FIA denies Ferrari’s appeal of the Carlos Sainz Jr. penalty at the Australian Grand Prix

Just when it looked like there was a glimmer of hope that Ferrari would be able to salvage something from a brutal Australian Grand Prix, the FIA stepped in and closed the door on that idea.

Ferrari appealed a five-second penalty handed down by race officials to driver Carlos Sainz Jr. after a collision between Sainz and Fernando Alonso late in the race. The collision, which occurred following a late-race standing restart, sent the field into chaos and caused the race to finish under safety car conditions.

The team requested a Right of Review regarding the matter under FIA regulations. Following a review of all available information (including the available telemetry data) as well as a virtual hearing where race officials heard from Sainz, Race Director Laurent Mekies, and Team President Frédéric Vasseur, FIA dismissed Ferrari’s appeal.

In their decision, FIA noted that there was “no significant and relevant new element which was unavailable to the parties seeking the review at the time of the decision concerned.” Race officials also continue to maintain that Sainz was “wholly” at fault for the decision.

Ferrari believed that how the FIA handled a collision between Alpine drivers Esteban Ocon and Pierre Gasly — which occurred seconds after the collision between Sainz and Alonso — should have governed how officials handled the Sainz penalty. Race officials met with both Ocon and Gasly, and determined that it was a “first lap incident,” and declined to institute a penalty.

In their decision Tuesday, race officials maintained their position from the time of the collision:

“We considered the fact that this collision took place at the first corner on the first lap of the restart, when, by convention, the Stewards would typically take a more lenient view of incidents. However, we decided that notwithstanding that it was the equivalent of a first lap incident, we considered that there was sufficient gap for SAI to take steps to avoid the collision and failed to do so. We therefore imposed a 5 second time penalty.”

Part of Ferrari’s appeal — and Sainz’s frustration at the time of the penalty — was that race officials did not take the time to even meet with the driver to hear his side of the events. However, in their decision Tuesday FIA made it clear that such a meeting was not needed.

“The distinguishing feature here is that our decision was made in-race. We deemed it unnecessary for us to hear from SAI or hear from any other driver to decide that he was wholly to blame for the collision. A decision that we, and other Stewards panels, routinely take and are encouraged to take, when the cause of the collision is clear and there is a need for time penalties to be issued as quickly as possible.”

FIA then addressed various additional elements raised by Ferrari. First, on the matter of telemetry data, they outlined how that data, in their view, supported their decision:

“The telemetry data presented in the Petition is at best ambiguous and in our view did not exculpate SAI but in fact corroborated our decision that he was wholly to blame for the collision. He says he braked harder but could not stop the car because of cold tyres. He states further that a slow formation lap contributed to the cold tyres.

There are two short points. First, even if that is true, the presentation of telemetry showing his braking point is not a significant new element for the purposes of Art.14.

Second, the conditions of the track and the tyres was something that every competitor needed to take into account and adapt to. In trying to brake late while racing GAS, he adopted the risk that he, as a driver, would lose control of his car. In this case, that risk materialised, with the consequence of a collision that ensued, for which a penalty follows.”

Then, with respect to Sainz’s written statement that he was dealing with cold tyres — and a lack of grip — as well as the difficult sun angle, FIA noted that these were conditions facing all drivers at that stage of the race: “His witness statement, in essence, states how poor the grip was (we have dealt with why that is not a sufficient excuse above) and how the sun was in his eyes. But logic would dictate that the position of the sun would have equally impacted other drivers too. It is not a justifiable reason to avoid a penalty for a collision. The witness statement is therefore not a new element either.”

Finally, Ferrari pointed to post-race comments made by other drivers. FIA again brushed those aside, noting that while they were made in the wake of FIA’s original decision, nothing in the comments was “significant,” or even “relevant,” to their considerations.

Following their decision Tuesday, Ferrari released a statement noting that they were “disappointed,” but that they remain “respectful of the process.” The team also noted that they were looking forward to future discussions with the FIA, F1, and the other teams, with the goal of “further improving the policing of our sport:”