As Lando Norris spent lap after lap trying to prise third place from Max Verstappen’s hands, surely everyone knew what was coming.
On lap 52, Norris finally nosed ahead in the DRS zone approaching turn 12. This was crucial, for everyone knows that under F1’s driving standards guidelines, if a driver is overtaking on the outside and gets ahead at the apex, their rival on the inside must leave them room.
This didn’t happen. Verstappen not only failed to leave room for Norris, he didn’t have enough room for himself, straying beyond the track limits at the corner exit.
Both motored on, Norris now ahead. McLaren, believing he had won the corner and was entitled to the position, told him he did not need to relinquish the place.
Red Bull argued Norris had overtaken their driver outside the track. The stewards agreed with them, handing Norris a five-second time penalty which cost him a podium place and, crucially, a six-point swing in the championship.
The stewards’ decision showed McLaren correctly identified the key issue at stake: Whether Norris had been ahead at the apex. However they ruled Norris “was not level with car one [Verstappen] at the apex.”
The footage of the incident corroborates this. Verstappen, despite being on the inside and therefore facing a tighter line, arrives at the corner at a higher speed than Norris. That puts him on a line which carries him beyond the limits of the track.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Norris arrived at a slower speed and had more room to make the corner. Whether he, like Verstappen, had over-committed and wasn’t going to make the turn is something only F1 drivers, not mere mortals like us, can know. But his line and speed indicate he was capable of making the corner and from the footage it appears the only reason he couldn’t get around it was the RB20 sliding off-track alongside him.
McLaren dropped the ball when they failed to correctly answer Norris’ question about where he had been ahead at the apex.
“We think you were ahead at apex,” said Joseph at first. He later began a response: “Our opinion is, you were ahead at apex, both cars went off track…” after which Norris talked over him. “Yeah, he also went off, so… It was clear,” said the driver.
McLaren’s thinking about the facts of the situation became clouded by their unhappiness at Verstappen going off the track to defend his position, Interlagos 2021-style. It’s always easy to analyse this sort of thing in retrospect, but no doubt meetings are already underway at Woking where rooms full of people are scrutinising still frames of turn 12, lap 52 and muttering, “yes, but Verstappen was ahead at the apex.”
Drivers aren’t allowed to overtake outside the track. This situation has happened many times before and the rules regarding it are well established.
But should drivers be allowed to defend their position by going off the track and forcing their rival off with them? This is much less common – Verstappen practically has a patent on it.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The stewards’ decision shows them grappling with its implications and vainly trying to avoid contradicting themselves. They view Norris as being both in the wrong for going off the track, yet in the right for being forced off: “Car four [Norris] had little alternative other than to leave the track because of the proximity of car one.”
Drivers are already aware that they must not force a rival off the track when they overtake on the inside. George Russell received a penalty for this in the same race.
Given that, it’s impossible to understand the stewards’ logic in considering it acceptable for a driver defending their position who’s fallen behind a rival that they are allowed to run both cars off the track.
McLaren shouldn’t have told Norris to stay ahead of Verstappen and the stewards had to penalise him. But the stewards should also have addressed the implications of Verstappen’s unusual defensive move, much as they did when Fernando Alonso pushed the limits too far in Australia earlier this year. At the very least, an acknowledgement was needed that the current driving guidelines are inadequate to cover this kind of move, and require updating for the future.
This kind of situation hits a nerve with fans for many reasons. It shows the deficiencies of asphalt run-offs which F1 has expunged from other tracks but, sadly, not the otherwise excellent Circuit of the Americas. Yet another battle for position is resolved by the stewards, not the competitors. And the decision ultimately prevented the championship from closing up.
Above all, it was an unwelcome reminder of how F1’s stewarding went to pot in the final races of 2021, when it seemed the only issue at stake in every decision which was made was: ‘How can we keep the championship alive?’ At least that accusation couldn’t be levelled at those who made yesterday’s call.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
F1 has made significant improvements in its stewarding since then. Drivers now have a codified set of guidelines they can refer to (it is, however, highly regrettable the FIA chooses not to publish them). The stewards explain not only their decisions but how they determine the scale of the penalty.
As in all sports, refereeing is always going to be contentious. F1 has improved its system incrementally and should continue to. On this occasion it missed an opportunity by failing to point out that just as drivers are not allowed to gain a position by going off the track, nor should they be allowed to defend one.
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories – and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
2024 United States Grand Prix
Source link
[redirect url=’https://fastpowers.com/’ sec=’3′]