The start of the weekend in Sao Paulo will be remembered by Formula 1 fans for a long time. Hamilton won the qualification but started from the last place in the sprint. His rival Max Verstappen was at the centre of the scandal.
The law is strong, but it's law
Hamilton was excluded from the qualifying results literally two hours before the sprint due to an issue with his rear wing. The FIA described in great detail that a ball with a diameter of 85 millimetres, which checks the gap between the wing slats, did not fit into the Mercedes' DRS under pressure. But this very wing has already been tested by the FIA - and everything was in order!
“They admit that the wing has worn out or been damaged during qualification. They themselves say that they do not suspect us of any malicious actions, but they will disqualify us anyway! "
Toto WolfF
In fact, Mercedes was punished for negligence: if the team itself noticed the damage and, for safety reasons, asked the FIA to replace the element with a similar one, disqualification could have been avoided. The punishment does not seem adequate to the offense, but the law is harsh.
Or is the law not always harsh?
When it came to Max Verstappen, the race judges were far from being as picky and formal as the day before.
When Hamilton overtook the Red Bull on the outside trajectory in the fourth corner on lap 48, the Dutchman drove wider than the apex and drove off the track with his opponent. In the turn, two cars entered side by side, Hamilton was and remained outside, and at the same time Red Bull with four wheels crosses the outer edge of the track - but the judges do not see this as squeezing out of the boundaries of the racing surface.
“Let's not forget that we decided to come up with the 'let them chase' philosophy. Both cars flew wide, but did not lose ground, and the stewards, as usual, studied all the available videos," Race Manager Michael Masi explained the decision of the judges and immediately added: "But we do not have onboard cameras from Verstappen's car. I would take a look out of curiosity. I even thought about the warning, but decided to give it up."
So after having thrust the ball into Hamilton's Mercedes and conferring for almost the whole day, the stewards' decided that a recording of Verstappen's steering wheel movements was not needed? Masi's explanation left many confused.
What are the rules of the game?
What is the fundamental difference between this episode and, for example, Lando Norris' five-second penalty at the Austrian Grand Prix? Then, too, there was no contact, but McLaren clearly squeezed out the Red Bull, overtaking him along the outer trajectory. Is the only difference that there was gravel and Checo lost ground?
Drivers (and spectators) need clear rules, and for this they need to at least properly explain their decisions. In the case of the disqualification of Mercedes, by the will of the FIA and the current rules, it was punished twice: a simple breakdown cost not only costs with a limited budget, but also exclusion from the protocols.
In the second episode, it is difficult to understand exactly how you can and cannot fight now. After the Red Bull Ring and Silverstone everything looked like if you were blown from the inside trajectory to the opponent who was outside, then you broke the rules and get a fine. However, in this case, for some reason, this formula did not work.
If Verstappen had won in the end, he could have secured a champion title in the next race. And one might get the feeling that the 85 mm FIA ball played a significant role in this - a disproportionate error of 0.2%. And that would put the whole Formula 1 in an extremely ugly position. Fortunately, Lewis's brilliant aerobatics prevented a major failure of the most prestigious races on the planet.
Comments