McLaren’s appeal request for Lando Norris’ United States Grand Prix penalty rejected

Almost a week after the checkered flag was raised, the United States Grand Prix is ​​officially over.

McLaren filed a “right of appeal” in relation to the five-second penalty given to Lando Norris at the race finale in Austin, seeking an appeal of the penalty which cost Norris third place in the United States Grand Prix and Max was promoted. In his place, Verstappen is in third place.

However, following a hearing held on Friday before the Mexico City Grand Prix, race officials have rejected McLaren’s request.

As per managers reportUnder the FIA ​​Sporting Code, the party requesting the right of appeal must meet a “high bar” in their request. Specifically, McLaren needed to demonstrate that “an important and relevant new element has been discovered that was not available to the parties seeking review at the time of the relevant decision,” as outlined in Article 14.3 of the Sporting Code. Is.

As stated in the stewards’ decision, McLaren needed to meet “each of the four criteria above”. (emphasis in original).

McLaren’s argument in support of its right to a review was that in the stewards’ preliminary decision in Austin, they found that Norris was “overtaking Verstappen on the outside, but not equal to (Verstappen) at the top.”

According to McLaren, that statement was “erroneous because McLaren had evidence that (Norris) had already overtaken and was ahead of (Verstappen) in the braking zone.”

Red Bull, represented by sporting director Jonathan Wheatley at the hearing, relied on the fact that the standard of the right of review set an “extremely high bar” for McLaren to satisfy, and their request did not meet the applicable standard.

steward, in their decisionThe focus was on the relevance of the alleged new element introduced by McLaren. In their view, the managers found that McLaren’s position that the underlying decision was in error, and that, therefore, there was a “new element” to be considered in the right of review was “not sustainable”, and so the petition was rejected.

However, the managers noted that the FIA ​​may want to reconsider how high the bar is currently set for parties seeking the right to review, particularly in relation to decisions taken during “the pressured environment of a race session”. In. Specifically, the managers drew attention to this language from the “regulatory authority” in their decision:

The current “high bar” that exists in Article 14 and the fact that it is designed more for decisions that are taken as a result of a hearing rather than in the pressured environment of a race session where all parties are present. Decisions are taken without all parties present, (as is permitted under the International Code of Sport).

In a way, this may have been the final reprieve for McLaren that it was seeking. Norris both and team principal Andrea Stella in your comments including media, sb nationRaised the fact that race officials decided on Norris’ penalty without listening to the drivers, and in the “pressured environment of a race session”.

Both Norris and Stella thought it would be more prudent to wait and hear from all parties involved before issuing a decision.

Although this may not change going forward, the language included by the Race Stewards at the end of this decision opens the door to lowering the current “high bar” on the right to review requests when decisions are made in a “race pressure environment.” are done. Session”.