SHANGHAI, China (AP) — Stewards of the Chinese Grand Prix have rejected a protest lodged through Aston Martin opposing the continuation of Carlos Sainz’s participation in qualifying on Saturday after his pit stop.
The Ferrari driver spun at the exit of the final corner, crashed his car head-on into the barrier and hit an obstacle on the side of the track, causing the consultation to be red-flagged.
Within one minute and 17 seconds, Sainz restarted his car and returned to the pits where the front wing was replaced to rejoin the session. He then qualified seventh.
Aston Martin’s protest argued that Sainz had breached Article 39. 6 of F1’s sporting regulations, which states: “Any driver whose car stops on the track during qualifying consultation or penalty shootout will no longer be allowed to take part in the race. this consultation. “
– No Overlap: Listen to ESPN’s F1 Podcast
To determine whether Aston Martin’s claim was admissible, the stewards ultimately had to figure out what the word “stops” meant in the article. After reviewing beyond the examples of cars stopped on track and beyond the discussions between groups on Article 39. 6, they came to the conclusion that the protest deserves to be rejected, meaning that Sainz will retain seventh position on the grid for Sunday’s race.
“It is evident that the plain language of Article 39. 6 suggests that as long as a car ‘stops’ a qualifying session on the track, that car does not deserve to be allowed to take part in the session any further,” the stewards said in a statement.
“However, it is clear from the examples cited across various team principals and the FIA that this is how this rule has been implemented across the groups and the FIA in the past.
“The FIA team explained that as long as the car could restart and restart from a status position within a moderate period of time, this would generally be allowed. The typical time would be around 30 seconds, this varies depending on the circumstances. .
“The groups themselves have stated that they have already tried to agree on what the moderate period of time will be before a car is ‘stopped’. Unfortunately, they were unable to reach a final agreement on the maximum time allowed. “
“For the FIA, what happened was that the car didn’t get any outside help to restart (e. g. from the stewards). “
Sainz did not get any help from the stewards in China, and the stewards later revealed that an earlier meeting between teams had concluded that Article 39. 6 should only be implemented if external help is obtained, although this was not added. to regulations.
Aston Martin went on to claim that the formula of the race message indicated that Sainz had stopped on track, but this was also rejected by the FIA as grounds for a protest of success.
“Aston also argued that the fact that the wording of the message warned that the car had ‘stopped’ constituted a localization of that fact for Article 39. 6. Race Control clarified that the language was the popular language used in formula and therefore did not convey what Aston advised,” he added.
“In fact, we saw an example of Alexander Albon in Montreal in 2022, where he stopped for about 40 seconds and restarted, complaint from any team and the formula of the message also showed that the car had ‘stopped’.
“We do not think that the wording of the message indicated a resolution on the race direction component for the purposes of Article 39. 6. Therefore, there was a clear trend beyond practice in the game that this rule was interpreted as allowing a car to restart and continue, as long as it does not obtain outside assistance to do so. “