FIA overturns Sainz’s F1 Dutch GP penalty after Williams protest

The FIA has overturned the penalty Carlos Sainz received during the Formula 1 Dutch Grand Prix for his collision with Liam Lawson at Turn 1 in Zandvoort.

Sainz suffered a 10-second penalty plus two penalty points after driving around the outside of the opening corner, where his front right tyre clashed with Lawson’s rear left at the exit.

It caused damage to both cars which eventually finished outside of the points, and stewards gave Sainz the blame believing Lawson had “the right to the corner” because his Racing Bulls car was ahead at the apex.

Yet Sainz’s Williams team was incensed at the outcome considering Lawson drifted to the left mid-corner, so it later submitted a right of review to revisit the incident.

That happened on Friday 12 September and although the superlicence points were deleted, the Dutch GP classification is unchanged as Sainz served his 10s penalty during the contest. 

“The Stewards agree with Williams’ characterisation of the collision as a racing incident,” read the FIA report.

“The Stewards are satisfied that the collision was caused by a momentary loss of control by Car 30 [Lawson]. However, in the Stewards’ assessment, no driver was wholly or predominantly to blame for that collision.

“Car 55 [Sainz] contributed to the incident by taking the risk to drive close to, and on the outside of, Car 30 when Car 55 had no right to room there and there was a real possibility that, if the collision had not occurred where it did, Car 55 would run out of track at the exit and/or a collision would have occurred at the exit for which the Driver of Car 55 would likely be predominantly if not wholly to blame.

“The time penalty imposed by the Decision was served by Car 55 during the race. The Stewards have no power to remedy that served time penalty by amending the Classifications but note that the gap between Car 55 to the car ahead in the Final Classification of the race (coincidently Car 30) was 17 seconds.

“The Decision having been rescinded, it follows that the 2 penalty points imposed on the Driver of Car 55 are to be removed.”

This is not the outcome many expected though, because for a right of review to be admissible, delivered evidence must be significant, relevant and unavailable to the stewards at the time of the incident. 

Considering all required footage was available at Zandvoort, not much was expected. Williams simply protested “to understand how to go racing in future” after it reignited debates over the guidelines.

“We are grateful to the stewards for reviewing Carlos’ Zandvoort penalty and are pleased they have now decided he was not at fault and that this was a racing incident,” read a Williams statement.

“While it is frustrating that our race was compromised by the original decision, mistakes are part of motor racing and we will continue to work constructively with the FIA to improve stewarding processes and review the racing rules for the future.”

Carlos Sainz, Williams

Photo by: Joe Portlock / LAT Images via Getty Images

It sparked a strong reaction from Sainz at the time, who labelled the penalty a “complete joke” and questioned the level of F1 stewarding. 

“I need to go now to the stewards just to get an explanation to see what is their point of view of the incident because it’s unacceptable,” he said.

“I think it’s not the level of the stewarding that Formula 1 needs if they are really considering that to be a 10-second penalty on my behalf.

“It’s a serious matter now that concerns me as a driver, as a GPDA director and something that I will make sure I raise.”

But Lawson agreed with the penalty, saying: “The regulations are written as they are. As drivers we all know that. 

“Sometimes we don’t agree with it, or sometimes we feel like it doesn’t feel right. And I had it in cases this year where I tried to make overtakes around the outside of cars and had my wheels even further alongside than Carlos did, and still wasn’t given space. And I always felt like it wasn’t fair, but it’s how the rules are.

“So, obviously, as drivers we’re going to try and maximise them. And the incident, that’s why it was his fault. That’s why he got a penalty.

“I don’t know why I was deemed as being aggressive when he was the car overtaking me. I was just defending. I think if the incident was my fault, I would have got a penalty. So, to me it’s pretty clear.”