The FIA dismissed both the protests made by Mercedes regarding overtaking under safety car and lapped cars being allowed to unlap.
After a dramatic end to the F1 Abu Dhabi GP, Mercedes just had about 30 minutes to lodge a protest against Red Bull and the result which they duly did so. They looked at two key articles from the 2021 FIA International Sporting Code.
The first one was Article 48.8 which hovered around overtaking under safety car. Red Bull’s Max Verstappen and Mercedes’ Lewis Hamilton were side-by-side when the Brit tried to slow down the pack in the hotel section upon re-start.
Onboard showed that Verstappen for very briefly had some part of his front wing ahead of Hamilton’s but he backed-off quickly and remained behind him until the overtake move later on in the lap. Mercedes protested against that brief moment.
The article states:
“With the exception of the cases listed under a) to h) below, no driver may overtake another car on the track, including the safety car, until he passes the Line (see Article 5.3) for the first time after the safety car has returned to the pits.
The exceptions are:
a) If a driver is signalled to do so from the safety car.
b) Under Articles 41.1c), 48.12, 51.6 and 51.12 below.
c) When entering the pits a driver may pass another car remaining on the track, including the safety car, after he has reached the first safety car line.
d) When leaving the pits a driver may overtake, or be overtaken by, another car on the track before he reaches the second safety car line.
e) When the safety car is returning to the pits it may be overtaken by cars on the track once it has reached the first safety car line.
f) Whilst in the pit entry, pit lane or pit exit a driver may overtake another car which is also in one of these three areas.
g) Any car stopping in its designated garage area whilst the safety car is using the pit lane (see Article 48.11 below) may be overtaken.
h) If any car slows with an obvious problem.
The second one they chose was Article 48.12 which was more clear regarding the unlapping of cars behind the safety car. Initially, the FIA did not allow to unlap the cars which would have taken more laps, but changed their decision at the last moment.
Only Lando Norris, Fernando Alonso, Esteban Ocon and Charles Leclerc were allowed to unlap who where between Hamilton and Verstappen. The likes of Daniel Ricciardo, Lance Stroll and Mick Schumacher weren’t who were behind in the pack.
The article states:
“If the clerk of the course considers it safe to do so, and the message “LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE” has been sent to all Competitors via the official messaging system, any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car. This will only apply to cars that were lapped at the time they crossed the Line at the end of the lap during which they crossed the first Safety Car line for the second time after the safety car was deployed.
“Having overtaken the cars on the lead lap and the safety car these cars should then proceed around the track at an appropriate speed, without overtaking, and make every effort to take up position at the back of the line of cars behind the safety car. Whilst they are overtaking, and in order to ensure this may be carried out safely, the cars on the lead lap must always stay on the racing line unless deviating from it is unavoidable.
“Unless the clerk of the course considers the presence of the safety car is still necessary, once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap. If the clerk of the course considers track conditions are unsuitable for overtaking the message “OVERTAKING WILL NOT BE PERMITTED” will be sent to all Competitors via the official messaging system.”
There were two hearings with a 30 minutes of break in between, where Mercedes also brought in a barrister Paul Harris in the meet along with Ron Meadows and Andrew Shovlin. Red Bull, meanwhile had Christian Horner, Adrian Newey and Jonathan Wheatley but only the latter spoke in the meet.
The decision on the first was announced first where the stewards dismissed. They stated that Verstappen did briefly got ahead of Hamilton but he got behind then after as seen in the videos during the grand prix as well.
“The Stewards consider that the protest is admissible,” said the steward. “Having considered the various statements made by the parties. The Stewards determine that although Car 33 did at one stage, for a very short period of time, move slightly in front of Car 44, at a time when both cars where accelerating and braking, it moved back behind Car 44 and it was not in front when the Safety Car period ended (i.e. at the line).
“Accordingly, the Protest is dismissed and the Protest Deposit is not refunded. Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits.”
As for the second big one of Article 48.12, the FIA dismissed that too which meant Verstappen stays as the 2021 F1 champion. The Race Director’s decision was used under Article 15.3 and due to Article 48.13, it allowed for the safety car to be taken in irrespective of the rule of lapped cars completing a lap to unlap themselves.
Here’s what decision stated:
The claims of Mercedes:
“Mercedes claimed that there were two breaches of the Sporting Regulations (Article 48.12) namely that which states “..any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car” and “…once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap.”
“Mercedes argued that had this been complied with, Car 44 would have won the race. They therefore requested the Stewards to amend the Classification under Article 11.9.3.h of the FIA International Sporting Code.
Red Bull’s arguments in defence:
Red Bull argued that
1. “Any” does not mean “all”.
2. The Article 48.13 of the Sporting Regulations states that the message “Safety Car in this lap” is the signal that it will enter the pit lane at the end of that lap.
3. That therefore Article 48.13 “overrides” Article 48.12.
4. That Article 15.3 gives the Race Director “overriding authority” over “the use of the safety car”.
5. That even if all cars that had been lapped (8 in total, of which 5 were allowed to overtake the safety car) it would not have changed the outcome of the race.
Race Director’s Evidence:
“The Race Director stated that the purpose of Article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that would “interfere” in the racing between the leaders and that in his view Article 48.13 was the one that applied in this case. The Race Director also stated that it had long been agreed by all the Teams that where possible it was highly desirable for the race to end in a “green” condition (i.e. not under a Safety Car).
Conclusions of the Stewards:
“The Stewards consider that the protest is admissible. Having considered the various statements made by the parties the Stewards determine the following:
“That Article 15.3 allows the Race Director to control the use of the safety car, which in our determination includes its deployment and withdrawal. That although Article 48.12 may not have been applied fully, in relation to the safety car returning to the pits at the end of the following lap, Article 48.13 overrides that and once the message “Safety Car in this lap” has been displayed, it is mandatory to withdraw the safety car at the end of that lap.
“That notwithstanding Mercedes’ request that the Stewards remediate the matter by amending the classification to reflect the positions at the end of the penultimate lap, this is a step that the Stewards believe is effectively shortening the race retrospectively, and hence not appropriate. Accordingly, the Protest is dismissed. The Protest Deposit is not refunded.
“Competitors are reminded that they have the right to appeal certain decisions of the Stewards, in accordance with Article 15 of the FIA International Sporting Code and Chapter 4 of the FIA Judicial and Disciplinary Rules, within the applicable time limits.”
UPDATE: Following the decision, Mercedes has put down an intention to appeal the decision of the stewards’ dismissal. They now have few days to collect more data and push on with the case if they wish to. They can even back out in days to come.
Here’s how F1 Abu Dhabi GP panned out
