At the end of a long evening of discussions that saw the College of Stewards on duty in the United States Grand Prix engaged, together with the representatives of the Haas and Alpine teams, Fernando Alonso was returned to the seventh position conquered last Sunday in Austin .
Nothing surprising so far, but what makes your eyes pop are the process and the reasons that led to this sentence. On several occasions in recent months it has been pointed out that the FIA is increasingly a prisoner of bizarre regulations, which have grown over time to become a labyrinth in which only expert lawyers can now be untangled.
Form vices have now taken over substance and this case is a clear example of it. It deserves to be analyzed to understand how far the complexity of sporting rules has gone.
Fernando Alonso, Alpine A522 accident, caused by Lance Stroll, Aston Martin AMR22 in Austin
Photo by: Carl Bingham / Motorsport Images
At the end of the United States Grand Prix, the Haas team filed a complaint against the # 14 Alpine team car. Fernando Alonso, who completed an extraordinary comeback in seventh position, was challenged for the danger of his car which drove a part of the race with the right mirror dangling, a detail that then detached from the car body on the straight between turns 11 and 12.
The Stewards agreed with the evaluation of the Haas team, inflicting a penalty of thirty seconds on Alonso to be added to his race time, and the Spanish driver thus marched to fifteenth place.
The official ranking of the race was published at 16:09, and the sporting regulations require that any complaint be presented within thirty minutes. Haas prepared a handwritten request within the time provided by the International Sporting Code (i.e. 30 minutes) but an FIA official, present in the Race Direction, informed the team representatives not to be in a hurry, because the time available to present the document was one hour long. Haas checked the complaint request in more detail by delivering everything at 5:03 pm.
The Board of Stewards accepted Haas’ claim, penalizing Alonso and communicating the decision at 20:53. Alpine has filed a complaint against the decision, discussed yesterday in Mexico City by the same College of Commissioners serving in Austin. The first twist immediately arrived, because it emerged that “a team has no right of appeal against a decision of the Stewards, but can appeal to the FIA International Court of Appeal”, an intention that must be communicated within an hour from the moment. the publication of the decision against which the team intends to appeal.
But in the case of the Alpine, the request was submitted after an hour and eight minutes. The last lines of the FIA press release also underlined that ‘should a new and significant element be discovered (by Alpine), the team has the right to present an application to the Stewards pursuant to Article 14 of the Sporting Code, requesting a review of the case.
The Alpine took the ball, immediately asking for a re-examination and citing as new and significant evidence the fact that only at 20:53 on the day of the race (time when the FIA formalized Alonso’s penalty) did the team come aware that the Haas complaint was filed 24 minutes after the settlement deadline.
The re-examination requested by Alpine was found admissible, and in the ensuing hearing it emerged that Haas could have lodged the complaint within the allotted 30-minute deadline.
Alpine said that only in yesterday’s hearing did it learn that an FIA official had communicated to Haas that he had an hour to present his protest, when the regulation provides for a maximum of 30 minutes.
Alpine stressed that there is no “room for maneuver” available to FIA men to extend the 30-minute deadline set by the regulations, unless it is “impossible” to lodge the protest within the deadline.
And here the most extreme jurisprudence comes into play, because according to Alpine the term “impossible” sets a very different level (in the FIA bulletin the Oxford dictionary is cited!) Or rather as something that prevents the task, and which in this specific case does not exist. ‘was nothing to stop Haas from filing the protest within the 30-minute deadline.
The plea concluded by pointing out that an FIA official cannot grant a team permission to contravene the rules.
Fernando Alonso in flight with his Alpine after take off on Stroll’s Aston Martin
Haas defended themselves that they could have filed a handwritten protest within the 30-minute deadline, but were told they had more time available from FIA personnel. Motivation that was rejected by the College, which thus judged the complaint presented by Haas as inadmissible, consequently voiding the penalty imposed on Alonso.
In the document released with the outcome of the sentence, the Stewards again stressed that they were concerned about the fact that Alonso was allowed to remain on the track with a loose mirror, a detail that was subsequently detached from the car body, and strongly recommends to put in place procedures to monitor this type of situation. The stewards finally announced that the FIA president has initiated a review on the use of the black-orange flag.
Nothing to take away from the concerns related to the black-orange flag, but the impression is that there is also something else on which the FIA, Liberty and even the representatives of the teams are called to reflect. The winter break that will lead to the 2023 World Cup is an excellent opportunity.
#Alonso #penalty #removed #vices #count #substance