Why there should be a zero-tolerance approach for breaking F1's technical rules
by Stuart Codling · AutosportAfter both McLaren drivers were disqualified from the Las Vegas GP, team boss Andrea Stella said penalties for technical infringements lacked "proportionality". But to have it any other way would invite more post-race disruption
On the face of it, the suggestion seems highly plausible. The McLarens of Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri were excluded from the results of the Las Vegas Grand Prix because the wear on some of their underfloor skid plates was fractionally beyond the permitted tolerance.
Team boss Andrea Stella's contention is that in this case, the punishment didn't fit the crime.
"Unlike sporting or financial rules," he said in a Q&A the team released ahead of the Qatar GP weekend, "there is no proportionality in the application of penalties for technical regulation infringements.
"The FIA itself has admitted that this lack of proportionality should be addressed in the future to ensure that minor and accidental technical infringements, with minimal or no performance benefits, do not lead to disproportionate consequences.
"It should also be remembered that the FIA itself emphasised that the infringement was not intentional, there was no deliberate attempt to circumvent the regulations, and there were also mitigating circumstances, as we explained to the event stewards."
This was a point the stewards acknowledged in their findings, while pointing out that there is no threshold for mitigation and no leeway for a minor infringement. Other competitors sympathised to an extent – as they would, given that the excess wear was but 0.12mm on Norris's rear skid plate and 0.26mm on Piastri's – but still shied away from supporting the idea of relaxing the punishment.
"It's a very tricky rule," said Charles Leclerc, who gained two positions in the final order because of the disqualification.
"I'm sure none of the teams here are targeting to be illegal, you just try to be on the limit. And with those things, a small change of wind or, on a track like Vegas that is quite bumpy, can add a lot of things that are very difficult to calculate when you set up the car.
"So it makes it very difficult. However, you've got to have a rule – I wouldn't relax it or take it off."
The reason for the lack of solidarity, particularly in this area, is that all the competitors are painfully aware of how much performance is generated by the underfloor in the current generation of cars. Ride heights have become critical to car behaviour and lap time – in Ferrari's case, having to run conservative ride heights to protect the skid plates on its cars has played a major role in scuppering its season.
So, if the difference between what is acceptable wear and what is unacceptable wear is made less stark, it introduces a grey area that is open to exploitation. Or, to view it through a less cynical lens, provides an incentive to take more setup risks.
Either of these approaches will lead to the same outcome: more cars entering that state of marginal wear, delaying the results of races while teams argue the toss with the scrutineers and stewards.
"There's a lot of lap time in these cars, being a millimetre lower than wherever," said Alex Albon.
"Everyone makes mistakes and I get that bit, but these cars are incredible now. We are setting ride heights down to what wind you get for the next day in the race. If you get a headwind into a main straight, it completely transforms your ride heights for the weekend.
"So, especially on sprint weekends, or weekends where we haven't much running, like Vegas, you have to take the safe approach. And sometimes you finish on Sunday as a team, kind of kicking yourself because you have hardly any plank wear and you feel like you could have optimised the weekend more.
"But that's just the way the rules are."
What fans and spectators – and by extension the commercial rights holder – don't want to see is the cars taking the chequered flag in a certain order, which is then laboriously unpicked long after the race is over, with all the controversy and negativity this entails. It undermines the spectacle, makes the organisation look shambolic, and prompts the lunatic fringe of fandom to cry foul that some sort of fix is in.
At the moment, the harshness of the punishment means the likelihood that any infringements are – as with McLaren in Las Vegas – the result of genuine mistakes. To permit an element of tolerance, wriggle room, or whatever term you wish to apply to it, would be to invite teams to push closer to the edge of what is permissible.
"No, I think it needs to be zero tolerance," said George Russell when asked by Autosport if more ‘proportionality' should be introduced to the punishment regime.
"He [Stella] is correct that the punishment is not in line with the crime, but that goes the same with being underweight, like I had two years ago [actually last year's Belgian GP]. Where do you draw the line?
"Track limits. If you go over by half a centimetre, you're off the track. You haven't gained half a second.
"But yeah, I think that, unfortunately, there needs to be zero tolerance just to make things simpler."
McLaren's response to its disqualification demonstrates that when a competitor exceeds a permitted tolerance by a hair's width, the natural response is for them to start splitting hairs. Imagine this becoming a weekly feature in grand prix racing.
We want to hear from you!
Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.
- The Autosport.com Team