The FIA stewards have cited two particular precedents and consistent feedback in Formula 1 driver briefings as the reasoning behind Charles Leclerc being awarded a five-second penalty in the Japanese Grand Prix.
The penalty was assessed swiftly post-race and relegated Leclerc to third behind Sergio Perez, the resulting points swing causing Max Verstappen – amid some rule application confusion – to be crowned 2022 F1 world champion champion with four races to spare.
After a couple of laps of spirited defending second against Perez, Leclerc had skipped through the chicane on the final lap under no clear immediate pressure, and finished three tenths of a second ahead after rejoining.
Perez was unimpressed by the way Leclerc had rejoined and covered him off but that proved irrelevant to the penalty.
“Although car 16 did not gain a position by going off-track, it was still deemed to have gained a lasting advantage,” the stewards’ verdict read.
“This determination takes into account the numerous driver briefings where the race directors [Niels Wittich and Eduardo Freitas] advised that an ‘advantage’ would be considered as having been gained if you go off track and return in the same position while defending.
“There have been a number of precedents this year, in particular ZHO [Zhou Guanyu] in Saudi Arabia and ALO [Fernando Alonso] in Miami.”
Ferrari has made it clear it will not appeal or request a review for the penalty, but was disappointed with the fact it was assessed so swiftly, without a hearing – something it felt was in sharp contrast to the decision that allowed Perez to keep his Singapore win the prior weekend.
Leclerc, however, said a five-second penalty “was the right thing to do, to be honest”.
The Zhou penalty cited was the result of him trying to overtake Alex Albon at Turn 1 in Jeddah and locking up as he got ahead into the corner, going off track.
Rejoining ahead, he was told by his Alfa Romeo team that he needn’t give up a position – but the stewards disagreed, writing that Zhou “left the track to maintain his position” and thus “gained a lasting advantage”.
Alfa Romeo subsequently erred in serving the five-second penalty during Zhou’s first pitstop, and was slapped with a drive-through on top of it.
The other sanction sited, the one against Alonso in Miami, proved more controversial, with both Alonso and his Alpine team incensed.
Alonso went off at Turn 14 and lifted off after rejoining, but the stewards felt this was not sufficient, arguing he “gained a lasting advantage”. It turned a ninth-place finish into an 11th-place one.
Alpine was public in its feeling the penalty was “wholly unjust”, while Alonso had to apologise to the stewards after initially branding them “incompetent” – and said subsequently he “maybe saw it in a different way” upon review.
