Stewards rule Piastri shares blame for Norris clash

Formula 1’s Singapore Grand Prix stewards determined that both Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri contributed to their last-lap sprint race collision, so ruled that no further action was necessary.

The stewards said Piastri hadn’t expected Norris to overtake him, but he "noticed [Norris] on the inside and attempted to leave space".

"[Norris] said that he saw an opportunity to overtake and said that the front axle of his car was ahead of the mirror of [Piastri] prior to the apex, and therefore expected to be left space.

"As he approached the apex, the space was less than he had anticipated, so he had to use the inside kerb and braked, and a collision occurred.

"The stewards considered that both drivers had contributed to the incident and that neither driver was wholly or predominantly to blame for the collision.

"Therefore, the stewards determined to take no further action."

Norris and Piastri collide 💥 Here's the moment 👇 #F1Sprint #SingaporeGP https://t.co/jVetu3oSOs

— Formula 1 (@F1) October 10, 2026

Norris is right that he had his front axle ahead of the mirror of Piastri’s sister car at the apex of Turn 5, so he satisfies that aspect of F1’s racing rules.

But it does not appear Piastri - who was caught unawares by the divebomb - had means of leaving more space at that corner; so once he turned in, a collision became inevitable.

Given the stewards stated "both drivers had contributed to the incident", we can infer that Piastri’s not anticipating the overtake and leaving enough space is what he did wrong - whereas Norris was ambitious with his move and had to climb onto the inside kerb to try to complete it.

The start of Norris’s interview with F1 broadcaster Viaplay after the sprint race made his feelings clear.

Norris was asked: "You'll surely always want to finish as high as possible, but it’s also a sprint, P4 and P5 and it was your team-mate in front of you... Wasn’t it too unnecessary, that move?"

He replied: "What, to go for a big gap? To overtake?". He followed up: "What's the title name of the race?"

The interviewer replied, "sprint", to which Norris said: "Sprint. What’s [the word] after sprint?" - "race" came the reply.

Norris smiled: "Wow! Good job. It’s a race".

"We were just stuck the whole race and the last lap there was a big opportunity into [Turn] 5 so I went for it," Norris said in the media pen.

"The gap closed a bit more than I would have liked and obviously I've had to back out of it because the gap was closing - so I've had to try and avoid the incident and obviously there still was one. But it was a big gap so I went for it, I have the right to do that. The rest we go review as a team."

Piastri said "it’s for fourth and fifth for a sprint race, not that bothered either way, just a lot of work for the team to get both cars fixed, just a shame for the team".

Meanwhile, Liam Lawson, having been shown a replay of the incident by Sky Sports F1’s Karun Chandhok, mused: "On the last lap, it’s not for many points; I don't think it's worth it".

Perez dodges serving penalty for Stroll clash

There was a slightly unusual decision made in the assessment of another of the sprint’s incidents.

Sergio Perez and Lance Stroll collided on the opening lap of the race when Perez tried to pass on the inside of the Turn 16 right-hander.

The stewards felt Stroll had turned in reasonably for the corner and Perez was predominantly to blame after having a lock-up.

They considered the tricky conditions reasonable mitigation and wanted to issue Perez with a five-second penalty instead of the usual 10.

But Perez retired from the race - and according to the stewards a five-second penalty does not typically convert to a grid drop.

Had it been a 10-second penalty, this would be different. So Perez escapes sanction for the clash.