McLaren know Norris’ penalty is likely to stand

If McLaren successfully overturns the five-second time penalty the stewards handed Lando Norris at the end of last weekend’s United States Grand Prix it will provide a useful boost to his championship hopes.

The penalty promoted Norris’ championship rival Max Verstappen to third in his place, resulting in a six-point swing. Reverse that and Norris’ deficit falls from 57 points to 51.

But do McLaren seriously expect to persuade the stewards that Norris did not deserve a penalty for overtaking Verstappen off-track at turn 12 on lap 52 last weekend? Recent history suggests they shouldn’t.

The team has submitted a Right of Review request. This is a notoriously high bar to clear: Any team attempting it essentially needs to win twice in order to have any chance of achieving the outcome they’re looking for.

First they must demonstrate to the FIA that they have identified a “significant and relevant new element” regarding the incident which deserves to be looked at. Second, if they meet that test and the review goes ahead, they have to win the case.

In a dozen such cases held over the last five years, the success rate among teams who appealed was one in four. Many of those who tried and failed fell at the first hurdle – proving they had pertinent new evidence.

Speaking to media at the Circuit of the Americas shortly after the penalty was issued, McLaren team principal Andrea Stella admitted McLaren’s chances of meeting this standard were not good.

| Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

What new evidence might McLaren have, and how likely is it to produce the desired outcome? New video evidence is unlikely to sway the stewards in this particularly case.

As Norris told media at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez on Thursday, McLaren’s objection to the penalty focuses on Verstappen’s lunging move down the inside of the corner after his rival nosed ahead of him. Verstappen ran off the track, taking Norris with him. Crucially, Verstappen’s late marking move meant he reached the apex of the corner before Norris, therefore earning him the ‘right’ to the corner in the eyes of the stewards, irrespective of the fact he then went off.

When Verstappen did much the same to Hamilton at Interlagos’ Subida do Lago in 2021, Mercedes requested a Right of Review hearing. Their case rested on new video of the incident which appeared after the stewards made their decision, specifically the forward-facing camera from Verstappen’s car.

| Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

This footage showed more clearly how far behind his rival Verstappen had been before diving into the corner and running wide, forcing Hamilton off as he did. The stewards were unmoved, however, insisting it added nothing new to their assessment of Verstappen’s driving.

In last week’s case, new video has again emerged subsequently, published by Formula One Management yesterday, including images from the 360-degree camera on the nose of Verstappen’s Red Bull. But there is little reason to imagine the stewards would consider this any differently that they did three years ago.

True, Red Bull used previously unavailable 360-degree camera video to win a Right of Review request in 2020. However that was able to show Hamilton had passed a yellow flag which wasn’t visible from other angles, and as in 2021 it’s doubtful such footage could reveal something not previously apparent in this case.

When teams have successfully persuaded the stewards to review their case, even if they have not subsequently gone on to win it (as happened to Alfa Romeo in 2021), the new evidence in question has usually not involved footage but documents relating to the rules, or discussions regarding their interpretation. Here we can only speculate what McLaren could intend to present.

Perhaps they believe drivers have been told on some past occasion, such as in a meeting with the race director, that this kind of defensive move would not be allowed following the Interlagos 2021 episode. As McLaren pointed out last week, the stewards made their decision in a hurry, and may have overlooked some relevant past decision or precedent.

It’s probably more likely that McLaren regard their chances of victory as slim, but want to exert every last iota of pressure upon Red Bull given the championship situation. The two teams have already had a tit-for-tat over the technical rules – ther MCL38’s rear wing, the RB20’s front bib device – now McLaren want to put the spotlight on Verstappen’s defending.

| Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Hamilton is among those who believes the time has come to outlaw such defensive moves. “It’s interesting people are talking about it now because it’s the same thing that happened to me in 2021 if you take Brazil into account, for example,” he told Sky.

“On braking you’re ahead, but then the car just comes off the brakes and doesn’t make the corner and you have to go wide. Then they say ‘you both went wide’, but you had no choice because you had to avoid collision. There definitely needs to be something done about it because it’s happening a lot now. You shouldn’t be able to come off the brakes and run more speed and go off track and still hold your place.”

Friday’s hearing will take place shortly before the drivers’ briefing at which the subject of last week’s penalties – Norris’ plus four others – are expected to be discussed. Several drivers have already expressed the view Verstappen’s ‘divebomb defence’ should not be allowed.

As Norris observed on Thursday, his points deficit to Verstappen means the championship leader can afford to take far greater risks when they fight, knowing a race-ending collision hurts the hunter more than the hunted. So if McLaren lose their case over Austin, but apply enough pressure to win the wider argument to outlaw Verstappen’s trademark move, they will surely still be satisfied.

| Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2024 United States Grand Prix

Browse all 2024 United States Grand Prix articles