McLaren penalty in Canada: Stewards reject review

(Motorsport-Total.com) – McLaren driver Lando Norris finished outside the points after a 5-second time penalty in P13 at the 2023 Canadian Grand Prix in Montreal. It will remain the same. Because the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) sporting commissioners now own it McLaren’s “Write of Review”. Rejected. In other words: the matter is not reconsidered, the original decision remains.

In the Sports Officials’ detailed justification, which covers a total of 23 individual points, Clause 19 states: “[Die Neuuntersuchung] Rejected because there were no major new relevant elements identified by McLaren at the time of the decision [in Kanada] still no.”

So the McLaren initiative failed at the first hurdle: an inquiry by sports commissioners in Austria to decide whether it was necessary to open a Canadian case.

What points McLaren raised

McLaren, through its chief strategist Randeep Singh, presented a total of four points to demonstrate that Norris should not have been penalized for reckless driving during the safety car phase. Section 8 of the FIA ​​document describes these four aspects.

Accordingly, McLaren on the one hand referred to the minutes of the team manager’s meeting on June 30, 2023, as well as other meetings in Monaco and Canada from the 2019 season, in which one got the impression that there was no “greening” behind the safety car. Penalties are imposed as it may be classified as “acceptable”.

In a written statement, McLaren also said Williams driver Alexander Alban did not lose any positions as a result of Norris’ conduct.

Williams and Aston Martin disagreed with McLaren

Williams, which was similar to Aston Martin in the investigation, disagreed with McLaren on some points and cited precedents that led to similar conduct penalties in 2016, 2017 and 2018.

McLaren’s other “new evidence” was “not new” to Williams and “not relevant” to Norris’s particular case in Canada. So is Aston Martin.

Why the McLaren evidence was not accepted

Stewards rated the points raised as important, new, accessible and relevant to McLaren. This is where McLaren’s argument failed: while all four aspects were “important”, all four aspects were labeled “not relevant”, and three of the four were labeled “not new”. McLaren’s claim was subsequently rejected.

The precedents set for pronounced or non-pronounced punishments are “irrelevant” to the present case, as “each incident differs in certain aspects” from other incidents of this type, the sports staff said, “if only in detail”.

No further objection is possible

They continue to write: “Most importantly, the original fine was imposed because the display was deemed unfair. None of the cited cases address the issue of unfairness.”

At the end there is a reference to McLaren: “Article 14.3 of the International Sporting Code of the FIA, Decision of the Stewards [neues] Whether there is an element or not, cannot be challenged.” And so finally closes the matter.

How McLaren reacts to the verdict

McLaren sees it that way. In a brief statement, the group wrote: “We respect the decision of the world governing body and stewards to uphold the sentence imposed on Lando in Canada.”

“We believe we have presented sufficient new, important, and relevant evidence to justify a ‘right of verification.’

“This was not the outcome we expected. However, we thank the stewards for their time and cooperation.”