The evidence that damned Alonso in Russell’s Australian GP crash
Summary
TLDRFernando Alonso's controversial driving maneuver during the Australian Grand Prix led to a 20-second penalty for dangerous driving. The stewards' analysis of telemetry data revealed that Alonso slowed significantly earlier than usual at Turn 6, causing George Russell to crash. Despite Alonso's claim that it was a misjudgment for a better corner exit, the stewards deemed the action potentially dangerous and penalized him accordingly. The incident sparked debate on racing etiquette and the boundaries of acceptable defensive tactics in Formula 1.
Takeaways
- 🏎️ Fernando Alonso was penalized for a maneuver that contributed to George Russell's last lap crash at the Australian Grand Prix.
- 🚦 Alonso received a 20-second time penalty for dangerous driving after lifting off the throttle and braking earlier than usual, causing Russell to lose control of his Mercedes.
- 📊 The stewards' decision was based on detailed telemetry data that showed Alonso's driving patterns throughout the race, highlighting the unusual nature of his actions on the final lap.
- 🔍 The F1 Tempo website allowed for a comparison of Alonso's approach to turn six on the lap of the crash versus previous laps, showing a significant difference in his driving.
- 🤔 Alonso claimed he intended to approach the corner differently to get a better exit but misjudged it, leading to the penalty.
- 📉 Russell, who was battling with Alonso, described the maneuver as erratic and was surprised by the sudden loss of downforce, leading to his crash.
- 🏁 The stewards acknowledged that Alonso had the right to change his approach to the corner but penalized him for the extent of his maneuver, which was deemed unnecessary and potentially dangerous.
- 📌 Alonso defended his actions on social media, comparing the incident to his past defensive drives and asserting that it's part of motorsport, but the stewards maintained that his actions crossed a line.
- 📉 The penalty dropped Alonso from sixth to eighth in the race results, but his teammate Lance Stroll inherited his position, resulting in a minimal impact on the team's overall standing.
- 🚫 Despite Alonso's strong disagreement with the decision, his team, Aston Martin, did not appeal the penalty, possibly due to the relatively low cost of the penalty in terms of overall race outcome.
Q & A
What unusual maneuver led to Fernando Alonso's penalty at the Australian Grand Prix?
-Fernando Alonso was penalized for lifting off the throttle earlier than usual and braking minimally before turn six, which contributed to George Russell's last lap crash. This maneuver was considered unusual and potentially dangerous by the stewards.
How did the stewards analyze Alonso's driving to determine the penalty?
-The stewards used detailed telemetry data that accounted for every lap of the race, comparing Alonso's approach to turn six in the lap Russell crashed with the previous lap. They also considered his braking, throttle inputs, and gear changes to assess the situation.
What was Alonso's explanation for his different approach to turn six?
-Alonso intended to approach turn six differently by lifting earlier and carrying less speed through the corner for a better exit but admitted to misjudging it, leading to the need to get back up to speed.
What was the stewards' conclusion regarding Alonso's actions?
-The stewards concluded that Alonso's actions created an unusual closing speed between the cars and were potentially dangerous, warranting a penalty for dangerous driving.
How did George Russell describe Alonso's maneuver?
-Russell described Alonso's maneuver as erratic, which took him by surprise and led to the sudden loss of downforce entering the corner, causing him to crash.
What was Aston Martin's response to the stewards' decision?
-Aston Martin was surprised by the stewards' decision and indefinitely postponed its regular post-race media session. The team's press release indicated their position but did not elaborate further.
How did Alonso defend his driving on social media?
-Alonso claimed that his actions were part of the art of motorsport and that the F1 stewards had no right to question his driving. He compared the incident to his past defensive drives and argued that his penalty was disappointing.
What was the penalty Alonso received and how did it affect his race result?
-Alonso received a 20-second time penalty for dangerous driving, which dropped him from sixth to eighth place, but his teammate Lance Stroll inherited his original position, resulting in Alonso only dropping back two positions.
How did the stewards determine the severity of the penalty?
-The stewards considered Alonso's unusual maneuver as an aggravating circumstance and applied the 2024 penalty guidance, which sets a 10-second baseline penalty for such offenses, potentially increasing it for severity.
What was the final outcome for Alonso and his team in terms of points?
-Alonso's team, Aston Martin, had their points cut from 14 to 12 due to the penalty, but the impact was minimal as his teammate Lance Stroll took over Alonso's position, effectively maintaining the team's overall standing.
How did the incident affect the racing etiquette and safety discussion?
-The incident highlighted the importance of racing etiquette and safety, as Alonso's actions were deemed not only against the spirit of fair racing but also potentially dangerous, prompting a discussion on what is acceptable within the 'art of motorsport' and the need for proactive measures to tackle problematic driving.
Outlines
🏎️ Fernando Alonso's Controversial Penalty at Australian Grand Prix
The first paragraph discusses the controversial penalty given to Fernando Alonso during the Australian Grand Prix. Alonso was penalized for a maneuver that contributed to George Russell's last lap crash in Melbourne. The stewards' decision was based on detailed telemetry data, showing that Alonso lifted off the throttle earlier and braked slightly, causing Russell to lose control of his Mercedes. The stewards' summary provided a clear rationale for the penalty, despite the divisive opinions on whether it was a brake test or a strategic move by Alonso. The F1 Tempo website was mentioned as a resource to compare laps and contextualize the stewards' findings.
🚦 Analyzing Alonso's Defense and the Stewards' Verdict
The second paragraph delves into Fernando Alonso's defense of his actions and the stewards' verdict. Alonso claimed he intended to approach turn six differently by slowing down earlier for a better exit, but misjudged it, leading to the penalty. The stewards acknowledged Alonso's right to alter his approach but emphasized that his actions were extraordinary and potentially dangerous, especially given the high-speed nature of the track. They concluded that Alonso's maneuver was an aggravating circumstance, warranting a penalty. Despite Alonso's strong disagreement and defense on social media, the stewards' decision stood, and the incident did not significantly impact his team's standings.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡F1 driver
💡Australian Grand Prix
💡Penalty
💡Crash
💡Telemetry
💡Stewards
💡Dangerous driving
💡Race tactics
💡Racing etiquette
💡Defensive driving
💡Post-race analysis
Highlights
Fernando Alonzo was penalized at the Australian Grand Prix for an unusual maneuver that contributed to George Russell's crash.
Alonzo received a 20-second time penalty for dangerous driving.
Russell lost control of his Mercedes at turn six, ending up in seventh place.
The stewards' analysis was based on detailed telemetry data from every lap of the race.
Alonzo lifted off the throttle earlier than usual before turn six, a move that was more than 100m earlier than in previous laps.
Alonzo also applied the brakes slightly and downshifted to sixth gear from seventh, which he had not done on other laps.
Alonzo claimed he intended to approach turn six differently to get a better exit but misjudged it.
The stewards did not have data to determine if Alonzo's maneuver was intended to disturb Russell.
Alonzo's action created an unusual closing speed between his car and Russell's, leading to Russell's sudden loss of downforce and crash.
Russell described Alonzo's driving as erratic and was surprised by the sudden change in speed.
Aston Martin was surprised by the steward's decision and Alonzo defended his driving as hard but fair racing.
Alonzo's public defense of his driving revealed that he admitted to the stewards he made a mistake.
The stewards stated that Alonzo had the right to alter his approach to the corner but his actions were extraordinary and potentially dangerous.
Alonzo's penalty was not based on Russell's crash but on the severity of the offense itself, creating a potentially dangerous scenario.
The stewards considered Alonzo's unusual maneuver an aggravating circumstance, leading to a harsher penalty.
Alonzo's penalty dropped him from sixth to eighth place, but it did not significantly impact his team's points.
The incident highlights the importance of proactively addressing problematic driving rather than only reacting to crashes.
Alonzo's maneuver was deemed inappropriate for a high-speed corner in a Grand Prix, unlike his past defensive drives.
The case serves as an example of how even experienced drivers can make significant misjudgments.
Transcripts
you don't normally see an F1 driver
punished for someone crashing behind
them without any contact but Fernando
Alonzo's driving in the Australian Grand
Prix was penalized for exactly that
Alonzo was given a 20 second time
penalty for the unusual maneuver that
contributed to George Russell's dramatic
last lap crash in Melbourne Russell lost
control of his Mercedes at the turn six
right-hander and crashed out to seventh
place while chasing Alonzo having very
suddenly closed on the Aston Martin on
the way into the corner he slid into the
gravel and hit the barrier with a big
imp impact that ended with the Mercedes
being ricocheted back onto the track and
tipped onto its side as it hit its own
mangled front wheel what initially
looked like Russell's shunting on his
own in Alonzo's dirty air quickly
morphed into something more as it became
clear that Alonzo had at least lifted
off on the way into the corner
unsurprisingly this became very divisive
very quickly was it a break test or was
it just classic Wy Alonzo doing an
age-old trick of making the car behind
check up and Russell just got caught out
well forget subjective opinions and
takes how about cold hard facts because
the stewards shared the damning data
they used to penalize Alonzo for
Dangerous driving and there's Telemetry
we can see as well that makes it Crystal
Clear what
happened the steward's summary of not
just the incident but also their
reasoning for penalizing Alonzo was
commendably detailed but before we get
into their logic let's establish the
facts the stewards have access to very
clear detailed Telemetry and were able
to see exactly what Alonzo was doing
their analysis could account for every
single lap of the race and therefore
they knew just how different Alonzo
drove on that final lap compared to the
rest of the Grand Prix while we don't
have exactly what they looked at we can
pretty much replicate it thanks to the
excellent F1 Tempo website which allows
us to compare how Alonzo entered turn
six on the lap Russell crashed compared
to the previous lap and put the critical
information from the stewards into
context approaching turn six Alonzo
clearly lifts off the throttle earlier
than before the steward said this
happened more than 100 m earlier than
any other lap he even applies the brakes
slightly this data is just a binary
onoff measurement so only shows that the
brake is being used but not the amount
of pressure being applied but the
steward said it was minimal enough that
braking wasn't the main reason for the
car slowing down still we can clearly
see Alonzo's lifted and break but he's
also downshifted to sixth gear as well
having stayed in seventh gear at this
point on every other lap having slowed
down so much Alonzo needs to accelerate
again and even upshift back to seventh
before he gets to the Corner Alonzo told
the stewards that he intended to
approach turn six differently that lap
by lifting earlier and carrying less
speed through the corner to get a better
exit but misjudged it so got back on the
throttle to get back up to speed the
stewards admitted they did not have the
data to decide whether Alonzo's maneuver
was intended to disturb Russell was
simply a different line to the one he'd
previously taken into turn six we'll
leave you to draw your own conclusions
there but whatever Alonzo's intention
his action created in the words of the
stewards an unusual closing speed
between the
cars Alonzo's claim that he was trying
to get the best exit out of turn six is
the one bit of his reasoning that stands
up to scrutiny he was in a close battle
with a faster car battling against
battery problems on his own car and knew
that Russell's best chance to overtake
on the final lap would be with DRS open
along the winding Flatout section from
turn six to turn nine by deliberately
slowing his Pace into turn six Alonzo
would have been hoping to compromise
Russell enough to prevent what Alonzo no
doubt calculated would like have been a
slam dunk overtake but from the
perspective of Russell's car even if
Russell himself wouldn't go this far in
what he said to the media Alonzo's
driving would have amounted to a break
test Russell was following only half a
second behind the Aston and described
Alonzo's maneuver as erratic in the
steward's hearing explaining that it
took him by surprise and closed the
speed between the two cars unusually
quickly which led to the sudden loss of
downforce entering the corner that
caused him to crash publicly Russell
felt the only potential justification
for what Alonzo did would have been a
genuine technical problem failure and
although Alonzo was struggling with
drates from his car's energy recovery
system that doesn't fully explain the
specific move he chose to make in this
instance Aston Martin indefinitely
postponed its regular post-race media
session with Team principal Mike crack
following the hearing so all we know of
the team's position on this incident is
that it was surprised by the Stewart's
decision as per the team's press release
in a different part of the same
statement Alonzo described the penalty
he received as disappointing claiming
that what he did amounted to nothing
more than hard but fair racing that it
was what any racing driver would do and
certainly nothing dangerous but Alonzo
issued a much feistier defense of his
own driving on social media afterwards
inferring that F1 stewards have no right
to question his driving claiming the
resultant crash for Russell was the only
reason the incident was investigated at
all and drawing comparisons with his
epic defensive drives of the past
claiming this sort of thing is part of
the art of
Motorsport the major problem here is
that Alonzo's Public Defense of what he
did admits something crucial that he did
did admit to the stewards he very
uncharacteristically for Alonzo made a
mistake remember the steward's judgment
revealed that Alonzo's case was he
always planned to slow earlier and to a
greater degree than usual for this
corner in order to maximize his exit but
he got it slightly wrong and had to take
extra steps to get back up to speed this
is the point that completely undoes
Alonzo's defense of his actions because
that act of deliberately slowing down
and speeding up again approaching a
high-speed corner is something you'd
only expect to see during a safety car
period or a formation lap not the final
race lap of a Grand Prix racing
etiquette dictates that checking up a
rival by going extra slowly through a
critical corner or section of a circuit
so as to delay them is a bit naughty but
part of what Alonzo calls the art of
Motorsport but even if you think
Alonzo's intentions were entirely Noble
here and he in fact wasn't trying to
unduly influence Russell's race in the
slightest Alonzo at the very least made
a massive misjudgment something more
befitting of a rank amateur with no F1
experience than a two-time champion who
is widely considered to be one of the
very best drivers of his generation
ation the stewards were very clear in
saying that Alonzo had the right to
alter his approach to this corner and
couldn't be held responsible for
whatever dirty air negatively affected
Russell's Mercedes but they were also
very clear that by his own admission
Alonzo chose to do something with
whatever intent that was extraordinary
lifting breaking downshifting and all
the other elements of the maneuver over
100 m earlier than previously and to a
much greater extent than was needed to
Simply slow a bit earlier than usual for
the corner so Alonzo is patently wrong
to tried to dismiss this incident as
trivial and conflate it with some of his
great races of the past this was not
some heroic defensive performance
crowned with a particularly clever
tactic it was a moment of Madness not
befitting a driver of his standing the
stewards concluded that what Alonzo did
in Melbourne was at the very least
potentially dangerous given the high-s
speed nature of that point of the track
we'd go so far as to say it was
dangerous unquestionably and that Alonzo
100% deserved to be
penalized the stewards said they had not
considered Russell's crash when deciding
Alonzo's fate which is in keeping with
the general principle of not allowing
the consequences of an incident to
impact a decision officials always try
to focus on the alleged offense itself
you might think that's nonsense and that
if Russell hadn't shunted Alonzo
wouldn't get in trouble at all remember
this is exactly what Alonzo himself said
on social media and if you read the
steward's report a certain way that
might only support your position they
refer to the harsher penalty guidance
that has made 10 seconds the Baseline
penalty for 2024 and how they consider
any aggravating circumstances to make
that penalty more severe in certain
cases with Alonzo the stewards felt that
actively choosing to perform this
unusual maneuver at this point met the
threshold of an aggravating circumstance
as opposed to a simple mistake so does
that mean Alonzo was punished for
Russell crashing not quite the
aggravating circumstance is more likely
the severity of the offense itself
creating a potentially dangerous
scenario and that existed regardless of
whether Russell actually crashed the
presence of Russell behind is Absol
absolutely a factor because you need a
second car there for Alonzo to be
risking anything dangerous but Alonzo's
only been judged and punished on
everything he did up to the point
Russell went off the road if Alonzo
messed about with his lines or his
breaking points or his throttle inputs
to a less severe degree it might have
fallen within the bounds of cheeky or
ruthless or hard but fair he went beyond
that and the stewards felt he crossed a
line in doing so well we sometimes think
consequences should be taken into
consideration it can also be a good
thing that they aren't as it means
problematic driving can be tackled
proactively rather than only ever
reacting to crashes and drivers risking
being hurt it's just in this case there
was a dramatic outcome as well Alonzo
obviously disagrees strongly with the
outcome but the indication is his Aston
Martin team has accepted it and will not
be appealing that maybe because it
didn't actually cost the team that much
at all Alonzo's 22nd penalty in Lee of a
drive-thru dropped him from sixth to eth
but teammate Lance stroll had finished
seventh so he inherited Alonzo's Place
Alonzo only drops back two positions and
as Martin's points hold from the race is
only cut from 14 to 12 whether you agree
with the decision or not that's a pretty
lowcost outcome for one of your drivers
being found guilty of dangerous
driving
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)