The evidence that damned Alonso in Russell’s Australian GP crash

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