has received a 20-second time penalty for his involvement in the crash. It is surprising that Alonso was not disqualified and should consider himself fortunate to avoid a race ban.
The scene of Russell’s crash at the end of the race immediately evoked memories of the [ppp2023]. Was Russell once again pushing the limits too far, jeopardizing valuable points for Mercedes?
While the initial reaction may have been to blame Russell, the circumstances are somewhat different. Russell’s proximity to Alonso led to him losing control of his car, but Alonso’s questionable actions cannot be overlooked. The decision to penalize Alonso with a twenty-second penalty, allowing him to still secure points for Aston Martin, raises questions.
The Rationale Behind Alonso’s Penalty
Alonso initially attributed his slow pace post-race to a supposed issue with his car’s battery, claiming innocence in the incident with Russell. However, upon further review, it was revealed that there was no technical fault with his battery. Subsequently, Alonso changed his narrative, suggesting that he was experimenting with a different approach to optimize his performance at Turn 6.
The stewards, upon analyzing the data, discovered that Alonso significantly altered his driving behavior on the final lap. He lifted off the throttle over 100 meters earlier than usual, a deviation that was unprecedented throughout the race. Additionally, he lightly tapped the brakes and downshifted for the first time entering the corner.
The Case for Harsher Consequences
Apart from the significant changes in Alonso’s driving approach, the stewards noted the element of dangerous driving. Despite this observation, Alonso was only handed a 20-second time penalty, resulting in an eighth-place finish instead of sixth, with points still awarded. This leniency contrasts starkly with past penalties, such as [ppp2022] receiving a mere five-second penalty for a similar incident.
The decision to impose a 20-second penalty, while deemed substantial by the FIA, raises eyebrows. The lack of a more severe punishment for Alonso’s actions, which endangered another driver, is concerning. The absence of concrete evidence linking Alonso’s maneuvers to Russell’s crash complicates the situation, highlighting the challenge of proving malicious intent.
In conclusion, while the absence of definitive proof may hinder a harsher judgment, Alonso’s actions on the track reflect a disregard for safety and sportsmanship. The stewards’ decision, though penalizing, falls short of addressing the gravity of the situation and ensuring accountability in competitive racing.