F1 drivers Lando Norris and George Russell were reprimanded and fined €5,000 each for breaching the FIA’s start procedure regulations at the Sao Paulo Grand Prix.
The incident unfolded after a chaotic aborted start triggered by Lance Stroll’s spin into the gravel during the formation lap. The repercussions of this mishap not only affected the two drivers but also highlighted the complexities of the chaotic race which saw several incidents.
As the Sao Paulo Grand Prix race began, Stroll’s Aston Martin lost control and became stranded at Turn 4, prompting race control to announce an aborted start.
This procedure is critical in F1 as it resets the starting protocol and requires a ten-minute delay for teams to prepare their cars for a new start. Drivers are instructed to either remain on the grid or return to it in an orderly manner.
However, confusion ensued when Lando Norris, who was on pole position, misinterpreted the aborted start signal and launched off the grid, mistakenly believing he was cleared to complete another formation lap.
Mercedes’ George Russell who was positioned directly behind Norris followed suit leading to a cascade effect where other F1 drivers, including RB duo Yuki Tsunoda and Liam Lawson also left their positions.
The mass exodus from the grid was met with bewilderment by some drivers who adhered to the correct procedure, notably Max Verstappen who remained stationary and watched the unfolding chaos before ultimately winning the Sao Paulo Grand Prix.
The FIA stewards quickly initiated an investigation into the incident post-race. They convened with representatives from McLaren and Mercedes to ascertain the details surrounding the breach of protocol.
The stewards concluded that both Norris and Russell had failed to comply with established regulations as outlined in Article 47.1 of F1’s sporting code. Their official statement claimed that while the signals for an aborted start were properly communicated via light panels and team notifications, Norris’s premature departure from the grid directly instigated similar actions from those behind him.
The stewards also noted that this incident could have been avoided had Norris adhered to the rules governing aborted starts. Their verdict underscored that the Brit’s actions were pivotal in precipitating a chain reaction among his fellow drivers.
Consequently, both he and Russell were handed a reprimand and fined €5,000 for their roles in the procedural breach. Interestingly, Tsunoda and Lawson were cleared of direct responsibility as their actions were deemed reactions to Norris and Russell’s movement ahead of them.
The FIA acknowledged that while they technically breached regulations by leaving their grid spots, they were influenced by the decisions made by the cars at the front of the grid.
A statement from the stewards read: “The FIA Formula One Race Director initiated the Aborted Start procedure indicating that drivers should not leave the grid. This message was necessary as there was a car [Lance Stroll] off track in Turn Four that needed to be recovered.
“Although the signal was appropriately given, the light panel illuminated was prescribed, and the teams notified by the messaging system, the driver left the grid and proceeded on a lap that he assumed to be an extra formation lap.
“As the driver was on the front row of the grid, this triggered following drivers to take similar action. In the opinion of the stewards, the driver [Norris] precipitated the action of the drivers on the grid directly behind him.
“Although the driver breached the regulation this was influenced by the driver ahead of him and as such he was not predominately responsible for the breach.”
Besides the fines, Mercedes faced further scrutiny when it was discovered that they had released pressure from their tyres while waiting on the grid during the aborted start procedure at the Sao Paulo Grand Prix.
This action resulted in an additional €10,000 fine for Mercedes—split between Russell’s and Lewis Hamilton’s cars—after stewards determined that while this breach typically warrants a sporting penalty, unique circumstances surrounding this race warranted a more lenient approach.
