12/12/2021
NEWS STORY
Mercedes protest relating to a potential breach of the safety car lapped car procedure has been dismissed.
Mercedes claimed that there were two breaches of the Sporting Regulations (Article 48.12) namely that which states "...any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car" and "...once the last lapped car has passed the leader the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the following lap."
Mercedes argued that had this been complied with, Lewis Hamilton would have won the race.
On the other hand, Red Bull argued that:
1. "Any" does not mean "all".
2. The Article 48.13 of the Sporting Regulations states that the message "Safety Car in this lap" is the signal that it will enter the pit lane at the end of that lap.
3. That therefore Article 48.13 "overrides" Article 48.12.
4. That Article 15.3 gives the Race Director "overriding authority" over "the use of the safety car".
5. That even if all cars that had been lapped (8 in total, of which 5 were allowed to overtake the safety car) it would not have changed the outcome of the race.
Mercedes was represented by Ron Meadows, Andrew Shovlin and Paul Harris, the team's legal counsel, while Red Bull was represented by Jonathan Wheatley, Christian Horner and Adrian Newey.
Race Director's Evidence
The Race Director stated that the purpose of Article 48.12 was to remove those lapped cars that would "interfere" in the racing between the leaders and that in his view Article 48.13 was the one that applied in this case.
The Race Director also stated that it had long been agreed by all the Teams that where possible it was highly desirable for the race to end in a "green" condition (i.e. not under a Safety Car).
While the Stewards considered the protest is admissible, having considered the various statements made by the parties they determined the following:
That Article 15.3 allows the Race Director to control the use of the safety car, which in our determination includes its deployment and withdrawal.
That although Article 48.12 may not have been applied fully, in relation to the safety car returning to the pits at the end of the following lap, Article 48.13 overrides that and once the message "Safety Car in this lap" has been displayed, it is mandatory to withdraw the safety car at the end of that lap.
That notwithstanding Mercedes' request that the Stewards remediate the matter by amending the classification to reflect the positions at the end of the penultimate lap, this is a step that the Stewards believe is effectively shortening the race retrospectively, and hence not appropriate.
Accordingly, the protest was dismissed and the protest deposit will not be refunded.
Mercedes subsequently revealed that it will appeal the decision.
Check out our Sunday gallery from Yas Marina, here.