Three crashes at the restart of the 2023 Australian Grand Prix

Three crashes, one penalty: Did the Melbourne stewards get these calls right?

Debates and Polls

Posted on

| Written by

Three collisions occurred after the final standing restart at the end of the Australian Grand Prix. But only one driver was penalised and one incident wasn’t even investigated, despite it leading to the retirement of one driver.

Did the stewards make the correct call? Compare the three incidents below and give your verdict.

Incident: Sainz and Alonso

How it happened

Carlos Sainz Jnr restarted the race from fourth, alongside Fernando Alonso to his left on the grid. Alonso made a better getaway and Sainz briefly fell behind Pierre Gasly, who started alongside him.

Both Sainz and Gasly braked late for the first corner. Gasly went off the track, and although Sainz reached the apex of the corner he was unable to avoid Alonso at the exit. The Ferrari’s front-left wheel hit the Aston Martin’s right-rear, tipping it into a spin.

Sainz continued in fourth place, which soon became third when Lance Stroll ahead of him went off, while Alonso was able to rejoin the field at the back of the grid.

What they said

It was a good race overall but the penalty ruined all the effort and I don’t agree with it. The frustration I feel right now will be difficult to digest, but I will try to think only of the positives from today and focus on the next race.
Carlos Sainz Jnr

Probably the penalty is too harsh, I think because on lap one, it is very difficult always to judge what the grip level, and I think we don’t go intentionally into another car, you know?

Because we know that we risk also our car and our final position, so sometimes you ended up in places that you wish you were not there in that moment. And it’s just part of racing, but I didn’t see the replay properly, but for me, it feels too hard.
Fernando Alonso

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

The incident in pictures

The official verdict

Sainz was given a five-second time penalty. The stewards said:

The stewards reviewed positioning/marshalling system data, video, timing, telemetry, team radio and in-car video evidence and determined that on the first corner of the restart, a collision occurred between car 55 [Sainz] and car 14 [Alonso]. We determined that car 55 was wholly to blame for the collision.

Car 14 was significantly ahead of car 55 at the first corner and nevertheless car 55 drove into car 14, causing it to spin and leave the track. We accordingly imposed a five-second penalty on car 55.

For avoidance of doubt, we took into account the fact that this collision took place at the first lap of the restart, when, by convention, the stewards would typically take a more lenient view of incidents.

However, in this particular case, notwithstanding the fact that it was the equivalent of a first lap incident, we considered that there was sufficient gap for car 55 to take steps to avoid the collision and failed to do so.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Your verdict

Who do you think was responsible for the collision? Should the stewards issue a penalty? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

What penalty would you have given for the Sainz-Alonso incident?

  • No opinion (1%)
  • No penalty for either driver (52%)
  • Stronger penalty for Alonso (0%)
  • Grid drop for Alonso (0%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for Alonso (0%)
  • Drive-through penalty for Alonso (0%)
  • 10-second time penalty for Alonso (0%)
  • Five-second time penalty for Alonso (0%)
  • Stronger penalty for Sainz (1%)
  • Grid drop for Sainz (7%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for Sainz (2%)
  • Drive-through penalty for Sainz (0%)
  • 10-second time penalty for Sainz (3%)
  • Five-second time penalty for Sainz (34%)

Total Voters: 100

Loading ... Loading ...

Incident: Gasly and Ocon

Gasly went off the track at the first corner as he locked his front-left wheel while braking late for the corner. He ran onto the grass on the inside of the turn two left-hander immediately alongside Nico Hulkenberg and Lando Norris.

They passed him, as did the AlphaTauri of Yuki Tsunoda. Ocon was the next driver to attempt to pass Gasly on his right as they exited turn two.

Gasly appeared not to realise his team mate was there and the pair made contact, hitting the barrier. Both suffered race-ending damage.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

What they said

I just have no comment and I’m way too disappointed to be standing here and looking at these guys doing one lap.
Pierre Gasly

It could have been any one that I collided with to be honest, because there was a lot of cars going off. Obviously it ended up being Pierre not leaving me much space, but no hard feelings, he came and apologised. As I said, it could have been anyone.
Esteban Ocon

The incident in pictures

The official verdict

The stewards decided to take no action, explaining:

The stewards heard from the driver of car 10 (Pierre Gasly), the driver of car 31 (Esteban Ocon), a team representative and reviewed positioning/marshalling system data, video and in-car video evidence and determined that it was a first lap racing incident.

Both cars [drivers] recognised and accepted this as such. In the circumstances, we took no further action.

Your verdict

Who do you think was responsible for the collision? Should the stewards issue a penalty? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

What penalty would you have given for the Gasly-Ocon incident?

  • No opinion (2%)
  • No penalty for either driver (44%)
  • Stronger penalty for Ocon (0%)
  • Grid drop for Ocon (2%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for Ocon (0%)
  • Drive-through penalty for Ocon (0%)
  • 10-second time penalty for Ocon (0%)
  • Five-second time penalty for Ocon (0%)
  • Stronger penalty for Gasly (4%)
  • Grid drop for Gasly (18%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for Gasly (6%)
  • Drive-through penalty for Gasly (3%)
  • 10-second time penalty for Gasly (5%)
  • Five-second time penalty for Gasly (17%)

Total Voters: 101

Loading ... Loading ...

Incident: Sargeant and De Vries

Approaching turn one at the restart Logan Sargeant briefly locked his brakes then ran into the back of Nyck de Vries. The AlphaTauri was forced to retire while Sargeant was able to continue initially, then later came to a stop.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

What they said

The last restart was was pretty weird. I felt like I braked [like] I did on the previous two starts but it just seemed like nothing was up to temperature: brakes, tyres.

I hit the pedal and it was immediate. Both fronts locked and there was nothing I could do from there.

Sorry to Nyck. I didn’t want to end the day like that. It was a tough enough day as it was. It was disappointing.
Logan Sargeant

It can happen. Everyone can make a mistake and a misjudgement and it’s a racing incident. We’ll move on and hope for a better race next time.
Nyck de Vries

The incident in pictures

The official verdict

The stewards did not investigate the incident.

Your verdict

Who do you think was responsible for the collision? Should the stewards issue a penalty? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

What penalty would you have given for the Sargeant-De Vries incident?

  • No opinion (7%)
  • No penalty for either driver (27%)
  • Stronger penalty for De Vries (0%)
  • Grid drop for De Vries (1%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for De Vries (0%)
  • Drive-through penalty for De Vries (0%)
  • 10-second time penalty for De Vries (0%)
  • Five-second time penalty for De Vries (1%)
  • Stronger penalty for Sargeant (2%)
  • Grid drop for Sargeant (20%)
  • 10-second stop-and-go penalty for Sargeant (2%)
  • Drive-through penalty for Sargeant (2%)
  • 10-second time penalty for Sargeant (5%)
  • Five-second time penalty for Sargeant (32%)

Total Voters: 95

Loading ... Loading ...

A RaceFans account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed instead of the voting form.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

48 comments on “Three crashes, one penalty: Did the Melbourne stewards get these calls right?”

  1. Adam (@rocketpanda)
    3rd April 2023, 12:32

    I’m quite surprised Sainz got a penalty at all for a collision on a lap that was deleted and Alonso was able to continue. A warning would have been sufficient instead of this phantom penalty. Has to be said though if that lap hadn’t been deleted, the penalty would have been deserved.

    Sainz getting a penalty but Gasly somehow managing not to despite rejoining the track unsafely and wiping out his own team-mate, and Sargeant just punting De Vries out but also not getting one, just adds to the sense of unfairness on Sainz.

    1. Has to be said though if that lap hadn’t been deleted, the penalty would have been deserved.

      But that’s exactly the point.
      The penalty is for what Sainz did (the action), not for how it did (or didn’t) affect Alonso (the consequence).

      And it’s not unfair for Sainz that the other two didn’t get penalties – it’s just extremely fortunate for them.

    2. @rocketpanda Gasly & Sargeant probably didn’t get penalized because of circumstances, i.e., if their collisions happened without other cars around, they most likely would’ve gotten penalized.
      Gasly didn’t really have any other way of rejoining the track & Perez also rejoined somewhat unsafely.

      1. 50 minutes! Were you at lunch or something?

    3. Tommy Scragend
      3rd April 2023, 13:30

      I’m quite surprised Sainz got a penalty at all for a collision on a lap that was deleted and Alonso was able to continue. A warning would have been sufficient instead of this phantom penalty. Has to be said though if that lap hadn’t been deleted, the penalty would have been deserved.

      The stewards aren’t supposed to consider the knock-on effects of an incident when determining a penalty, although I agree that in this case as the lap was (effectively, not actually) deleted, some discretion could perhaps have been shown. But that might have set a precedent which they didn’t want.

      1. Exactly.

    4. Personally, I don’t think the lap being “deleted” should have any bearing on the penalty. They have all agreed that consequences don’t matter in determining penalties, only actions. If it deserves a 5s penalty at any other time, it deserves one there.

      However, for me it was a “lap one” racing incident. I am don’t think Sainz would have been penalised had the incident actually occurred on lap one, and the same should apply after a restart.

    5. My understanding is the lap wasn’t deleted.

      But that’s not relevant anyway.

      If a football player breaks an opponent’s leg after the whistle, it’s still an action worthy of punishment.

  2. Sainz’s penalty was ridiculous, the epitome of a lap-one incident that normally goes unpunished. Gasly should have got a grid drop, and probably the two points that would make him miss a race – it seems pretty clear that the stewards didn’t penalise him as they don’t want to ban him, in any other case that’d be a penalty.

    All caused by the farcical red flags, made for Netflix.

    1. @tflb I think Gasly didn’t get penalized because of circumstances & the mess around acting as mitigating factors, i.e., if the Alpine drivers had their collision in the same manner without anyone else in proximity, Gasly would’ve probably gotten penalized. Everything indeed was ultimately caused by the farcical red flags.

      1. 46 minutes

    2. Correction – all caused by the driving decisions made solely by the drivers.
      If you are going to blame the FIA, you are essentially saying that there shouldn’t even be any event at all.

      The red flags were necessary under the current rules and nature of modern F1. And the world in general with its modern attitudes to safety, responsibility and duty of care.

    3. In this race almost every lap was a lap one…

  3. All 3 should have been penalties for me but crucially I feel Gasly actually should have got a more severe penalty. Rejoining the track safely in motorsport is hugely important, when you leave the track you forfeit your right to just blend back onto the circuit and the drivers on track have right of way. Gasly not only rejoined unsafely, he proceeded to move across the full width of the track too rather than position in a neutral position until he could establish it was safe.

    I don’t think Sainz should have been given a free pass as it feels like he contributed to the crash of Gasly and Ocon with the chaos he caused and as such 2 cars didn’t finish in the points that should have. I appreciate why Alonso wouldn’t care but I’m not so sure Alpine would feel happy that Sainz escaped with no penalty. The penalty is very harsh but under the current rules that’s all that is allowed to be given. I think there is scope perhaps that the time penalty be amended to something like a 5 second time penalty or a drop of 3 positions (whichever results in the least drop in positions) for those drivers who finish the race with that time penalty. Perhaps a 5 place drop or 10s time penalty.

    The Sargeant accident seemed a slam dunk 5 second time penalty too.

    I’m not a fan of the leniency just because an accident happens on lap one. It seems to reward aggressive drivers more than those who are cautious.

    1. @slowmo I think Gasly & Sargeant didn’t get penalized because of circumstances & the mess around acting as mitigating factors, i.e., if the Alpine & SAR-DEV collisions happened without other cars around, they probably indeed would’ve gotten penalized.

      1. 47 minutes

          1. For some reason, I don’t know why cause I don’t look too deep into comments, he is obsessed with how fast or slowly jere replies to threads, in this case it means 47 mins after the thread was posted.

  4. I do agree that Sainz is responsible for the incident, but this penalty feels harsh because of the lack of consequences for Alonso and the enormous consequences for Sainz. Would a reprimand and/or only giving penalty points have been an option? I feel like it might have been a perfect way to warn the driver that it was his fault without ruining their race for an incident which, because of the red flag, didn’t really happen if you look at the results.

    1. i don’t agree similar contact with Leclerc and stroll was consider racing incident, but somehow Sainz got punish…..if i was ferrari i would start to consider to leave F1, not only every year the messed building the car, but also they have no power anymore towards FIA

      1. Leclerc came down the outside from behind and turned in on Stroll.
        Not Stroll’s fault.

  5. Sargeant also retired on the spot, but ultimately I don’t mind that only Sainz got penalized (deservedly in the end, even if somewhat harshly), as everything was a mess anyway, thanks to Wittich.

    1. 43 minutes

  6. I voted no penalty for all 3. First corner incidents are meant to be treated more leniently and they shouldn’t have been a restart anyway.

    The officiating was dreadful – why investigate Sainz but not Sargeant? Totally inconsistent and implies incidents involving the front runners are more important, which is a dire message to send with regard to safety.

  7. I never thought the penalty for Sainz was fair and having looked at the pictures I am still of that opinion. Just a minor shunt on a start lap that can easily, and does often happen.

    My initial reaction to the Gasly/Ocon incident was the same but having looked at the pictures I think there is more of a case for saying that Pierre was at fault. I am not sure why he would not have seen Ocon in his mirrors looking at the pictures and I think it might have been the case that he made an error in just positioning his car too much to right to avoid anyone else passing. Still only a 60/40 decision though i.e 60% guilty.

  8. I dont think it was about sanctioning Sainz, but rather how to ensure Alonso would have stayed on top. Now this is the second race that Alonso get suspiciously favored.

    1. (lawrence stroll winking dollar signs.gif)

      1. If you were wearing a tinfoil hat you would suggest that AM’s title sponsor also being a major sponsor of the series might have something to do with it

  9. I think there should be some tweaks to the ways penalties are applied, because i don’t think Sainz deserved to drop out of the points entirely for what is usually only a minor infringement (the smallest penalty available). However, until that is done i think the penalties have to be applied consistently – therefore the 5 second penalty is correct (although should apply to all first lap incidents, rather than only some of them as it seems currently).

    Gasly being out of the race means time penalties are not relevant, so he should have suffered a grid drop for the next race and penalty points on his licence which in his case would mean a race ban. But the FIA clearly do not want to hand out race bans for points accumulated, therefore they let this one slide. Would be interesting to see what would have happened if the crash had been with someone other than his teammate, since the opposing team would no doubt be pushing for sanctions.

    Sergeant should have been penalised, no question. His misjudgement was bigger than Sainz’s, so probably worthy of a 10 second time penalty, plus some penalty points. Since he finished outside the points, the time penalty would have no impact, but i believe this is consistent with previous rulings since he was still participating in the race.

    1. edit: I’ve seen that Sargeant did in fact retire from his collision. In that case, grid drop for the next race rather than time penalty.

      1. I agree with you absolutely

  10. Things we need to sort after the Australian GP:
    1. Do we really need a standing start after a red flag?
    2. In case we do: do we, penalty wise, handle the first lap after a restart the same way we handle first lap of the race?
    3. Can we apply penalties and rules simultaneously for the entire field, not just for the front runners?

    Where I said ‘we’ I meant the FIA.

    I would assume that the best drivers in the world would be able to handle a standing start, even if it’s late in the race. Apparently they can’t, which is a sad conclusion. I feel that Sainz, Gasly and Sargeant all contributed to a messy first and second corner and deserve the same penalty. And if a penalty isn’t applicable anymore for this event it should be transferred to the next event.

    1. I fail to see the point of standing restarts, but the main issue is the red flags for Albon and Magnessun weren’t necessary.

      1. I fail to see the point of standing restarts

        They’re the most exciting part of a Grand Prix (because the cars are bad at racing).

        It’s why half the highlight videos tend to be of the start and post-race podium, with everything else making up the rest.

  11. Sargeant didn’t get a penalty only because the stewards are seemingly not interested in what happens at the back. Had it been Hamilton wiping out Verstappen, for example, it certainly would have been investigated and penalised.

    Btw, the poll has several unnecessary options since the stewards can´t give time penalties for drivers who have retired. And Sargeant did retire as well, contrary to what is claimed in the article.

  12. Had Gasly remained on the same side of the track after rejoining then I would have been okay with any following accident. Unfortunately he came across the track and at a much more reduced speed. Vettel got a penalty for driving across the track and crowding another car off track.

    1. Exactly. He’s both dull and erratic.

  13. I really don’t know what Sainz was complaining about. So what that the tyres were cold? We’ve seen plenty of drivers make similar mistakes (‘Bottas bowling’ comes to mind) and get penalized. I don’t agree that the fact Alonso ‘survived’ by resetting the positions should exempt Sainz from a penalty. Of course FA was most forgiving of his compatriot, friend and idolizer. Had that been one of his rivals, I doubt he’d have been quite so understanding.
    10 second penalty seems about right for the incident.
    I didn’t check back on replays of the other incidents so no opinion.

  14. The one’s who should get a penalty are those at Liberty, The FIA, Race control & the media who have pushed to put the show above the sport and created this whole sorry mess to begin with.

    If the sport was still valued before the show the race never would have been red flagged to begin with!

    1. If the sport was still valued before the show

      There wouldn’t have even been a Melbourne GP, or F1 in any recognisable form at all.
      It would be financially poor and hardly anyone would watch it.

    2. Spot on. Liberty’s greed is going to cause a serious problem on track sooner than later.

  15. Why/how is a penalty for Alonso even a response option? That’s the most bizarre/ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen. Sainz would have went flying off the track just like Gasly if he hadn’t been able to use Alonso as a brake. And Alonso should get a penalty for simply being there or a penalty by the official his fans didn’t like?

  16. It’s impossible to take these guys seriously, so any analysis – while appreciated – is ultimately pointless. They don’t care, so there’s no point trying to understand their reasoning.

    There is a guy on the grid with so many penalties that he’s long overdue a race ban. He’s speeding under red flag conditions, admitting to not thinking about marshal safety at all while doing so. But that race ban is being skirted around by not penalizing him. Repeatedly. Here, he goes off track, rejoins in an unsafe manner (not allowed), sweeps to the other side of the track (dubious at best), crowds another car off (not allowed), hits said other car (not allowed). And what happens? Nothing. Why? He’d be banned and that’d look bad on the French team and F1 as a whole.

    As for Sainz… you can penalize Ferrari all day long and it’s fine. They’ll take it. Just like they took the bogus penalty for Leclerc in Japan last year that ‘fixed’ the Honda WCC party at home.

    1. Exactly, Gasly is the number one driver I wouldn’t trust if I was overtaking. Number two is, ironically, Ocon. Beyond being very dim, he’s not headed, petulant and erratic. Being all of those and arrogant to boot and a race ban is exactly what he needs to humble him.

  17. I don’t understand how for Sainz they can say:

    However, in this particular case, notwithstanding the fact that it was the equivalent of a first lap incident, we considered that there was sufficient gap for car 55 to take steps to avoid the collision and failed to do so.

    But then for Gasly say that they:

    determined that it was a first lap racing incident

    Gasly had room to the left and didn’t need to come all the way to the right side of the track. He absolutely had sufficient gap to take steps to avoid the collision and failed to do so. Plus Gasly was the result of rejoining the track after locking up and going off. Sainz never locked up and would have made the corner without going off the track had he not hit Alonso (who I agree was blameless in the collision).
    It makes it really hard to believe that it’s anything other than the stewards being too scared to give Gasly a race ban for an accumulation of penalty points, when a number of his points are for things that no longer accrue penalty points.

    1. Sainz never locked up and would have made the corner without going off the track had he not hit Alonso

      Which suggests that Sainz didn’t make enough of an attempt to avoid contact, right?
      So deserving of a penalty.

      Sargeant did lock up significantly, showing he was (although completely at fault) at least making every attempt to avoid contact. It should have been a penalty too – but as it was outside the points, everyone cares a lot less.

      And Gasly is on the points limit. It’s a bad look when the supposed “World’s Best Racing Drivers” competing in “The World’s Premier Motor Racing Series/Pinnacle of Motorsport” are being banned for poor driving. So they didn’t.
      Add to that, F1 typically doesn’t penalise teams for taking themselves out. It’s a ridiculous layover from the past, but nevertheless, it’s still there. Yay for tradition….
      Just like they don’t penalise teams for issuing team orders, even though the sporting regs explicitly forbid them…

Comments are closed.