Why was Oscar Piastri penalised at Silverstone when George Russell wasn’t for his actions behind the protection automotive in Canada? Is the distinction that one was within the moist and subsequently visibility restricted? – Nick
This can be a query Piastri was clearly asking himself after the British Grand Prix, even when he didn’t say so in fairly so many phrases.
Consistency of stewards’ opinions is one thing groups and drivers are always asking for, and on the face of it this does seem like a contradiction.
The 2 incidents have been very comparable. In Canada, Russell braked and Max Verstappen handed him. At Silverstone, Piastri did the identical with the identical consequence.
In Canada, the stewards took no motion, and rejected a post-race protest from Crimson Bull. At Silverstone, Piastri misplaced the win as a consequence of a 10-second penalty.
There have been some variations, nevertheless. The brake stress Piastri utilized, whereas completely regular for a braking occasion behind a security automotive, was greater than double Russell’s. And the circumstances have been completely different – moist slightly than dry – with the lowered visibility that got here from that.
Verstappen made it clear he didn’t view the incidents that in a different way, nevertheless.
After Sunday’s race, he was requested if he thought Piastri deserved a penalty.
“The factor is that it occurred to me now just a few occasions, this sort of state of affairs,” Verstappen mentioned. “I simply discover it unusual that immediately now Oscar is the primary one to obtain 10 seconds.”
As a result of there was no distinction to what Russell did in Canada?
“Nicely, to the stewards, sure,” Verstappen replied.
Piastri mentioned he felt he had accomplished every part inside the guidelines, and implied he had been unfortunate to be braking on the similar time the protection automotive lights went out to point a restart – the time after which drivers should not allowed “erratic braking nor another manoeuvre which is more likely to endanger different drivers”.
Crimson Bull workforce principal Christian Horner mentioned: “I wasn’t stunned to see him get a penalty. That was what you’d anticipate.”
McLaren workforce principal Andrea Stella mentioned he felt the penalty was “very harsh” and he would talk about it with the stewards.
He mentioned McLaren had made the purpose through the race it must be checked out afterwards.
“I believe we must always have checked intimately the opinion of the drivers concerned,” he mentioned. “We must always have checked why the protection automotive was referred to as in so late after which put collectively all the weather such that the choice could possibly be as honest as doable.”
