Williams has initiated a “right of review” over the controversial 10-second penalty Carlos Sainz received at the Dutch Grand Prix.
Sainz was given the penalty for causing a collision with Liam Lawson after the pair banged wheels in Turn 1 following the first of three safety car periods.
Both cars received punctures following the incident and dropped to the back of the field before Sainz then served his 10-second penalty at his next pit stop.
Teams can challenge decisions of the stewards by seeking a right of review, but in order to be successful must present significant and relevant evidence that was not available to the stewards when they made their decision.
“We can confirm we have submitted a right of review to the FIA relating to Carlos’ penalty in Zandvoort,” a Williams spokesperson said. “It is important for us to understand how to go racing in future, and we are hopeful of a positive outcome.”
The incident occurred after a safety car period at Zandvoort when Sainz positioned his car on the outside of Lawson through Turn 1 in the hope of opening up an opportunity to pass in the following corners.
The stewards decided to penalize Sainz for the resulting collision based on a strict interpretation of the driving standards guidelines, which state that a car overtaking on the outside only has a right to room at the exit of the corner if “its front axle [is] ahead of the front axle of the other car at the apex.”
At no point during the move did Sainz have his front axle alongside or ahead of Lawson’s, meaning the resulting collision was deemed to be his fault.
Speaking in a press conference on Thursday at Monza, Sainz said he visited the stewards after the race to discuss the decision and claimed they viewed the incident differently after hearing from him.
“I had the opportunity to go and sit with them for 15 minutes to analyse the incident,” Sainz said. “It was very clear to me that as soon as they got all the evidence right and they looked at the places they needed to take the right decision, it was clear to me that I think they realised probably the decision taken wasn’t the best one.
“Now we are trying to see if we can come up with enough evidence to change the outcome of the penalty, because I still firmly believe it was a very poor penalty I received and a bad judgment, which can happen as long as you have the capacity to revisit it. If there’s been a misunderstanding or a lack of evidence or analysis, then there is still time to reanalyse it, reopen it, and change it.
“I do believe they had a very difficult Sunday looking back at it. They had a very busy afternoon, and maybe it was overwhelming because of the amount of stuff that happened in the race.
“But I still firmly believe what I thought after the race. Now in a cooler-headed state, I still believe the penalty was not acceptable, and I made it very clear.”
Sainz added: “I think they [the stewards] have an incredibly difficult job, and sometimes they also have restricted time. I think what happened in my case in Zandvoort was a consequence of trying to rush a decision without looking deep enough in the analysis.
“If you just apply the rule in the rulebook, you could understand why they would want to penalise me. The moment you analyse the onboard footage and go into detail, you can clearly see why I should have never got a penalty.”
