2
Renault has affirmed that it may choose to appeal the FIA's decision to disqualify it from the Japanese Grand Prix classifications.
On Wednesday, the decision to throw out the Enstone squad's results from Suzuka was confirmed as the stewards determined that its cars were not being driven unaided.
Racing Point launched the protest against the Renault following the race in Japan.
In a statement from Renault in response to the disqualification, the team stated: "Renault F1 Team acknowledges the decision of the Stewards of the Japanese Grand Prix regarding the protest by SportPesa Racing Point F1 Team concerning the legality of Renault F1 Team’s braking system during the Japanese Grand Prix.
"Despite the FIA concurring with Renault that the system was entirely legal under the FIA Technical Regulations, it was judged by the stewards that the system was in breach of the FIA Sporting Regulations regarding driver aid.
"Both Renault cars were disqualified from the Japanese Grand Prix and the team loses the nine points scored.
"However, considering the subjectivity of the qualification of a system as a driver aid and the variability of the associated penalties in recent cases, Renault F1 Team will consider its next course of action within the timeframe laid out by the FIA."
The stewards outlined that Renault has until 10:00 AM Central Daylight Time in Mexico City on October 24th to notify the FIA about its intent to appeal.
Grand Prix of Belgium
C. Sainz jr
27 members have this team as their favourite
Replies (2)
Login to replyf1dave
Posts: 782
Why bother appealing, just walk away from F1, it's becoming a silly series on all fronts.
michielhimself
Posts: 132
Didn't some teams drive or in the past, drive with pre-set engine and energy recovery mappings depending on their position in the lap?
Honda in 2017 at Spa for sure, because an unanticipated condition made Alonso not have the power he needed going up at Kemmel.
Even if that would be just one mode of many selectable by the driver, would the use of such a system not constitute a similar violation of the "drive unaided" rule?