05/05/2025 06:30
The FIA has offered a clear explanation as to why a Red Bull
protest against Mercedes' George Russell after the Miami Grand Prix
was rejected. Verstappen finished fourth at the Miami International
Autodrome, one place and 2.312s behind Russell. A virtual safety
car had compromised the four-time F1 champion's bid for a podium
behind the dominant McLaren duo of Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris.
However, Red Bull sought to promote Verstappen to third by lodging
a protest against Russell for not reducing his speed during a
yellow-flag period at one stage during the race. Verstappen had
radioed through to suggest as such. Red Bull hinted late in the
race that it would take action against Russell when it ordered
Verstappen to try and remain within five seconds of the British
driver. A five-second penalty would have demoted Russell behind
Verstappen. During the protest hearing, Red Bull claimed that
although Russell lifted the throttle when the yellow flag was
displayed, he did not reduce speed, so failing to comply with the
requirements of Article 26.1 a) of the FIA sporting regulations.
The rule states that in a single-waved yellow-flag period, "any
driver passing through a waved yellow-flag marshalling sector must
reduce their speed and be prepared to change direction. "For the
stewards to be satisfied that any such driver has complied with
these requirements, they are expected to have braked earlier and/or
discernibly reduced speed in the relevant marshalling sector." Red
Bull suggested that "discernibly reduced speed" should be
interpreted as passing the yellow-flag zone at an absolute speed
lower than the speed before entering the yellow-flag zone. Mercedes
argued that the common practice accepted by all teams and the FIA
was, and still is, that significantly lifting the throttle in a
yellow-flag zone is considered an appropriate reaction, as
performed by Russell. The team also suggested Russell had lifted
more than Verstappen had observed. In response, the stewards
concluded that, from onboard footage and the telemetry from
Russell's car, it was evident that he "lifted the throttle when
passing the yellow-flag zone. The throttle was lifted by approx. 25
per cent, and this resulted in a reduction of torque of approx. 30
per cent." In addition, a statement added the relevant article in
the sporting regulations "requires the driver to have 'discernibly
reduced speed' in a yellow-flag zone, but does not specify if that
means reducing the absolute speed or reducing the speed relative to
the regular racing speed in the relevant part of the track. "The
speed of car 63 [Russell] in the yellow-flag zone was considerably
slower than the regular racing speed, but the absolute speed while
passing through the yellow-flag zone increased slightly. "The
stewards determine that the requirement of Article 26.1 a)
concerning the reduction of speed in a yellow-flag zone can only
relate to a reduction relative to the regular racing speed as the
reduction of the absolute speed can, depending on the part of the
track in which the yellow flag is displayed, represent a compliance
or a non-compliance with the regulations whereas a reduction of the
relative speed always signals that the driver has acknowledged and
respected the yellow flag. "For instance, in a braking zone, the
absolute speed can be reduced without necessarily complying with
the regulations." On that basis, the protest was rejected, with Red
Bull's €2,000 deposit for launching the protest forfeited.
