Ferrari team principal Frederic Vasseur has remarked on the increasing complexity of Formula 1’s sporting regulations, highlighting the challenge posed by the growing intricacy of the rulebook over time.
Vasseur expressed his concerns regarding the evolving nature of F1’s regulations, noting the emergence of contradictory clauses within the document. He emphasized the need for clarity and understanding amidst the expanding scope of the rules.
During the qualifying session for the Chinese Grand Prix, Carlos Sainz experienced a spin in his Ferrari, prompting a red flag and a temporary halt to the proceedings.
Despite the incident, Sainz managed to resume his qualifying attempt, advancing to the next phase. However, Aston Martin lodged a protest against the results, contending that Sainz should have been disqualified for coming to a halt on the track.
Subsequently, the stewards rejected Aston Martin’s appeal, citing the provision in Article 39.6 of the sporting regulations. According to their interpretation, since the Ferrari could return to the pits without external assistance, it did not violate the rules.
The decision rested on the understanding that Article 39.6 specifically pertains to situations where a car is unable to make it back to the pits independently.
The ambiguity stemming from the wording of Article 39.6 brought the issue into focus, prompting questions from the media regarding the clarity of the rule. When asked about the matter after the Chinese Grand Prix, Vasseur acknowledged the need for clarification and understanding of the situation.
“I don’t know if it’s clear, but for sure we need to have some understanding of what has happened, as yesterday, we asked if we can restart, he [the race director] said yes, and it was the end of the story,” he remarked, before emphasizing that, “we have to define exactly the situation.”
Vasseur then shifted focus to the inherent inconsistencies present within the regulations on a broader scale, underscoring how the expansion of the sporting regulations has resulted in contradictions.
“But for sure, what is true is that the regulation is more and more complicated. When I started the job, the sporting regulation was 20 pages, today, it’s 75,” he commented.
“You will always find loopholes because you have cross-articles. I remember a couple of years ago when Kimi [Raikkonen] spun on the out-lap at Imola, we had two different articles reporting to the same case: one saying black and the other one saying white.”
While Aston Martin’s attempt to alter the results of qualifying for the Chinese Grand Prix was unsuccessful, the team has previously benefited from protests in recent years.
Examples include successfully reinstating Fernando Alonso’s podium at the 2023 Saudi Arabian Grand Prix and ensuring proper scrutiny of track limit infractions at the 2023 Austrian Grand Prix, resulting in penalties for rival teams and additional points for Aston Martin.
“It’s tricky, because as a consequence, the teams are getting bigger and bigger with more and more lawyers,” Vasseur remarked.
“At the end of the day, we are in the exact same situation as with the technical regulation – we are all trying to find a loophole and the regulation now is more and more complicated, but I think on this one, an easy clarification,” Vasseur concluded.
