[F1 Special Topic]No. 3 with twists and turns

Fernando Alonso's 3rd place in Saudi Arabia was really full of twists and turns: First, he was fined 5 seconds for parking incorrectly before the start, and then during the first stop for a time penalty, because the team staff inserted the jack into the bottom of the car for less than 5 seconds , Therefore, when he was punished for his inaccurate actions, he was punished for another 10 seconds after the game, and his score dropped to 4th. However, 3 hours later, the game will cancel the 10 seconds and let him return to 3rd.

What is intriguing is that Esteban Ocon at the Bahrain station was also fined 5 seconds for not parking correctly before the start, and an additional 10 seconds for the time penalty. However, Ocon’s 10-second penalty was issued immediately, while Alonso passed After most of the race, the decision was not made until the podium after 1 hour! It turned out that Toto Wolff, the team leader of Mercedes, protested to the game that Alonso's penalty time action was not correct before the end of the game. Therefore, it was not that the decision-making time was too long, but the review time was too late.

Then why was the penalty revoked later? It turned out that after considering the video of the race again, it was confirmed that although the team personnel had inserted the rear jack into the bottom of the car when the penalty time was less than 5 seconds, it had not been jacked up. , so it does not count as starting the job early.

According to the regulations, when the car is stopped for time penalty, the staff can prepare to stop the work, but they are not allowed to touch the car. They have to wait for the time to start working, but in the end the judgment was changed to Alonso. Is it just because the hand did not touch it? There has never been such an example in the past, so the final judgment this time will become a precedent, that is, in the future when the car is stopped for penalty time, can the front and rear jacks for tire replacement be inserted first? Or is it unprecedented, but not an example? FIA must be clearly defined.

The resulting episode is: Alonso received the third place trophy on the podium and sprayed (non-alcoholic) champagne, but the third place in the interview after the game became George Russell who replaced the third place after a penalty of 10 seconds, and He also took the trophy handed over by Alonso, but when the ranking was reversed again, Russell did not return it in time. Instead, he took the trophy back to the Mercedes team headquarters, and then mischievously asked where Alonso's address was on social media, which attracted the latter to return. Post a stalk picture below in response to "Give it back to me!", before sending it back to the nearby Aston Martin headquarters.

The ranking is decided, let’s go back to the problem of incorrect parking position before the start: Occasionally, a driver will be seen parked on the left side of the starting grid, because there is a stealth sensor buried in the right front of the grid, so it will be suspected It is to evade and obtain improper benefits, so punishment will be imposed. So Alonso seems to be able to run together this time and surpass the pole winner Sergio Perez, is it intentional? Or is this veteran who has the record for the most races in F1 history even unable to stop the car? When he was notified of a penalty after the start, Alonso did not yell "innocently", but replied "I know" in a low-key manner. You can understand that he was just gambling, but he was caught and knew he was wrong! Isn't this old and thief?