When Alonso It serves the media after a career, in the corralite de televisión or in the written press, there is always a clear message that wants to stand. It doesn’t matter what you ask him, that he will be able to conclude his answer to assert the subject, a virtue communication that little is and that Fernando is dominant perfectly. And This week, after the Canada GP of F1, 1 Ovetense has something very clear to say and repeat.
In 2024 he had lived FIA’s hard hand and said enough
Asturian has lived in the past FIA’s tough hands, sometimes suffering non -proportion or unfair penalties like one who exploded last year, when he received a controversial penalty of 20 seconds and two points in Australia for an action where Russell left the track and suffered an accident without an oversesense touching him.
Commissioners, on that occasion, believed that Alonso stopped accelerating before the usual curve to hurt Russell, without considering the greatest wearing of the tires or that the English pilot itself was emphasized that he was making fixing the steering wheel and that it could deceive the British. An unprecedented major penalty for many years.
After that, many penalties came than Alonso considered unfair, at the appointment of China 2024or the posterior of Miami, when Hamilton ran for a punishment for a link with Fernando with the release of the Sprint appointment. There, the oversense exploded precisely. Does not endure yet after the inconsistencies of the same FIAthat judges with similar incidents are different from each grand prize. And he repeated something he said in recent years. He had previously said that Hamilton would not be punished because it was “not Spanish,” indicating that nationality could influence the decisions of the commissioners.
“We will see what they are deciding. I suppose they will not decide anything because it is not Spanish. But hey, I think it broke the career of a few. Norris, especially since he had a very fast car and stayed in that event.
On this occasion, that Alonso could benefit from an investigation of up to 6 pilots, including 3 of them that ended in front of Asturian in Canada, he continued to highlight that he hoped to end the 4th and not 7, which won three positions, because “there must be a punishment.” For Fernando, the thing is very clear.
Ask for a penalty to 3 of the 5 questions
The 6 pilots violated the ‘Safety Car’ regulations once the career ended by advancing cars and not maintaining their car safety order when crossing the end line. It is black or black. There is no possible interpretation. Had an offense or not. Despite the end of the career, the pilots had to stay after the security car until they arrived at the ‘pit lane’ for security reasons.
Indeed, the same happened in 2024 Azerbaijan Gp And the commissioners are clear by ensuring that the advanced car security regime once the photo flag is shown is dangerous due to the possibility that commissioners or emergency equipment are present on the asphalt: “It is prohibited in the event that there are yellow flags, car security or virtual security methods. Although pilots know where the incident happened, they do not know if emergency equipment or commissioners were sent to the track, so they should continue to be careful.”
On the same official note, FIA said that if it repeated in the future “it could lead to more severe penalties.” Passed again on Canada 2025, a year later, but the resolution was exactly the same, with a monitored decision: a warning for 6 pilots.
That’s Fernando’s smell. Therefore his repeat. He warned it in his first answer. In the second question they asked him, he finished his answer to another reminder, the second: “We’ll see if the afternoon will end a little better than it is today.”
They asked him a third question and went further, making sure the penalty was a drawer, which was “unable to arrange”: “And yes, we have some investigations there to go with a security car and it can’t adjust. If you move forward with a yellow flag and all the steering wheel full of ‘car safety’ should be some penalties.” And he ended up in a phrase where he turned away what was expected to come: “I hope this is not one of those times at the next worry that it cannot be advanced to ‘car safety’ and now we are doing nothing.” That certainly happened.
In the 5th question, even when asked if his bad luck had ended, Asturian returned to attack: “In two hours I told you, to see the investigations”. Same idea to 3 answers to 5 questions. The coming is feared.
It should be noted in the sense that a penalty on these pilots could remove the first podium of his career in a pilot from Mercedes, Kimi Antonelli. The admiration of the boy’s 18 -Year -old story, the student of Toto Wolff, who became the third youngest pilot in the history of F1 to get to the podium, has disappeared.
But that’s not all. FIA’s ‘show’ is more. He did nothing but begin.
More controversial decisions in Canada
FIA needs to make two more important decisions: they have to decide the penalty to fall Lando Norris for hitting his partner Piastri Behind an incomprehensible action in which Lando admits all sin. And also, if they punish the winner, George Russell, to stop dry after the security car with Vrstappen next to.
Norris, a penalty that is not
First, in terms of Norris’s action, instead of applying a penalty of grill positions for the next Grand Prix, they put him 5 seconds in English that need to be applied to its final result in Canadian career. He finished the 18th after leaving the wall, so about 5 seconds didn’t change anything for Lando. A penalty is a punishment that is resistant to violations, but in this instance, the penalty has no sports implications for Lando and, therefore, it is not a penalty.
Russell might lose his success
Then came the final decision on George Russell’s maneuver. English led the career in the final turn after ‘car safety’ before his public ‘enemy’, George Russell, who tried to put a penalty last year in Qatar, something that made the verstappen exploded against the British.
On this occasion, Russell looks to look to his right by the rear mirror to see where Vrstappen is. It is seen to stop dry, the Dutch caught, which moved forward for a moment. And immediately, George turned on the radio to warn that Max had advanced him, something that could not be done on the car safety track. It seems that English is looking for an action penalty for Max, which has smelled what his rival rivals are trying to do and complains that need to investigate for “improper driving” after the security car.
Russell defends himself in his statement in front of the commissioners. He said he had to carry out braking to maintain brake temperature and this procedure was usually car safety transd. He also stopped to maintain the distance using the safety car, which slowed down. And He searched for the rear glass to make sure Max was not in the back to stop without the cause of any accident. He also considers Verstappen to expect George to do so.
Those are George’s explanations. And One of the commissioners called to declare, Tim Mallyon, also spoke in favor of the British. He said “the incident was observed by the career management team and it was evaluated that it was not justified in reported to the commissioners”, and that “the time -braking under the security of the car was something typical and expected,” among other factors.
First of all, FIA concludes that the protest should “Denied by the lack of foundation.”
As such we should add that they did not punish Ocon by improperly driving the Pit Lane exit, braking a lot with the exit curve, something that Carlos Sainz was about to spend on an incident.
Another controversial decision to participate in this body’s inconsistencies when applying penalties. Fernando smelled it. It was no accident that he repeated it on many occasions.
Source: La Verdad
I’m Rose Herman and I work as an author for Today Times Live. My expertise lies in writing about sports, a passion of mine that has been with me since childhood. As part of my job, I provide comprehensive coverage on everything from football to tennis to golf.
