Why Stewards Denied Red Bull’s Protest and Spared Lando Norris F1 Penalty

The Canadian Grand Prix saw a late protest from Red Bull after some tight racing in the final laps. Red Bull’s focus was on two main points involving George Russell, Mercedes, and Max Verstappen, Red Bull’s title contender.

The controversy centered on Russell’s driving behind the safety car, his use of the brakes, and communication on the team radio. Red Bull claimed that Russell braked harshly and checked his mirrors to try and cause Verstappen to overtake and possibly receive a penalty.

They also highlighted radio messages as gamesmanship, believing they were designed to draw race control’s attention. During the post-race investigations, several Mercedes representatives including Ron Meadows and Andrew Shovlin joined Russell.

Mercedes countered that it is common for drivers to brake and warm up tires during safety car periods. Russell argued that checking his mirrors was for safety, ensuring he knew Verstappen’s position.

Telemetry and onboard footage were reviewed, showing periodic braking is a normal tactic, and similar data highlighted Verstappen had done the same on other parts of the track. The stewards agreed, saying Russell’s behavior was in line with regulations and did not count as erratic driving.

After a 45-minute hearing and five hours of deliberation, the stewards rejected Red Bull’s claims on all grounds. The verdict referenced the FIA’s position that drivers do brake intermittently behind the safety car, and no unsportsmanlike conduct was found in Russell’s radio messages.

The panel stated they accepted Mercedes’ explanations and did not see evidence that Russell tried to trigger an investigation against Verstappen. Red Bull’s protest about exceeding the gap behind the safety car was not given significant attention, as the main concerns were the braking and radio conversations.

Meanwhile, Lando Norris faced the stewards for a separate incident after hitting his McLaren teammate, Oscar Piastri. Norris quickly accepted responsibility, telling officials he misjudged the available space and caused the collision. This incident echoes recent challenges faced by McLaren, as seen during their Monaco struggles with driver coordination and race strategy (https://fervogear.com/2025/05/28/news/nascar/mclaren-lewis-hamilton-monaco/).

Since Piastri was able to continue racing without immediate disadvantage, the stewards issued Norris a five-second time penalty instead of a more severe sanction. Because Norris completed over 90% of the Montreal race, he was officially classified and the penalty was added to his race time.

This means Norris did not receive a grid penalty for the next round in Austria. The time penalty simply altered his finishing time by five seconds, and he also avoided any penalty points on his superlicence for the incident.

The regulation allowed the penalty since the incident had no significant effect on the final standings and did not cause another driver to retire. Russell kept his Canadian Grand Prix win after stewards dismissed the Red Bull protest.

The outcome left Red Bull without the rule clarification or penalty they hoped for, confirming a firm stance on acceptable driver conduct during safety car conditions. This decision aligns with previous rulings related to racing conduct, like those seen in the context of flexible wings and aerodynamic regulations during the Spanish GP (https://fervogear.com/2025/05/28/news/nascar/f1-flexi-wing-spanish-gp/).

Daniel Miller

Daniel Miller reports on Formula 1 Grand Prix weekends with race-day analysis, team-radio highlights, and point-standings updates. He explains power-unit upgrades, aerodynamic developments, and driver rivalries in straightforward, SEO-friendly language for a global F1 audience.