Alonso 3rd, then 4th and then 3rd again: what a mess! Here’s what happened

The FIA ​​had sanctioned the Spaniard for mistakenly serving a penalty. But the procedure didn’t turn out to be irregular according to a previous agreement and was therefore cancelled, the Spaniard keeps the 100th podium of his career

March 19, 2023 ( edit March 19, 2023 | 11:59 pm)

– Jeddah (Arabia)

Third, fourth, third again. Fernando Alonso’s placement in Arabia was the subject of quite a dispute. In the end, the Spaniard was classified third, as had actually happened in the race. But what happened? The Aston Martin driver had been stripped of his third place in the second round of the championship after stewards ruled that his team had failed to properly serve a penalty during the race. The stewards ruled that the team had tapped the number 14 car with a jack while Alonso was serving a five-second penalty at his first pit stop. The penalty had been inflicted on him for having positioned himself badly on the pitch at the start.

the first measure

“In this case, it was clear the car had been touched by the rear jack,” the marshals noted. “Based on the statement made to the stewards that there was an agreed position that touching the car amounted to ‘working’ on the car, the stewards agreed to impose a fine.” So at the end of the race Alonso was given another 10 seconds and so the two-time world champion ended up fourth behind George Russell. But after a review, Alonso posted on social media his joy at his 100th podium finish: “100th podium,” he wrote. “What a great team we have and a fast car! Proud of you Aston Martin”. Why?

the reverse

The FIA ​​confirmed that Alonso’s penalty had been lifted and that he was back in third place, with Russell back in fourth place. Aston Martin have in practice successfully proved the stewards wrong in stating that jacking the car was ‘working’ on it and therefore not a breach of the rules. “We concluded that there was no clear agreement, as previously suggested to the stewards, that could be relied upon to establish that the parties had agreed that a jack touching a car would amount to work on the car,” the stewards noted. “Under the circumstances, we felt that our original decision to impose a penalty on car 14 should be reversed and we have done so accordingly.”



ttn-14