Kimi Raikkonen has been handed a 30-second post-race penalty, demoting him from his ninth-place position to 13th.
As a result, the Alpine duo of Esteban Ocon and Fernando Alonso move up to ninth and tenth respectively.
Raikkonen’s penalty stems from a spin he had on the lap before the re-start following the race’s suspension due to a crash between Valtteri Bottas and George Russell.
Raikkonen dropped from his original position, and under Article 42.6 of the Sporting Regulations, he was allowed to retake his position, as long as he did so before the first safety car line.
Alfa Romeo instructed Raikkonen to do so, before telling him to hold position. The Stewards pointed out that Article 42.6 also indicates that should a driver fail to take his position, he must enter the pit lane and can only re-join the race once the whole field has passed the pit exit.
However, Article 42.12 indicates that during a rolling start, once the safety car turns its lights out, “No driver may overtake another car on the track until he passes the line”. On this occasion, Raikkonen caught up to the cars ahead of him between Turn 13 and 14, but the safety car turned its lights out at approximately Turn 10.
The Stewards outlined that “this would appear to be a contradictory instruction”. The team instructed Raikkonen to not re-gain his position, “fearing that this would create a safety issue in the wet conditions”.
Explaining why it opted to hand Raikkonen a penalty despite the confusion, the Stewards said: “The Stewards consider it to be a further contradiction that when the cars are behind the safety car during a safety car period, they are prohibited from passing, but when they are behind the safety car for a restart, they are permitted to – even though the reasons for a rolling start are that the track conditions don’t permit a standing start.
“However, the rule requiring a car to enter the pit lane if it fails to regain its position is consistent amongst several championships, has been in the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations for several years and has been consistently applied.
“The penalty is a mandatory penalty, and therefore the Stewards consider that they have no alternative than to apply this penalty for reasons of consistency.”
