Why Hamilton was penalised but Leclerc wasn’t at Belgian Grand Prix

Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton were both placed under investigation by the stewards at the Belgian Grand Prix for causing a collision, but only the latter was penalised for his incident and here’s why.

Feature image credit: Pirelli

Both Ferrari drivers were placed under investigation for causing a collision during the Belgian Grand Prix, with Lewis Hamilton making contact with his former Mercedes teammate, George Russell, and Charles Leclerc colliding with McLaren’s Oscar Piastri.

Following the contact, Russell was spun out of the race on the first lap, beaching his car in the nearby gravel trap and retiring. Whereas Piastri, later on, sustained damage to his car but was able to continue.

Whilst both incidents occurred at turn five, also known as Les Combes, only Hamilton was penalised for his collision against Russell, whilst Leclerc managed to escape contact without punishment from the stewards.

So, why was Hamilton punished and Leclerc not?

Hamilton vs Russell

At the beginning of the race, Russell had fallen back down the order, having tried to maintain his on-track position of third. He was quickly overtaken by both Ferraris on the Kemmel straight, but attempted to fight back into turn five, going side-by-side with Hamilton into the chicane.

However, Hamilton understeered left and into the side of Russell, spinning out his former teammate into the gravel.

Typically, a first-lap incident is taken lightly by race control, and most collisions that occur on said lap are mainly treated as ‘racing incidents,’ something Russell described with his collision with Hamilton post-race. However, the stewards opted to punish Hamilton with a five-second time penalty for the collision, placing the blame at his front door.

In the stewards’ report, they claimed Hamilton was unable to ‘maintain sufficient separation’ as Russell was entitled to racing room. But, they recognised ‘several mitigating circumstances,’ with reduced grip and compressed racing conditions, and the loss of Hamilton’s front-end grip after being sandwiched under the gearbox of Red Bull’s Max Verstappen.

Embed from Getty Images

In their report, the Stewards justified their decision. They said:

“Approaching Turn 5 on the opening lap, Car 63 [Russell] attempted an overtake around the outside of Car 44 [Hamilton] and had established sufficient overlap to be entitled to racing room. Car 44 remained on the inside.

“During the corner, Car 44 experienced understeer and, despite attempting to avoid Car 63 by applying corrective steering, made contact with the right-hand side of Car 63 with its left-front wheel. The Stewards determined that Car 63 remained within the available racing room and that the collision was caused by Car 44 being unable to maintain sufficient separation.

“The Stewards recognise several mitigating circumstances. Car 44 acknowledged the presence of Car 63, attempted to leave appropriate racing room and made a genuine attempt to avoid contact. The collision resulted from a loss of front-end grip rather than from an aggressive or deliberate manoeuvre.

“In addition, the incident occurred on the opening lap, where reduced grip and compressed racing conditions are recognised.

“For these reasons, while Car 44 was wholly at fault for the collision, the Stewards consider that a 5-second Time Penalty, rather than the standard 10-second Time Penalty, is the appropriate penalty in accordance with the FIA Penalty Guidelines.”

Embed from Getty Images

Leclerc vs Piastri

On the other side of the coin, Leclerc’s incident with Piastri was mid-race, where the mitigating circumstances of a first-lap incident would not apply. On the run to turn five, Piastri was beside Leclerc, but the Monegasque squeezed the Australian to the track edge, forcing Piastri to yeild as they entered the corner.

Contact was made, and a piece of carbon fibre was dislodged from Piastri’s car, which allowed the McLaren driver to continue with the race to fight another day.

Following the incident, the stewards deemed there would be no further action against Leclerc for the incident. In their reports, the officials’ reasoning was that there was insufficient overlap between the two contenders, leading to the incident.

Embed from Getty Images

The Stewards claimed Leclerc did not ‘deliberately crowd’ Piastri and that he was following the racing line, moving slightly to the left, which resulted in the contact. In their report, the Stewards said:

“On the approach to turn 5, Car 81 [Piastri] moved to overtake Car 16 [Leclerc] on the outside.

“Car 81 had some overlap on Car 16 but the front axle of Car 81 was not ahead of the front axle of Car 16 and there was no possibility of Car 81 completing an overtake from that position.

“In the Stewards’ determination, Car 16 did not deliberately crowd Car 81 off the edge of the track. Car 16 followed the racing line before the entry to turn 5 by moving slightly to the left to open up for turn 5 and side to side contact occurred between the two cars.

“In the circumstances, the Stewards determined to take no further action.”

Read more Formula 1 here:

Kamron Kent

Hi, I’m Kamron. I created ApexMotorsports.co.uk in the dying embers of the 2021 Formula 1 world championship. It allowed me freedom to write whatever I wanted to write about which was all things motorsports, my passion.

I have put a lot of effort in over the years to keep this website in its best shape and I’ve loved seeing the brand grow consistently, month-on-month, year-on-year. My ambition is to keep watching this brand grow into a primary outlet of news for all things motorsports whilst fueling my desire to pursue a career in sports journalism, specialising in motorsports.

Kamron Kent

Hi, I'm Kamron. I created ApexMotorsports.co.uk in the dying embers of the 2021 Formula 1 world championship. It allowed me freedom to write whatever I wanted to write about which was all things motorsports, my passion. I have put a lot of effort in over the years to keep this website in its best shape and I've loved seeing the brand grow consistently, month-on-month, year-on-year. My ambition is to keep watching this brand grow into a primary outlet of news for all things motorsports whilst fueling my desire to pursue a career in sports journalism, specialising in motorsports.