The FIA and Formula 1 officials have called for a hearing on Thursday to discuss the matter of the 10-second penalty handed to Mercedes' Lewis Hamilton after contact between Hamilton's car and Max Verstappen's car at Silverstone.

The contact on the first lap of the race sent Verstappen's Red Bull machine off the track, into a tire barrier and out of the race. Following a red flag period for track cleanup and mending of the safety barrier, Hamilton was assessed a 10-second penalty. The seven-time champion not only made up the 10-second penalty, but he went on to win the F1 British Grand Prix and cut Verstappen's gap in the championship from 33 points to just eight.



Red Bull team principal Christian Horner said afterward that the penalty wasn't nearly enough, and he asked to appeal the penalty. Red Bull advisor Dr. Helmut Marko has gone so far as to call for a race ban for Hamilton.

“You can’t (penalize Hamilton) within the normal sporting code,” Marko told Sky Germany. “I don’t know what the maximum penalty is, but such dangerous and reckless behavior should be punished with a suspension or something.”

Hamilton was also on the wrong end of abuse on social media following the incident. Some of the comments led the FIA to post the followingon it's website the day after the race:

"During, and after, yesterday’s British Grand Prix, Lewis Hamilton was subjected to multiple instances of racist abuse on social media following an in-race collision. Formula 1, The FIA and Mercedes-AMG Petronas F1 Team condemn this behavior in the strongest possible terms. These people have no place in our sport and we urge that those responsible should be held accountable for their actions. Formula 1, the FIA, the drivers and the teams are working to build a more diverse and inclusive sport, and such unacceptable instances of online abuse must be highlighted and eliminated."

Thursday's hearing will be conducted via a video conference. Each team--Red Bull and Mercedes--are allowed to have three attendees, including the team managers, to state their case.

The meeting is scheduled for 11 a.m. ET (17:00 CEST).

The FIA announced on Tuesday that Red Bull have protested the penalty that Lewis Hamilton received at the Formula 1 British Grand Prix, believing it wasn’t harsh enough.

This isn’t the first time an F1 team has protested a penalty, but has the FIA ever changed a penalty after a protest, and has it ever increased the severity of one after an appeal?

Has the FIA ever changed a penalty after an appeal?

There have been many appeals by teams in Formula 1, though they’re usually made by the teams the decision has gone against – not the team that wasn’t penalised.

One of the most famous appeals came during the 1976 F1 season, when James Hunt and Niki Lauda, of McLaren and Ferrari respectively, were fighting for the championship.

New rules governing a car’s width were brought in on May 1, and narrowed the permitted width of the cars.

The race, hosted on May 2, was won by Hunt, who crossed the line over 30 seconds in front of Ferrari’s Lauda. However, he was disqualified when post-race scrutineering found his car to be 1.5cm too wide. This handed Lauda the win.

McLaren, believing the difference that 1.5cm would have created was negligible and was due to wider rear tyres, appealed. Two months after the race the appeal was successful, and Hunt was reinstated as the winner of the Spanish Grand Prix.

The 1999 Malaysian Grand Prix featured another controversial penalty, this one against Ferrari.

Its two drivers, Michael Schumacher and Eddie Irvine, came home first and second with McLaren rival Mika Hakkinen in third, giving Irvine a four-point lead in the championship ahead of the final race.

That was until stewards found an infringement on the bargeboards of the two Ferraris, leading to a disqualification for both.

Ferrari appealed the decision and was successful: the disqualification was overturned, and it was back in first and second. Irvine would go on to lose the championship by two points to Hakkinen in the final race.

A more recent example comes from 2019, when Sebastian Vettel was penalised for rejoining in an unsafe manner during the Canadian Grand Prix.

Vettel was given a five-second penalty during the race, dropping him to second place behind Lewis Hamilton. Ferrari appealed the investigation and brought new evidence in the form of a Sky Pad analysis by Karun Chandhok. Unfortunately for the team the footage didn't change anything, and the ruling was upheld.

The most recent example of a penalty being incurred following an appeal comes from 2020.

Five of the teams appealed the previously-permitted Racing Point car, believing it to be too similar to the 2019 Mercedes W10. The appeal was successful for the protesting teams, and Racing Point was fined €400,000 and 15 championship points, but was allowed to keep the offending parts for the remainder of the season.

Feeling that the penalty wasn’t harsh enough, Ferrari announced that it would launch another appeal against the ruling, aiming to get even more penalties levied against Racing Point - though this was eventually dropped.

Racing Point also withdrew its appeal against the ruling, saying it did so “in the wider interests of the sport”.

While the Racing Point protest was by teams who felt a competitor had an illegal part, protests against in-race penalties are rare – and even rarer when they aren’t made by the team that was penalised.

Has the FIA ever made a penalty harsher?

One of the rare instances where a penalty was increased was against Irvine in Brazil 1994.

Irvine, driving for Jordan, and Jos Verstappen were coming up to lap Éric Bernard when Irvine moved left, forcing Verstappen off the track.

The Dutchman lost control on the grass and spun back across the track, collecting Irvine and Bernard, as well as Martin Brundle, just ahead of the trio. All four had to retire from the race.

Irvine received a fine of $10,000 and a one-race suspension. Jordan appealed, but the penalty was actually increased to a three-race ban.

While the penalty in this instance was increased, it came from the penalised team appealing – not a different (but still involved) team trying to increase the severity of the punishment.

Red Bull is leading a push for F1 to move towards louder and more emotive engines from 2025 when new power unit rules are due to be introduced.

It wants grand prix racing to ditch the quiet and economical current turbo hybrids in favour of something more exciting, which runs on environmentally-sustainable fuel.

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner thinks that the formula would tick F1’s green credentials on the fuel front, and be more exciting for fans thanks to engines that thrill again.

Not everyone is convinced, though, with Mercedes boss Toto Wolff fearing that major sponsors may not be happy to be associated with a sport that was not viewed to be fully sustainable.

Brown, who had a long involvement in the sport as a sponsor guru before joining McLaren, is not so sure though that sponsors would be unhappy at what Red Bull has proposed.

“What’s most important is that Formula 1 is sustainable,” said Brown. “You can get there a variety of different ways and I do not think sponsors, as long as Formula 1 is sustainable, are concerned over how you get to sustainability.

“So if it’s an ICE unit with sustainable fuels, or if it’s electric or hybrid, the important thing is that Formula 1 is leading edge technology and that sustainability is critically important to the sport and the world.”

Brown suspects that Wolff’s stance may be skewed by the fact that his team is a full works effort, with road car manufacturers facing different sustainability challenges in both the short and long-term.

“I think what you heard there was more a view of an OEM who probably wants the sustainability element to be consistent with how they go to market,” added Brown.

“I think what's important to the corporate partners is sustainability. I think they are less concerned about what the product is to get you there.

“So do I think fans and corporate partners would be turned off if Formula 1 was sustainable in a technology direction that was maybe different to the automotive industry? I do not think corporate partners and the fans would mind at all.

“But we do have to take into consideration the OEMs, because they’re a massive part of the sport, huge contributors, and we need them.”

The tease of a potential Texas Grand Prix by an official Formula 1 platform is a hint of the next replacement being lined up for the 2021 calendar.

As reported earlier this year following the cancellation of the Singapore Grand Prix, a second race at the Circuit of the Americas emerged as an option to boost F1’s end-of-season schedule.

The United States Grand Prix is due to be held on October 24. Now, F1 Experiences – the championship’s official experience, hospitality and travel programme – has advertised the 2021 Texas Grand Prix with a “to be decided” date, placed before the United States GP in the schedule.

F1 Experiences lists the event with promotional text that tells fans who missed out on ticket packages to the US GP: “The good news is that you may have another chance to see Formula 1 in Austin this year.”

Though it stresses the race is not yet confirmed, it is the first time an F1 entity has acknowledged the prospect of the extra Texas race.

It is peculiar to see an F1 platform advertise a potential race in this manner, especially as it suggests that the Texas GP could slot in one week before the US GP.

Adding another Austin race before the US GP is not compatible with the Japanese Grand Prix being scheduled on October 10.

This Texas GP tease would therefore indicate that the race is most likely to materialise as a replacement for Japan.

The Suzuka race is currently only likely to go ahead with a strict biosphere-like arrangement similar to that of last year’s Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, with F1 personnel arriving by chartered flight and only allowed to travel between the hotel and the circuit.

Japan has had a hard stance against foreign travellers during the COVID-19 pandemic and the postponed Olympic Games are currently being held under tight restrictions.

F1 is waiting to see if the Olympics can be completed without incident before the fate of the race can be known.

That was confirmed by Masashi Yamamoto, Honda’s F1 managing director – whose company owns Suzuka.

“The situation depends on the Olympic Games,” Yamamoto told The Race.

“And as you can see, although it’s without crowds, the sport itself is happening.

“My wish is to have crowds. But even without it we hope to show the race from Suzuka.”

The uncertainty makes it logical for the additional Austin race to be teed up as a flexible option that could be slotted in one week before the original grand prix, as F1 is keen to maintain its planned record 23-race schedule if it can.

It’s unclear whether a second Texas race could take place one week after the original date, with Mexico moving back to replace the Brazilian Grand Prix given that is widely considered to be unlikely to happen.

But it is still the strongest hint yet that the Circuit of the Americas could hold a second grand prix this year after all.

F1 used same-track double-headers to help its 2020 season following the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic and it has employed the same tactic this year already at the Red Bull Ring.

An Austin double-header, which has remained an option in the background even while it was not being widely talked about, would please F1 owner Liberty Media given the ongoing efforts to increase F1’s footprint in the States.

Adding another Austin race would mean F1 has two grands prix held in the US in the same season for the first time since Detroit and Dallas in 1984.

The Williams Formula 1 team says that its current financial circumstances under new owner Dorilton Capital means it is not dependent on taking pay drivers for next year.

With the outfit having faced years of financial headaches to keep its head above the water amid the ever-increasing costs of F1, Williams came to rely many times on drivers with good financial backing.

These included Pastor Maldonado, Lance Stroll and Nicholas Latifi, all of whom delivered mixed results.

However, the increased investment from Dorilton, allied to F1’s cost cap and new structure for commercial rights income, has left the team is a much better financial situation.

It means that, as Williams ponders its driver option for 2022, it does not necessarily need to only go chasing after those who can offer it the best sponsorship packages.

Neither of its current line-up are contracted for 2022. Latifi’s deal runs out at the end of the season, but he is interested in remaining in F1 despite being linked with a switch to IndyCar.

George Russell is in the frame for a move to the Mercedes team if the German car manufacturer elects not to retain Valtteri Bottas, but Williams would like to keep hold of him if it can.

Amid uncertainly about what Williams will do, recent speculation has also linked Mercedes Formula E driver Nyck de Vries with a seat, which could form part of a financial arrangement with Mercedes.

Williams team principal Jost Capito says that the Grove-based squad is in a luxury situation of being able to choose who it wants for 2022 – rather than having to worry specifically about income.

“I think we at Williams, we are in the position that we solely decide on the drivers,” explained Capito. “We are not dependent like in the past on somebody, a driver who brings money.

“We have a long-term plan to get back to the top, and we have to choose the drivers that fit into that plan. We are just thinking about this. Of course everybody can talk to us, but the decision is with us."

Capito thinks that with a lot of teams having locked down their drivers for 2022, Williams is an attractive option for a lot of people.

“I think every driver who hasn’t got a fixed seat for next year, or has an option for next year, is talking to us at the moment,” Capito said.

“It is the most aspired seat in Formula 1 right now for a team that has to fill a seat.”

Carlos Sainz and Charles Leclerc will receive a boost later this year, after Ferrari boss Mattia Binotto revealed the Italian team will bring a "significant" power unit development during the second half of the season…

Formula 1 engine manufacturers are restricted to one upgrade of each component per year, as per the regulations, and it has emerged that Ferrari have been running a power unit with some 2020-spec parts this season.

It remains unclear when the new PU will be introduced, but it is believed it will be after Ferrari’s home Grand Prix in Monza. With both Sainz and Leclerc already on their third and final engines, the duo will almost certainly incur grid penalties – and thus the team will likely look to time the switch with the new unit.

Speaking to selected media before the team went on their mandatory two-week summer shutdown, Binotto said: “We will bring a power unit development. To clarify the regulations for 2021, you may have a brand new power unit in 2021. It means you can bring an update in all components of the power unit – the ICE, turbo, MGU-H, batteries, MGU-K etc.

“What we made at the start of the season, we didn’t complete the entire power unit development so there are still components which are the ones of last year. We will bring an evolution of those ones. That will be for us, a significant step for the end of the season. But more important for us, it will be experience in view of 2022.”

Ferrari are currently third in the constructors’ championship, level on points with McLaren with 12 Grands Prix still to go. Binotto said the focus is to continue to improve everywhere – and if they do that, he believes they can hold on to that position.

“The objective is to improve in all the areas,” he said. “If we are capable of doing that, continuously improving, I think the outcome will be third.

“Being third is certainly a positive objective. We are third at the moment, equal points but we are third. Team is doing well and we are improving. I think we can achieve it, that’s no question. But it has to be a consequence of us improving in all areas.”

Ferrari's fight for P3 resumes with the Belgian Grand Prix at the end of August.

Aston Martin have failed in their bid to have Sebastian Vettel's disqualification from the Hungarian Grand Prix reviewed by the stewards.

Vettel finished second on track at the Hungaroring, but was subsequently disqualified when the FIA were unable to take the required 1.0 litre fuel sample from his car following the race, as per the technical regulations.

After the ruling, the team immediately said they would appeal, while also seeking a 'right of review' in order to try to reverse the decision.

On Monday afternoon the stewards heard from team boss Otmar Szafnauer, Chief Technical Officer Andrew Green and Sporting Director Andy Stevenson to hear the team's case. Under F1's rules, in order to secure a right to review, the team must show "significant and relevant new" evidence to the stewards.

After the hearing the FIA revealed that Aston Martin had discovered that a faulty fuel pump meant a "significant amount of fuel was inadvertently discharged from the fuel cell of Car 5" meaning FIA personnel could only extract 0.3 litres.

This was accepted as 'new evidence' but in their decision document, the stewards said it was irrelevant why there was less than 1.0 litres of fuel in the car - writing that in order to secure a right of review, "Aston Martin would have had to present facts that actually more than 1 litre of fuel was remaining. The explanation why this requirement could not be met is not relevant to the decision as to whether a breach of the regulations has occurred."

Therefore the officials dismissed the request for a right of review, which means Vettel's disqualification from the race stands pending further appeal from Aston Martin, which the team say they are still considering.

“Sebastian drove brilliantly in Hungary and we are pleased to have been given the opportunity to show significant new evidence that we discovered since the race," said Otmar Szafnauer, Aston Martin Team Principal.

"We felt that the evidence we presented was relevant and demonstrated to the FIA that he should have been reinstated following his disqualification.

"Unfortunately, the FIA took a different view and, despite the fact that that the accuracy of our new evidence was not contested, Sebastian’s disqualification has been upheld on the basis that the new evidence was not deemed ‘relevant’. That is disappointing, and we will now consider our position in respect of the full appeal process.”

Formula 1 has confirmed that the inaugural Miami Grand Prix will run in early May 2022, and claims tickets are in large demand despite them not having yet gone on sale.

Miami will join the F1 schedule next season, but will be kept separate from the United States Grand Prix at Circuit of the Americas in Austin, which holds a late October slot. While the Miami project faced some opposition prior to its approval, F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali noted there’s a lot of interest in tickets that will go on sale once the final race date is announced.

“We are less than halfway through 2021, but planning for 2022 has been ongoing for some time,” Domenicali said. “There is a high demand for venues for the 2022 calendar. We hope to announce the provisional calendar in September/October.

“We can confirm that the much-anticipated Miami Grand Prix will happen in the first half of May, and demand for tickets is high, even though sales have not officially started. We also look forward to our move for St. Petersburg for the Russian Grand Prix in 2023.”

Talk of the 2022 calendar comes amid big crowds at recent races, but also an ongoing experiment with a sprint qualifying format that is also going to be seen next month at Monza and again later in the year, provisionally in Brazil. However Domenicali believes the different weekend format is likely to be used for more established races rather than new additions like Miami.

“The idea was to offer something different in order to make sure there was something new we can offer to all the stakeholders in Formula 1,” Domenicali said. “We had said that we wanted to do three tests. One has been done at Silverstone, the other will be in Monza, and the other one will be at the end of the season in Brazil.

“At the end of this complete test we are going to have a plan to see what the next step is. What we can say is, after Silverstone, the response we had from the drivers, teams and media has been really positive. And also from the promoter, because every day we had something – people coming to the track on Friday had first qualifying – so the outcome of the first event has been dramatically positive.

“It’s great because that brought attention, and interest and TV, and also partners, so we have seen a financial influence being positive. Therefore, If I may say it has shown very, very positive signs.

“We want to respect what we said. We are going to have a full debriefing at the season. We have a plan for the future – of course, we are developing that. We are fine-tuning some of the comments we received. What I can say is, if we move – as I do believe we should – in that direction in the future, it will not be at every race.

“We have ideas to create a special format for certain historic grands prix, and certain special awards we want to offer to add to the already incredible platform of Formula 1. So very, very positive comments after the first exercise, and (we are) ready to prepare a proposal at the end of the three events that can bring home what will hopefully be a big step, also in a sporting proposition.”