Kobayashi and Perez disqualified from results

2011 Australian Grand Prix

Sergio Perez, Sauber, Melbourne, 2011

Sergio Perez, Sauber, Melbourne, 2011

Both Saubers have been disqualified from the Australian Grand Prix due to a technical infringement.

Sergio Perez and Kamui Kobayashi therefore lose their seventh and eighth place finished in the race.

Their upper rear wing element was found not to conform to the regulations.

The change promotes Felipe Massa to seventh and Sebastien Buemi to eighth.

It also means both Force India drivers have moved up into the points, with Adrian Sutil taking nine and Paul di Resta scoring the final point on his debut.

See the revised results in full:

Update: Sauber have announced they will appeal the decision.

James Key said: “This is a very surprising and disappointing result.

“It appears that there is a question over the top surface of the uppermost rear wing element, this area is not the working surface of the component and therefore relatively unimportant to its function.

“Certainly this has not lead to any performance advantage. We are checking the design of the parts now to better understand the situation and we intend to appeal the decision made by the stewards.”

The FIA found them in breach of articles 3.10.1 and 3.10.2 of the technical regulations.

2011 Australian Grand Prix


Browse all 2011 Australian Grand Prix articles

Image ?é?® Sauber F1 Team

Advert | Go Ad-free

202 comments on Kobayashi and Perez disqualified from results

  1. F1Lover said on 27th March 2011, 12:20

    How come it wasn’t picked in the Pre-race scrutineering?

  2. LAK (@lak) said on 27th March 2011, 12:20

    Beyond devastating :( Poor Perez and Kobayashi, this isn’t their fault! Not sure who to blame though.. The team? Or the FIA for allowing it to pass in the first place.. Would Sauber go as far as changing the car after it passing the FIA’s inspection?

    Would this infringement affect handling the tyres in anyway? If not Perez is still a star..

  3. pottedshrew said on 27th March 2011, 12:23

    Once again F1 destroys its own good news stories and creates a PR disaster…when will it learn?

    I presume the RBR front wing will be scrutinized again now and fully expect to see SV and MW excluded also……not.

    • Rules are rules and they must be followed, even if the stewards aren’t always consistant with penalties. It’s still a real shame that this happened, Kobayashi and Perez drove really well today.

      • Magnificent Geoffrey (@magnificent-geoffrey) said on 27th March 2011, 12:54

        Exactly. It’s a massive shame for the team but if they had an illegal part on the car, they should be punished accordingly.

        • Mike said on 28th March 2011, 0:52

          Agree completely, I’m devastated because this has become one of my favourite teams, and Perez had such a dream start to his career… But like slr said, rules are rules.

  4. brxtr (@broxter) said on 27th March 2011, 12:32

    “The test is conducted with a template and would not have come to light until after the race because not all FIA tests are conducted routinely every weekend.”

    That’ll be why the rule infringement wasn’t picked up until after the race. It’s Sauber’s fault for not complying with the rules.

    • zenman1 (@zenman1) said on 27th March 2011, 13:05

      But even so, it surely should have udergone thorough scrutiny and every check that it complied prior to being issued with a certificate/license to take part in this season…
      Something stinks.

    • Jake said on 27th March 2011, 13:10

      How is it their fault, the FIA test the cars, it’s their responsibility to make sure the cars are not only safe but meet the requirements. They have Thursday, Friday and Saturday to do the checks there isn’t an excuse.

      Or are you saying it would be ok to have a car unsafe on the grid because the checks are only done after the grand prix? nonsense. The FIA are a joke to the world of motorsport time to bring ACO into the sport http://old.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=372421&FS=LEMANS

      • thatscienceguy said on 27th March 2011, 13:13

        It’s not the FIA’s responsibility to make sure the cars fit the requirements, its the TEAMS responsibility to make sure their cars fit the requirements.

        • Mike said on 28th March 2011, 1:05

          Bingo. I don’t see how people are blaming the FIA for this, it was Sauber’s job to bring a legal car.

          For sure it is deeply unfortunate, but that’s F1 for you.

          To be honest the FIA has it’s hands tied, it can’t let this go or other wise FI and co. will get their back up about it.

      • A team doesn’t just design a car and turn up without checking for themselves that it doesn’t break the rules.

        They are grownups and will take responsibility, instead of blaming the FIA for catching them breaking the rules.

      • bosyber said on 27th March 2011, 14:56

        Well, I agree that it would have been good to test this stuff before the race, but in the end the team are responsible for making their car comply to the rules, not the FIA.

  5. Calum (@calum) said on 27th March 2011, 12:58

    You can prove that rear wing was illegal but to a lesser extent, Mclaren and Ferrari – and mainly RedBull Racing have front wings which flexing, clearly against the written intention of the rules, but FIA say/do nothing.

  6. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 27th March 2011, 13:07

    A real shame. Regardless, Perez still impressed. All we can hope is that no-one else gets away with anything similar in the future.

  7. Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 27th March 2011, 13:19

    James Key says it didn’t give them a performance advantage, but the stewards won’t are about that – what matters if is the rules are broken.

    And it can hardly help Sauber’s cause that their cars were quickest through the speed trap in qualifying.

    • thatscienceguy said on 27th March 2011, 13:25

      when teams change components by miniscule amounts to eek out every advantage they can get, I think he’ll have a hard time convincing anyone that a wing outside of the size limits won’t contribute to performance.

      As you say, size limits are size limits and you have to be within those limits. There’s no grey area there.

    • Muffin (@muffin) said on 27th March 2011, 13:56

      Even taking that into account this technical issue should be detected before the race.

      As far as I know Sauber did not change any part of their cars during the race.

      They should not be disqualified for something that could be checked before the race (these parts of the cars were not hiden).

    • TFLB said on 27th March 2011, 17:25

      If a rule is broken but safety is not compromised or performance gained then there should be no punishment.

  8. Younger Hamii(Formally Younger Hamilton) said on 27th March 2011, 13:22

    WHAT IS THIS?? Seriously i first assumed but their Cars were underweight similar to what happened to Jenson in Imola 2005 but something with the ‘Upper Rear Wing element’ I think that ridiculous Disqualification Ruins Sergio’s and Kamui’s Confidence especially the fact they’re young drivers.But **** Happens in Sport now i really hope they get some decent points on the board in Malaysia.

    **** the FIA

    • I don’t think this will ruin Kobayashi’s or Perez’s confidence. They both performed really well today, they were disqualified through no fault of their own.

    • thatscienceguy said on 27th March 2011, 13:28

      I think you meant to say “**** Sauber for not building a car within the rules.”

      • Alex Bkk (@alex-bkk) said on 27th March 2011, 13:44

        Don’t be too harsh on Sauber… they just don’t have a Newey and a billion dollars in sponsorship, to get them to the top of the grid.

        They tried to design around what they thought was a loophole on the regs and they lost.

        It’s happened to bigger teams.

  9. axosf1 (@axosf1) said on 27th March 2011, 13:29

    Heartbreak for Perez. A rule is a rule though and don’t see a successful appeal.

    Well done though to Paul Di Reta who now scores his first point if DSQ stands.

  10. Muffin (@muffin) said on 27th March 2011, 13:47

    The race was so boring that stewards decided to step in.

    In my opinion one of the worst races ever.

  11. Muffin (@muffin) said on 27th March 2011, 13:49

    And this kind of technical things must be checked BEFORE the race.

    • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 27th March 2011, 17:06

      Sauber should have checked this yes.

      • LHJBFTW (@lhjbftw) said on 27th March 2011, 19:43

        No the FIA should not have tested the cars to see if they are legal. The FIA do a number of random tests in scrutineering (appart from the obvious ones like weighing the cars). the reason this wasn’t picked up on before was it wasn’t tested for before.
        It’s Saubers responsibility to race a car that’s legal.

        • zenman1 (@zenman1) said on 27th March 2011, 19:57

          But surely just as it is the responsibility of Sauber to race a car that is legal, it is also up to the FIA to enforce the very rules they set, and make sure they are legal.
          You cant tell me they just take it for granted that each car is within the set parameters each season. Otherwise you would as somebody else stated, have teams constantly flouting the rules on the off chance their vehicle would slip through…it’s not happening is it!!!

          Hopefully all this will be sorted over next week or so with the appeal. And the exact problem and how it came about will come out.

  12. Oliver said on 27th March 2011, 13:52

    Any advantage will be in the area of downforce which should hurt straight line speed. The dont say if the concave part or exceeding the reference plane is what got them in trouble. Becauce if its just a question of the reference place,, its obvious that the flap can be shifted forward by a few millimeters and thus past the regulations. Which makes me wonder if it is caused by wear along the axis in which the flap pivots. On another note, how anyone can decode this reference plane stuff just beats me.

  13. Oliver said on 27th March 2011, 14:01

    Not every aspect of the restrictions placed in the regulations are there to hinder performance. Some are just there to ensure certain sections of the car fall within a certain dimension. For example the regulations call for a very wide front wing, but the teams hardly need all that downforce hence they only use part of the allowable arear to generat downforceand then use the rest as air channels to condition the airflow.

  14. KaIIe (@kaiie) said on 27th March 2011, 14:10

    It this was Ferrari’s rear wing the FIA would introcude a 100mm tolerance :P

    Shame, but I have to say I’m not too surprised. The rules are so complex it’s very easy to either misinterpret or just ignore something by accident.

  15. AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner) said on 27th March 2011, 14:39

    ARGH! Terrible news, this has put a downer on the race. I was so happy for both drivers, especially Perez. I hope their appeal is successful.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.