Chandhok urges stewards to choose different penalty in cases like Sainz's

Sainz was probably the biggest loser in the closing stages of the Australian Grand Prix. On the second restart, the Spaniard made contact with his compatriot Fernando Alonso, causing the Aston Martin driver to spin and rejoin at the back of the grid. However, the lap was aborted soon after due to the chaos behind them, with no less than four drivers retiring. The standings were returned to before the restart, giving Alonso his third place back, but Sainz was blamed for the collision and given a 10-second time penalty. The race was then run behind the safety car, with no opportunities to overtake or run out, so the time penalty ensured Sainz was completely out of the points.

Chandhok calls for different approach in similar situations

Initially, race control refused to hear Ferrari's side. Ferrari then requested a right of review, from which it emerged this week that the penalty will stand after all. Sainz thought the penalty was far too harsh - an opinion shared by Alonso, among others.

Chandhok too thinks there should have been a different solution. "I do think that if races finish behind the safety car, the stewards should consider a three place grid drop at the following race instead of the five seconds being added," the former driver wrote on Twitter. In another tweet, he added: "The stewards have the ability to apply either time or grid penalty. Both are defined in the regulations and that’s why penalties are applied by people, not an AI bot. The stewards as individuals should be able to look at circumstances and make a fair judgement call."

I do think that if races finish behind the safety car, the stewards should consider a 3 place grid drop at the following race instead of the 5 seconds being added.

Would be a more proportionate penalty… https://t.co/qzFo65BuNn

— Karun Chandhok (@karunchandhok) April 19, 2023