FIA; Raikkonen had no case to answer

(Scuderia Ferrari SpA via Twitter)

The FIA have reacted to claims that Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen should have been punished following the Finn's crash during last last weekend's British Grand Prix in Silverstone which resulted in a lengthy red flag period. Raikkonen lost control of his Ferrari entering the Wellington straight running wide and then coming back onto the track before hitting the barrier on the other side of the circuit.

The FIA initially investigated the incident but found that the Finn had no case to answer as he had rejoined the track in a safe manner. Article 20.2 of the Formula One Sporting regulations says:

'Should a car leave the track the driver may rejoin, however, this may only been done when it is safe to do so and without gaining a lasting advantage.' Ferrari provided the FIA with telemetry data from the Finn's F14-T and although the FIA believe Raikkonen could have slowed the car more they found that he had in fact applied the brakes prior to rejoining the circuit and as a result a punishment was not warranted.

One driver, who was particularly vocal about the incident was Marussia's Max Chilton who video footage showed narrowly avoided being struck by a flying tyre from Raikkonen's car.

FIA race director Charlie Whiting has criticized Mercedes Non Executive Director Niki Lauda for comments the Austrian made following the race as he believed that the lengthy stoppage to repair the armco barrier was completely unnecessary.

However, Whiting has rejected Lauda's claims of making a 'quick fix' saying:

'Absolutely not. Niki has clearly demonstrated that he knows nothing about circuit safety, and his comments were not very helpful. It is ridiculous to say that the chances of another car hitting the barriers in the same location are unlikely. If one car can do it, then another car certainly can.'

Whiting concluded by saying:

'If you cast your mind back to the Felipe Massa crash at Hungary in 2009, you could say that it would be unlikely another driver would be hit in the head by a spring, and we would not have had the improved visor protection that we have now.'

© Ben Johnston 2014