Kevin Magnussen sparked controversy through his defensive tactics in Miami.
Cleared of unsportsmanlike behaviour despite his Sprint race offences meeting “exceptional circumstances” that were worthy of three penalty points, the Miami stewards explained that it wasn’t clear Kevin Magnussen’s actions had been intentionally unsporting.
Kevin Magnussen played the role of Minister of Defence during the 19-lap Miami Sprint as he kept Lewis Hamilton behind him, thus allowing his Haas team-mate Nico Hulkenberg to scamper off into the distance.
Stewards: Three penalty points for ‘exceptional circumstances’
The Dane stirred up controversy during the race by veering off course multiple times, resulting in four time penalties and subsequently three penalty points on his Super Licence.
However, Magnussen’s actions while defending against Hamilton were so extreme that the stewards believed it called for extraordinary measures, despite the typical protocol of imposing a time penalty but “zero penalty points”. This was the reason behind three of his penalties.
“The specified points [zero, ed],” stated their judgment, “are established as the standard for a specific offense. The stewards have the discretion to modify these points, considering factors that lessen or worsen the situation. Nevertheless, the stewards’ authority to augment the assigned points is meant to be exercised solely in extraordinary situations.”
Considering that this was the third occurrence of leaving the track and gaining an advantage during one session, which we deemed to be an aggravating factor, we hereby apply three penalty points.
The Haas driver earned eight points, which will remain untouched until 9 March 2025.
Nevertheless, the consequences for his actions did not end there as Magnussen was subsequently subjected to an investigation for unsportsmanlike conduct.
PlanetF1.com recommends
Miami GP data: Ferrari sneak up on Red Bull without upgrades as McLaren hype deflates
F1 penalty points: Kevin Magnussen joins top of growing list near race ban threshold
Magnussen escapes ‘unsportsmanlike behaviour’ charge
After Hamilton spoke out against Magnussen’s antics, and it should be noted this was not the first time this season he’s used these tactics having done so in Jeddah, McLaren team boss Andrea Stella called for him to receive a race ban for “completely unacceptable” behaviour.
After a lengthy hearing involving Magnussen and Haas, the stewards concluded that the actions did not meet the criteria for unsportsmanlike behavior.
The officials stated that they did not find clear evidence of an intention to behave unsportsmanlike in this situation. Magnussen defended his actions by expressing his belief that he had the right to race alongside Hamilton in the manner he did.
“He believed that creating a distance between himself and the cars in front was completely compliant with the regulations, as it was a common practice for drivers to support their team-mates during a race.”
Since Magnussen had already received a total of four time penalties amounting to 35 seconds and four penalty points on his license, the stewards decided not to impose any additional consequences on him.
However, they would appreciate the FIA reviewing the situation and considering an increase in the penalty for repeat infringements. This would aim to discourage similar scenarios like the one witnessed today.
Kevin Magnussen admits to using ‘stupid tactics I don’t like doing’
Magnussen acknowledged that playing the role of a bollard to assist Haas and his teammate Hulkenberg was not his preferred style of racing. However, he recognized that it was his responsibility to contribute to the team’s point-scoring efforts.
“The Dane confirmed to Sky F1 that all the penalties were fully justified, with no question about it. However, he expressed the need to engage in the game once more.”
“I found myself in a favorable position right behind Nico. I made significant progress at the start of the race, reaching P8 and effectively fending off Lewis thanks to the DRS from Nico and my strong pace.”
However, Nico took a shortcut through the chicane, resulting in me losing the DRS. Surprisingly, this incident was not investigated, despite occurring on lap six.
“Nico had the opportunity to return it to me so that I could have the DRS protection, which would have secured us positions 7 and 8 comfortably. However, instead, I found myself exposed to Lewis and we ended up engaging in intense battles.”
He stated, “Although I resorted to these regrettable methods, which I personally dislike, I ultimately fulfilled my responsibilities as a collaborative member of the team.”
“Nico achieved his points thanks to the gap I created for him. Both Lewis and Tsunoda were unable to catch up with him. It wasn’t my preferred racing style, but it was necessary for me to do so today.”
The full stewards’ ruling
Decision: No further action.
The Stewards addressed the driver, team representative, and examined video evidence of Car 20’s involvement in three distinct instances where it veered off the track and obtained a significant advantage. As a consequence, a 10-second time penalty was imposed for each violation.
The Stewards aimed to investigate the specific circumstances surrounding the second and third instances of deviating from the track and gaining an advantage, particularly in the context of a heated on-track battle involving Car 44.
We were conscious of how these infringements could potentially affect the time gaps to the cars ahead, specifically Car 20’s teammate in Car 27.
Among other things, the driver of Car 20 gave a media interview right after the session, and the Stewards were informed about it.
I reluctantly resorted to employing these ineffective strategies, which I personally dislike… However, in the end, I fulfilled my responsibilities as a team player… Nico was able to score points because I created that opportunity for him…
The driver verified in the hearing that the comments were reported accurately.
Consequently, our aim was to examine whether the driver of Car 20 intentionally violated the regulations in order to gain an advantage for either his team or teammate. Additionally, we sought to determine whether such behavior would constitute a violation of Article 12.2.1.L of the FIA International Sporting Code.
To better comprehend their viewpoint, we conducted an extensive hearing with the driver of Car 20 and the team representative before the Stewards.
The driver openly admitted that he believed he had the right to compete alongside Car 44 in the way he did, and he was prepared to face the typical consequences for any rule violations that happened during their intense battle for position.
He believed that creating a distance between himself and the cars in front was completely within the rules, and it was not unusual for a driver to support their teammate during a race by adopting this strategy.
At no moment did he believe that his actions were incorrect or unsportsmanlike in any manner. He emphasized that the Stewards generally do not escalate the penalties for recurring offenses.
We considered the matter and found as follows:
1. The standard for establishing unsportsmanlike behaviour must undoubtedly be high.
2. In circumstances such as this one, there must be clear evidence of an intention to behave in a manner that can be said to be unsportsmanlike as a finding of unsportsmanlike behaviour is serious.
3. While we disagreed with the way in which Car 20 was driven today, in particular, the repeated infringements from leaving the track, we do not think that the actions reached the level of unsportsmanlike behaviour.
Moving ahead, the Stewards should contemplate whether, particularly in instances of repeated violations, the penalties for each offense should be heightened to deter occurrences like the ones we witnessed today. We will specifically address this matter with the FIA and the Stewarding team.
Therefore, we will not proceed with any additional steps regarding the current summons.
Read next: Winners and losers from the 2024 Miami Grand Prix qualifying
