After trailing just 2.2 seconds behind Austin race winner Max Verstappen, the Mercedes rider Hamilton as well as sixth-placed Leclerc were sent off for running with excessively worn floorboards.

They violated the FIA ​​technical regulations which stipulate that the plank assembly measured in the marked holes can only wear 1mm to 9mm over the course of a weekend.

With their backslide deemed illegal, the standard disqualification penalty for technical breach was applied.

Standard procedure

Post-race scrutiny is an integral part of motorsport starting at the grassroots level. After Formula 1 competition, a range of temperature, torque, software, fuel and component checks are carried out.

But this is not uniform across the 20 cars. The sporting regulations allow technical delegate Joe Power to carry out “any checks, at his discretion, to verify the compliance of the cars participating in the competition.”

Accordingly, no car floors were checked after the Japanese Grand Prix, one car was checked after the Qatar Grand Prix and three cars were assessed in the immediate aftermath of the Qatar Grand Prix.

For Austin, four cars were reviewed. Alongside the Mercedes and Ferrari, Verstappen’s RB19 and (disqualification applied) Lando Norris’ second-placed McLaren were inspected and deemed legal.

Joe Power, FIA Technical Delegate for Formula 1

Photography: Mark Sutton / Motorsport pictures

Why were Hamilton and Leclerc arrested?

The FIA ​​can focus on which cars will be selected for further examination based on a variety of indicators.

In the case of a worn floor, the titanium surfboard emits a strong odor that can arouse suspicion in the cubicle wall. Better reading is the on-board footage, which the FIA ​​will monitor to see if drivers’ heads bob as a result of bottoming out over bumps.

Following the notable return of porpoises amid ground effects certification for 2022, the FIA ​​is now also measuring the vehicle’s vertical oscillations to ensure drivers are not at risk from vibrations.

If the car draws attention to these excessive movements, the technical representative will be inclined to investigate further.

Bauer is also not limited to using one car per team, meaning he could also have requested spot checks on George Russell and Carlos Sainz if he thought the performance of the Mercedes or Ferrari was too low. Leaving the pair alone suggests that Hamilton and Leclerc got the rules wrong based on their individual setups.

For wear the rear skid plate points to the W14 and SF-23 were either too low on the ride height at the rear axle or operated too soft to allow the cars to kiss the asphalt as they bounced from hitting a bump.

Verstappen passing scrutiny may suggest the RB19 works a little stiffer to lock the ride height into position to prevent it bottoming out, but it’s less comfortable for the driver.

Notably, the Red Bulls had to climb past Eau Rouge at Spa earlier this season to avoid relegation.

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes F1 W14, Carlos Sainz, Ferrari SF-23, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing RB19

Photography: Steve Etherington/ Motorsport pictures

That Hamilton and Leclerc were under pressure in no way indicates a deliberate attempt to skirt the rules.

Instead, they were discovered through a sprint format that only allowed for one hour of training before the Parc Ferme system came into effect. Since then, teams have been severely restricted on how they can change a car.

The limited window meant that some teams did not complete a heavy fuel run before the Grand Prix. Consequently, they were unable to optimize the car to navigate the bumps of the Circuit of the Americas, which were much worse this year despite a reappearance at Turns 12, 14, 15 and 16.

Furthermore, teams are free to remove the plank to take precise measurements to assess the extent of wear until the garden barriers are installed. They are then effectively limited to educated guesses.

It seems to be the case that Mercedes and Ferrari got it wrong.

Perfectionism versus pragmatism

While the FIA ​​can rely on data on oscillations as well as on-board footage to identify non-compliant cars, a potential problem is that of the 17 cars that finished the race, 13 were not checked for their flooring.

This necessarily means that there is a possibility, however remote, that one or more of them have finished using a plank that has been illegally excessively worn. Therefore, they scored the points incorrectly, having benefited more from the exclusion of Hamilton and Leclerc.

As such, the ideal scenario is for each car to undergo a rigorous set of audit checks. But the FIA ​​points out practical limitations that prevent this from happening.

Charles Leclerc, Scuderia Ferrari, at Parc Ferme after the race

Photography: Andy Hone / Motorsport pictures

Given the range of tests available to the technical representative, if they were performed for all cars, the process would take a long time.

The US Grand Prix weekend exacerbated the problem. A sprint weekend means scrutiny after Friday’s qualifying, Saturday’s shootout, a sprint race, and a full Grand Prix.

For this round, there was only 3 hours and 45 minutes left in Saturday qualifying before the sprint race. This already restrictive window does not take into account pre-race preparations, outside laps and grid preparation.

Then, after the Grand Prix on Sunday afternoon, every additional hour the car may be held in the park while checks are completed for all 20 competitors, where the teams can finally pack up and ship off to the next race, which happens this weekend Week in Mexico as part of a rapid-fire triple header.

In the eyes of the governing body, at some point speed must exceed absolute accuracy.

Can the race result be appealed?

If a team, dissatisfied with the level of FIA monitoring, suspects that a competitor has been driving too low, it may reasonably want to evaluate those panels to see if further disqualifications are needed to boost its results even higher.

However, there is only a 30-minute window starting immediately from the checkered flag when teams protest the race result – as Aston Martin did successfully in Austria this year amid the track limits debacle to get Sainz, Hamilton, Esteban Ocon and Pierre. Gasly and Alex Albon have been demoted.

Verstappen won the United States Grand Prix in 1 hour, 35 minutes and 21 seconds (plus the time taken to complete the formation lap) after the start at 2pm local time. But the technical representative’s report on the floor inspection was not issued until 5:28 p.m. By then, it was already too late to protest the outcome of the race.

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes AMG, second place with his trophy

Photography: Steven T/ Motorsport pictures

With cars not recalled for inspection and then returned to their teams as the park closes out, disassembly can begin. Once tampered with, it will be impossible to reliably recall the cars and verify their compliance. As such, protesting the result was not viable.

With this window closed, the only parties that can now reopen the case are Mercedes and Ferrari, should they decide to appeal the disqualification.

However, whether intentionally or unintentionally, they violated the technical rules, of which there is no gray area that can be exploited to overturn decisions. Disqualification was inevitable.

For example, Sebastian Vettel lost out on the podium to Aston Martin at the 2021 Hungarian Grand Prix after the team was unable to provide the regulated one-litre fuel sample at the end of the race.

However, Aston Martin was able to prove that this was due to a fuel leak and not a fueling error, but the disqualification was nonetheless a crushing blow.

Finally, an appeal is unlikely to see Hamilton and Leclerc’s disqualifications stand.