Sainz was relegated from fourth to 12th and outside of the points in Melbourne after he was handed a five-second time penalty for colliding with Aston Martin’s 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:Fernando Alonso at the final standing restart. 

The Spaniard was left furious at the FIA and called the decision the 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:“most unfair penalty” and the “biggest disgrace I’ve seen in the sport”, while his Ferrari team were left frustrated t🉐hat other restart incidents went unpunished.  

Even🐭 Alonso, who was pitched into 🅺a spin by Sainz, felt the penalty was “too harsh”. 

A 1♋68澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:virtual hear𒅌ing will be held on Tuesday morning (April 18) to decide whether the case should be reinvestigated after Ferrari 🧔formally submitt𓆏ed a ‘right of review’ petition. 

The hearing will first asse🧜ss whether there is “a significant and relevant new element” of evidence that was not previously considered by the stewardsꦡ in Melbourne.

Ferrari will present their cas🅺e and if deemed successful, another hearing will take place. 

There, a decision🍷 will be taken to either uphold the penalty, changﷺe it, or overturn it altogether. 

History not on Ferrari’s side 

‘Right of review’ cases are rarely successful.

That is something Ferrari experienced first hand when they appealed 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:Sebastian Vettel’s five-second time penalty at the 2019 Canadia𝓡n Grand Prix. 

Vettel appeared on course to win the race until he made a mistake under pressure from 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:Lewis Hamilton and ran wide at Turn 3. The German cut a🔥cross the grass and blocked the Mercedes driver to retain his position. 

Vettel crossed the line in first ahead of Hamilton but was s𓄧lapped with a penalty for rejoining the track in a dangerous manner, ultimately handing Hamilton the win. 

Ferrari trie🎶d to get the pen෴alty overturned but failed after the stewards threw out their request for a review, ruling they had not met the criteria of providing significant new evidence. 

It later emerged that Ferrari showed the stewards Sky F1 pundit Karun Chandhok’s post-race anal🐲ysis on the SkyPad as part of their body of evidence. 

The stewards considered this to be a ‘personal opinion by a ꦬthird party’ and determined that five other pieces of evidence were𓂃 available at the time of the original call. 

Ferrari will have to overcome that precedent if they are to gain their desired outcome this t🔥ime around. 

There have been plenty of other examples where teams have failed with their rꦦight of review bids.&🌌nbsp;

Williams failed to overturn 168澳洲幸运5官方开奖结果历史:Sergey Sirotkin’s grid penalty at the 2018 Spanish Gra𝓀nd Prix, while four right of review requests were rejected in 2021, with Mercedes, Red Bull, Aston Martin and Alfa Romeo all seeing respective appeals fall flat. 

Do Ferrari have any hope?

Successful cases are few and far between. A Red Bull appeal re✨sulted in a late grid penalty for Hamilton at the 2020 Austrian Grand Prix after the team submitted new on-board footage from the 360 degree camera attached t🍎o Hamilton’s Mercedes. 

Haas also won a right of review case at last year’s United S𝓡tates Grand Prix, however this was later overturned following an Alpine appeal. 

The most recent example of a successful appeal came at the second round of the sea🀅son in Saudi Arabia,𓆉 where Aston Martin managed to get Alonso reinstated to the podium after his post-race penalty was reversed.

Recent history suggests that Ferrari’s chances of♏ success are rather slim.