reinstated Monaco Grand Prix podium risks creating a “tricky
precedent” for Formula 1, with teams potentially refusing to serve
penalties and then “arguing about it for weeks after.” Gasly
originally crossed the line third in Monte Carlo, but was handed
two five-second time penalties for pit lane speeding, dropping him
to seventh in the classification. Alpine chose not to have Gasly
serve the penalties during the race, instead accepting the
post-race time addition while preparing a challenge through the
FIA’s Right of Review process. That proved successful. Alpine
presented new evidence, including data from Formula One Management
(FOM), demonstrating that the pit lane distance used to calculate
speeds was inaccurate, meaning the timing system had overstated the
speeds of drivers passing through. The stewards accepted the
evidence, rescinded both penalties, and reinstated Gasly to third
behind race winner Kimi Antonelli and Lewis Hamilton. The decision
has prompted both McLaren and Red Bull to lodge appeals with the
FIA International Court of Appeal. Red Bull’s Isack Hadjar had been
promoted to third in the original post-penalty classification,
while Piastri dropped a place in the revised result. Both appeals
were filed on 16 June and have not yet been heard. Piastri’s
concerns Piastri had already described himself as “pretty mind
blown” by the stewards’ decision and labelled the situation
“murky.” Speaking at the Austrian Grand Prix alongside Gasly, the
McLaren driver expanded on his concerns, acknowledging both sides
of the argument while flagging what he sees as a significant risk
to the sport. “I think the most obvious one is to make sure the pit
lane is measured correctly,” the Australian told media, including
RacingNews365 , when asked what needed to be learned from this
episode. “That’s a good starting point, obviously. “I think what is
difficult in that situation is that Alpine questioned the penalty.
I think everybody questioned the penalties. I’ve never seen a race
like that where there are so many pit lane speeding penalties. “In
my case specifically, I knew I wasn’t speeding either, but the
approach is always, ‘Well, you have the penalty, you can’t really
argue with it,’ in a lot of cases, which I think in 99 per cent of
things is a good thing.” Piastri, who was one of five drivers
penalised for pit lane speeding in Monaco, served his own penalty
during the race. That decision shaped McLaren’s strategy and,
ultimately, his finishing position. The contrast with Alpine’s
approach, deliberately not serving the penalties and then
challenging them after the fact, is at the heart of his unease.
Gasly, for his part, has consistently maintained that the Right of
Review simply corrected a clear FIA error and restored a fair
result, while acknowledging he understands why rivals feel
aggrieved. He has finally received his Monaco trophy, though the
situation is far from over with the McLaren and Red Bull appeals
still to be resolved. “I think the risk that we have now is anytime
a team or a driver feels that a penalty is potentially wrong or
they have a chance of changing it, you go through this whole saga
where we still don’t officially know the results of the race a
month later, which I think is the biggest thing,” Piastri added. “I
kind of agree with Pierre’s point that if there’s something that
can be corrected, then I can definitely see why it can be. “But it
also sets a bit of a tricky precedent because you could just end up
with everybody not serving their penalties and then arguing about
it for weeks after, which is not what anyone wants to see. “So
yeah, a difficult situation with two sides to it, I guess, or
probably even more.”