Case argued for why Lewis Hamilton’s 10-second penalty was fair

Lewis Hamilton’s controversial 10-second penalty at the Mexico City Grand Prix was deserved, according to Martin Brundle and Jacques Villeneuve.

Seven-time world champion Hamilton was hit with a 10-second penalty for cutting Turn 4 on Lap 6 during a fierce battle with Red Bull’s Max Verstappen. The punishment dropped Hamilton down the order and ruined his hopes of claiming a first grand prix podium for Ferrari as he eventually finished eighth.

Hamilton felt he had been singled out by the FIA and said it was “kind of nuts” that he was the only driver to receive a penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage during Sunday’s race at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez.

The decision to penalise Hamilton has proved divisive and been one of the biggest talking points to emerge from the weekend in Mexico City.

“I don’t know why they all don’t go straight on at Turn 4 to be honest, follow the escape road, back up a bit on the way out not to have a lasting advantage,” Brundle told The F1 Show.

"Why they bother taking Turns 4 and Turn 5, which are really slow, I don’t know, because that little road looks really handy.

“Lewis didn’t follow the route, had a big advantage and didn't really go to a lot of trouble, did he, to back up and hand it back again, either the position or 100-200m or something.

“So unless there are mitigating circumstances that has to be a 10-second not a five-second penalty. So that's my clarity as far as my brain is concerned, but others will disagree no doubt.”

Fellow pundit Villeneuve agreed that the penalty was “deserved”.

"It sounds tough, 10 seconds, and it was a lot in that race,” the 1997 world champion said.

“He couldn't give the place back to Max, obviously [because Verstappen had been overtaken by Bearman at the next corner] and had he not cut across the track he would have lost a position or two the way he had gone wide anyway.

"The problem was he got out with a 100-metre lead and just kept it; that's a huge advantage on the whole pack not just gaining a position or not, and that was the big issue. He didn’t even try or bother to slow down a bit.”

How the stewards viewed it

The stewards accepted that Hamilton was not able to correctly follow the escape road back to the track but said he should not have rejoined ahead of Verstappen.

“Car 44 [Hamilton] locked brakes on the approach to turn four and went into the run-off area,” the stewards noted.

“The stewards determined that the car was carrying too much speed to enable the driver to use the prescribed escape road and for that reason the driver had a justifiable reason for failing to comply with the race director’s instruction. Given the circumstances, the stewards took no further action.

“However, by leaving the track and cutting the corner, the driver gained a lasting advantage, overtaking [Verstappen] and failing to give back the position thereafter. The standard penalty for leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage is therefore imposed.”