MEXICO CITY, Mexico -- There is a simple solution that could have avoided much of the post-race penalty debate in Mexico on Sunday: A gravel trap between Turns 1 and 2.
Although the three-way battle for third between Max Verstappen, Sebastian Vettel and Daniel Ricciardo injected some much needed excitement in an otherwise-dull Mexican Grand Prix, it also left some unanswered questions hanging over the results. Lewis Hamilton had escaped a penalty on the first lap despite gaining a clear advantage by skipping Turn 2, whereas Max Verstappen was given a penalty on lap 68 because he gained a clear advantage by skipping Turn 2. It's true that Vettel was marginally closer to Verstappen than Rosberg was to Hamilton as the respective battles approached Turn 1, but there's no doubt that the lead car was defending position in both instances.
It's possible to argue that Hamilton did not deserve a penalty because his advantage was lost later in the opening lap when the Virtual Safety Car was deployed, but what if Pascal Wehrlein and Marcus Ericsson hadn't tangled at Turn 1? Should stewards' decisions be affected by the outcome of separate incidents elsewhere on the track? For the sake of consistency, almost certainly not. It has also been argued that Hamilton backed off enough after the incident to negate the advantage, but on the run down to Turn 4 -- the other main overtaking opportunity on the opening lap -- Hamilton held a huge lead over Rosberg in second (see picture below).
On the other hand, the argument for penalising Hamilton could be bolstered by the fact his flat-spotted front tyre could have been considerably worse if he had attempted to make the first corner up until the apex. The footage shows Hamilton coming off the brakes ahead of the corner to protect his tyre and commit to the run off and, in the harshest possible interpretation of the rules, that could be seen as gaining a lasting advantage by limiting the severity of the flatspot (as it happened Hamilton was able to continue to lap 17 on the same set despite big vibrations, which may not have been possible with a bigger flatspot).
In Verstappen's case, the 19-year-old claimed his lead over Vettel into Turn 1 was similar to the lead he held when he exited Turn 3. That is up for debate as Vettel may have been able to attempt a move nearer the apex of Turn 1 had Verstappen not taken to the run-off, but Vettel was certainly closer to Verstappen on the exit of Turn 3 than Rosberg was to Hamilton.
Therefore, it is no surprise that the stewards' decisions resulted in the inevitable "one rule for Driver A and another for Driver B" argument after the race. Yet there is a simple solution that would have taken the decision out of the stewards' room and put it back completely in the hands of the drivers.
"I am a bit of a fan of gravel traps," Ricciardo said after the dust had settled on the final result. "It is a proper deterrent because even if you get through the gravel trap at some speed and don't lose a whole lot of time, you still have stuff in your radiators, so there is more of a penalty.
"I don't like that a driver can defend lock ups, or make a mistake while defending, cut through and continue. In the first corner with Lewis, I didn't think that was right. You make a mistake and the start of the race is a crucial moment and a mistake with so many cars around, you should pay the price."
Nico Hulkenberg, who watched Hamilton cross the grass from just behind Rosberg, agrees: Lewis' start thing was very strange. I mean if that's not gaining an advantage then I don't know what is gaining an advantage. Had there been a gravel trap or a wall he would have been in big trouble.
"I don't know necessarily gravel traps. Maybe something like we have at other tracks like Sochi or Monza if you go off there you have to go around a certain thing to make you pay the price. Because where he braked there's no way he's going to make the corner."
Red Bull boss Christian Horner made reference to controversial comments made by F1 CEO Bernie Ecclestone ahead of the weekend and argues there should be a happy middle ground.
"Bernie's view is put a wall there, which is probably one end of the spectrum. But I definitely think there's an argument for a gravel trap because if you end up in the gravel you either lose an enormous amount of time or you're out of the race. I really think it's something that should be looked at for corners such as Turn 1 to see if gravel is a better deterrent than large tarmac run-off areas.
"It remains too open to interpretation because why was Max's move any different to Lewis at the chicane in Monte Carlo or Lewis on lap one here? You're leaving it constantly up to stewards interpretation on individual events. If there's a gravel trap there they pay the price, it's as simple as that."
Although the FIA would have to carry out a study on the potential downsides of adding a gravel trap in the grassy area on the inside of Turn 2, it could easily be introduced for next year's race. Watch that space ...