Heading into the triple-header to conclude 2025, Oscar Piastri and Kimi Antonelli reviewed the tricky F1 São Paulo GP incident that resulted in a conflicting penalty. While the Australian served the penalty, the controversy surrounding it became a topic of conversation that followed the drivers ahead of the F1 Las Vegas GP.
During lap 6 of the F1 São Paulo GP, Piastri got off to a great restart following the end of a Safety Car. The McLaren driver tried his hand at overtaking the two cars ahead. Going into Turn 1 in a three-wide battle with Antonelli and Charles Leclerc, the Australian locked up. Trouble ensued, with multiple collisions between the three: Piastri’s McLaren hit Antonelli, who in turn hit Leclerc.
Antonelli’s perspective
During his F1 Las Vegas GP Thursday media session, Kimi Antonelli tried to clear up the Interlagos incident. From the #12 cockpit, the Italian felt the situation was out of his control. Furthermore, Antonelli believes Piastri’s harsh penalty at the F1 São Paulo GP was in accordance with the guidelines:
“Well, I think, if you stand by the driver’s guidelines, Oscar [Piastri] is wrong. And, you know, the stewards stand by the guidelines, and that’s why the penalty was given.”
Comparing the incident in Brazil with one from the Dutch GP when he took out Leclerc, the Mercedes driver explained his reasoning: “Also in Zandvoort, I was penalised. Obviously, it was a bit different. But the dynamic was kind of the same, you know. I was not fully alongside in Zandvoort, and I collided with Charles [Leclerc]. And I got my penalty.”
The penalty’s fairness in Antonelli’s POV
Going over the step-by-step events that led up to the incident at hand, the 19-year-old looked into the level of avoidability of it all. While Antonelli understands Piastri’s position, he believes the penalty for his F1 São Paulo GP mistake was understandable.
“And with Oscar… The thing is, yes, approaching the braking, he was alongside me. But when we braked, he broke much earlier than me. And from being fully alongside, his front wing was at the back of my wheel, was in my rear wheel.
“And then, of course, obviously, we were also three wide, which is never easy. I mean, the thing also, everything happened so quick that it’s hard. I was trying to give space to Charles, of course, because I had Oscar inside me.
“But then, obviously, in the braking, I didn’t even see him anymore because he broke so much earlier than me. Then, obviously, he locked up and I closed a bit the corner, and we collided. But I think, of course, it was an unlucky situation.”
Final input on the penalty
In Antonelli’s closing statements, he admitted that Piastri’s penalty at the F1 São Paulo GP followed the current rules. Nonetheless, the Italian recognised the difficulty of assigning such a harsh punishment for these situations:
“But if we stand by the guidelines, the penalty is fair because it wasn’t at the level of my mirror. And that’s how it is. Of course, maybe it can be a bit unfair. Maybe it was a racing incident because the situation was tricky.
“But the rules are these. And that’s why in Qatar we will discuss about it for the future to try to make it better.”
Piastri’s perspective
After another fellow driver, Carlos Sainz, called out the severity of the F1 São Paulo GP penalty, Oscar Piastri shared his point of view on the Antonelli-Leclerc incident. Moreover, the Australian’s response highlighted the need for open communication with the FIA in these situations:
“I think, fortunately for me, a lot of people have done the talking for me. When one of my fellow drivers involved in the accident said it’s not your fault, I think that’s a pretty good indication. So it’s something that I’m sure we’ll talk about with the FIA, just to get some more understanding.”
Lastly, Piastri pointed out the silver lining brought to light by the discussions that followed the incident. Focused on learning from the penalty, the McLaren driver trusts the FIA to adjust accordingly to the feedback they received:
“And yeah, I think it was a bit of a surprise for everyone to hear that the penalty was so harsh, myself included. So I’m sure we’ll talk about it. What you can do in these situations is try to learn the reasoning and the thinking behind it. And whether that needs to change or not. They’ve been very receptive to that in the past, and I’m sure they will be in the future.”
