Why didn't Mercedes or McLaren request FIA review after Monaco penalty controversy?

Pierre Gasly's two five-second time penalties from the Monaco Grand Prix being rescinded by the FIA stewards reinstated the Alpine driver to the podium five days after the fact.

But it has also opened a considerable can of worms for the motorsport governing body and Formula 1, and it is not yet clear where or how this ends.

Team Enstone, already suspicious of the irregularities at the pit entry — which ultimately was proven to be a genuine issue, with the timing loops 77cm shorter than the incorrect measurements used to calculate the average pit lane speed — across the weekend, opted not to pit Gasly again later in the race and serve his accumulated punishments for speeding.

It was a precautionary measure, and this meant his 10 seconds' worth of time penalties were added to his race time, dropping him from third to seventh at the chequered flag.

And crucially, it left open the possibility of challenging those punishments — but more on that later.

Other drivers, such as Lewis Hamilton, George Russell, Oscar Piastri and Franco Colapinto — in the other A526 — served their sanctions in-race, as they all decided to come in to stop again.

In the Mercedes driver's case, failing to correctly serve that punishment led to a drive-through penalty and a second successive pointless grand prix.

For Piastri, like Russell, it cost him the opportunity to fight for a podium finish, with Gasly subsequently elevated to the top three because those drivers had served their penalties.

We now know that none of those supposed infringements were actual speed limit infractions, so none of their sanctions should have stood. However, only Alpine submitted a Right of Review to the FIA.

Why did Alpine submit the Right of Review?

It is worth noting that the French squad did not necessarily anticipate the result of the Monaco Grand Prix being changed, in part because some drivers (Piastri, Russell et al.) had served their penalties whilst others (Gasly) had not.

But rather, Alpine was seeking to understand what had happened and to establish if anything had gone wrong, as opposed to directly appealing or protesting the result.

"So we've asked the FIA for a process called a Right of Review," the team's managing director, Steve Nielsen, said on Sunday evening.

"It's not a protest or an appeal, it's different. It allows us to compile all our data and evidence, and it allows us to sit with the FIA and fully understand how they came to the conclusion that we transgressed the pitlane speed limit. Because we don't think we did.

"But we're open to being shown if we did, so it’s really an open conversation with the FIA about what we could've done differently. Or perhaps what they could have done differently."

What action might be taken against the Right of Review outcome?

McLaren and Red Bull, which has had to relinquish Isack Hadjar's podium result, have now signalled their intent to appeal the outcome of the Right of Review, with Piastri also relegated from fourth to fifth.

Both teams laid out their reasons for doing so during the hearing that ultimately saw Gasly's penalties wiped clean.

Earlier this weekend, Piastri explained why he believed the FIA could not reverse the punishments and how he would not have pitted again without the sanctions looming over him.

After qualifying in Barcelona, the Australian made no attempt to hide his anger at the decision, hitting out at the FIA in a strongly-worded rant about the situation.

Mercedes, meanwhile, is considering legal action; Toto Wolff confirmed in the team representatives' press conference on Friday that he had been on the phone with their lawyers over the matter.

Just before the start of the Barcelona-Catalunya Grand Prix, he revealed Mercedes has written to the FIA, although the team does not have high expectations of being allowed a Right of Review at this late stage.

But what is its endgame, because taking the matter to a court of arbitration logically, at this stage, only ends one way, with the entire results being declared null and void — and that would strip Kimi Antonelli of a hard-earned victory. However, that is a topic for further down the line.

The eight-time constructors' champions also had its doubts over the subject across the weekend in the Principality, and even flagged those concerns on Friday and again on Saturday, only to be told there was no problem.

In extension of not pitting Gasly again, Alpine has since confirmed that it lowered the speed limiter on his car during the red flag stoppage to avoid further issues, and other teams, namely Williams, also took measures to counteract the problems experienced early in the weekend.

But why did neither McLaren nor Mercedes submit their own Right of Review, and why can't the stewards reverse Piastri and Russell's penalties too?

Why McLaren and Mercedes' hands were tied

The answer is straightforward, even beyond the obvious point that it would be incredibly difficult to untangle how much time was lost, and the fact that their serving of the penalties irrefutably altered the rest of the race.

The reason that the FIA cannot "undo" their penalties is because there is no mechanism for the stewards to remedy punishments already served.

The official Right of Review decision document confirmed: "The Stewards note that in relation to other cars that were penalised, some served their penalty and this, regrettably, impacted their race strategies and therefore their race result.

"There will undoubtedly remain questions as to whether those breaches were genuine. There is no regulation that gives the Stewards the power to 'undo' a served penalty.

"In any case, it is impossible to imagine how such power could be applied. Notably, no other party petitioned for a Right of Review within the allowable time frame."

Therefore, the Right of Review process would have been essentially redundant for both Mercedes and McLaren, and there is also no way for a team to appeal or protest an awarded penalty during a race.