Williams submits right of review for Carlos Sainz penalty following F1 Dutch GP crash

The Spaniard tangled with Liam Lawson in Zandvoort and was handed a 10-second penalty, which Williams will now try and overturn with any new and sufficient evidence it has

Williams has submitted a right of review to the FIA over the Dutch Grand Prix incident between Carlos Sainz and Liam Lawson, which left the Spaniard to soak up a 10-second penalty.

Sainz and Lawson made contact following the resumption of the Zandvoort Formula 1 race last week, touching at Turn 1 after the opening safety car was withdrawn. Both drivers were left with punctures, and their recoveries to the pitlane put them both a lap down.

Both drivers felt that the other was to blame, and thus Sainz was audibly aggrieved to have been hit with the penalty - the stewards decreeing that Lawson had the right to the corner and that Sainz's front axle was not far enough alongside the Kiwi.

Williams has thus submitted a right of review, which will then be judged it if is admissible by the FIA.

"We can confirm we have submitted a right of review to the FIA relating to Carlos’ penalty in Zandvoort," read a Williams statement. "It is important for us to understand how to go racing in future, and we are hopeful of a positive outcome."

Following this, Williams will have to prove that it has new and sufficient evidence to have a chance of overturning the result.

Carlos Sainz, Williams, Alexander Albon, Williams

Photo by: Joe Portlock / LAT Images via Getty Images

Sainz said on Thursday that he had spoken with the stewards in the aftermath of the Dutch Grand Prix, and believed that he had been able to convince them that the wrong decision had been taken during the race.

"Yeah, I did get the chance to go and speak to them after the race. I had the opportunity to go and sit with them for 15 minutes to analyse the incident.

"And it was very clear to me that as soon as they got all the evidence, and they look at the places that they would have needed to look at to take the right decision, it was very clear to me that I think they realised that probably a decision taken wasn't the best one."

"Now we are trying to see if we can come up with enough evidence and enough stuff to realise if we can change the outcome of the penalty, because I still firmly believe it was a very poor penalty that I received and a bad judgment, which can happen as long as you have the capacity to revisit it.

"And if there's been a misunderstanding or a lack of evidence or a lack of analysis, then there is still time to reanalyse it, to reopen it, and change it."