Ferrari endured a disastrous weekend at the Chinese Grand Prix, marked by a rare and embarrassing double disqualification for both Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton due to technical infringements. What was initially a mediocre race for Ferrari turned into a catastrophe, overshadowing even Hamilton’s Sprint victory earlier in the weekend.
The disqualifications stemmed from two separate yet equally costly mistakes. Leclerc’s car was found to be one kilogram under the minimum weight limit. Contrary to speculation, this was not due to his front wing damage on the opening lap, as teams are allowed to replace damaged components before post-race inspections. The weight discrepancy was simply a critical oversight by the team.
Hamilton’s disqualification came down to excessive plank wear, with measurements exceeding the legal limit by mere fractions of a millimeter. While these infractions likely offered no performance advantage, the FIA enforces these rules with zero tolerance. Ferrari immediately accepted the penalties without appeal, acknowledging their own errors. The rare occurrence of both cars from the same team being disqualified underscores the severity of Ferrari’s technical blunder.
This incident brings to light possible setup issues Ferrari has been struggling with since the Australian Grand Prix in Melbourne. Speculation suggests that Ferrari has been running their cars too low to extract more performance, leading to increased plank wear. Despite team boss Frédéric Vasseur dismissing these claims, Leclerc himself hinted at setup adjustments made to ensure legality, creating a disconnect between driver and team management narratives.
Shanghai’s newly resurfaced track provided more grip, allowing Ferrari to lower their ride height further in pursuit of performance. However, this gamble appears to have backfired spectacularly. Hamilton’s strong performances in the Sprint and qualifying were not mirrored in the Grand Prix, where his car exhibited handling issues, further suggesting setup miscalculations.
Adding to the weekend’s chaos was the confusion around Ferrari’s team orders. During the race, Hamilton suggested over the radio that he should let Leclerc pass, acknowledging that he was holding his teammate up. However, delayed radio broadcasts created the impression that Ferrari was forcing Hamilton to comply with team orders, generating unnecessary controversy.
Vasseur expressed frustration at how the situation was portrayed, criticizing the omission of the initial radio message where Hamilton voluntarily offered to switch positions. The miscommunication fueled perceptions of internal discord, despite Hamilton eventually allowing Leclerc through in a controlled manner.
The race also raised questions about Ferrari’s car balance. Surprisingly, Leclerc’s car performed strongly even after losing part of its front wing in a collision with Hamilton. Observers speculated that the damage may have inadvertently corrected setup imbalances, explaining Leclerc’s improved pace relative to Hamilton.
Despite moments of competitiveness, the underlying issues at Ferrari are undeniable. Frequent mistakes, technical infringements, and inconsistent communication are symptoms of deeper structural problems. Vasseur’s focus must now shift towards addressing these internal shortcomings rather than external narratives.
Ferrari’s struggles come at a time when McLaren is surging ahead in the Constructors’ Championship. With valuable points lost in China, Ferrari faces an uphill battle to remain competitive. The team’s inability to maximize race weekends, coupled with critical operational errors, threatens to derail their championship ambitions.
The immediate challenge for Ferrari is to conduct thorough internal reviews, ensuring that technical compliance lapses are not repeated. Setup decisions need to be more calculated, balancing performance gains with the risk of breaching regulations. Furthermore, improving clarity and timing in team communication is essential to avoid unnecessary controversies.
Vasseur, known for his protective leadership style, may need to reassess his approach. While shielding his team from external criticism is admirable, the focus must remain on eliminating mistakes and streamlining operations. The recurring pattern of small errors accumulating into major setbacks indicates that Ferrari’s problems are systemic rather than circumstantial.
In conclusion, the Chinese Grand Prix highlighted both Ferrari’s potential and its vulnerabilities. While the cars demonstrated flashes of competitiveness, especially in Sprint conditions, race execution and regulatory adherence fell drastically short. The double disqualification is a wake-up call that Ferrari cannot afford to ignore. If the team hopes to challenge McLaren and remain in the title fight, a period of reflection, accountability, and recalibration is urgently required.
