McLaren seeks rule rethink after Las Vegas technical disqualification

A contentious weekend in focus

McLaren left Las Vegas facing one of the strictest sanctions in Formula 1, as Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri were both disqualified when post-race checks found their skid blocks below the mandatory nine millimetre minimum.

According to Racingnews365, the penalty was automatic under current regulations and offered the team no route to appeal the outcome.

The decision arrived during a season already defined by close margins in both the drivers and constructors standings, making the incident more than a routine technical breach.

The unusually bumpy Las Vegas surface, combined with aggressive kerb profiles, had created unpredictable ride characteristics throughout the weekend, with several teams reporting higher than expected plank wear.

Read also: McLaren fired me on my birthday and cut the wrong driver

Why skid block rules matter

Skid blocks, sometimes called planks, were introduced in the mid 1990s as part of a wider effort to prevent teams from running excessively low ride heights for aerodynamic gain.

The FIA measures the plank at multiple points after each race, and any reading below the legal limit automatically triggers disqualification. The rule has led to several high profile penalties in the past, including sanctions for Mercedes and Ferrari, and has historically been applied without exceptions.

In Las Vegas, the FIA measurements showed deviations of 0.12 millimetres on Norris car and 0.26 millimetres on Piastri car. Although small, the numbers still constituted a breach.

McLaren team principal Andrea Stella acknowledged that the readings were correct, noting that even marginal wear carries the same consequence under the existing framework.

Read also: Mathias Gidsel played two months with a broken sternum

Calls for a proportional approach

Stella said the team has been informed that the FIA is reviewing the broader question of proportionality in technical penalties. He explained that the governing body recognises the gap between minor, often accidental violations and intentional attempts to exploit performance gains.

According to Stella, officials also confirmed during their discussions that McLaren had not acted deliberately and that mitigating factors, including unusual track behaviour, were presented to the stewards.

The issue of proportionality is not new within Formula 1. Teams have previously pushed for clearer gradations of penalty severity, particularly as the sport has introduced more complex rules in areas ranging from aerodynamics to cost cap compliance.

Many within the paddock argue that technical violations should reflect intent, advantage gained and the scale of the irregularity rather than functioning as a single threshold based system.

Read also: Ronaldo’s private gift to Jota family revealed

Shifting pressure in the championship

The Las Vegas ruling had immediate implications for the title battle. As noted by GPFans, Max Verstappen moved to within 24 points of the championship lead with two rounds remaining, aided by McLaren losing both cars from the final classification.

Verstappen has won four of the past seven grands prix, while McLaren has taken two victories in the same period, tightening pressure on the Woking based outfit as the season approaches its conclusion.

Some observers questioned whether McLaren might have been running aggressively low in response to Red Bull pressure. Stella rejected that line of thought, stating that the wear resulted from an unexpected anomaly in the car behaviour rather than from chasing performance at the edges of legality.

He added that the team approach, which has produced a sustained championship challenge, remained unchanged.

Read also: Injury ends Neymar’s season early

Will continue over the winter period

Stella said McLaren will incorporate lessons from the Las Vegas weekend into its ongoing development work, noting that the team routinely adjusts its processes as it gathers new information. He expressed hope that the FIA review will lead to clearer and more balanced rules, so that future cases distinguish between minor deviations and deliberate attempts to gain an advantage.

The debate is likely to continue into the off season, as teams, regulators and the FIA technical department consider how to shape a ruleset that remains strict but more flexible to the realities of modern Formula 1.

Read also: Surprise name leads the race to replace Arne Slot after PSV thrashing