FIA rule on Red Bull’s protest with Russell Miami GP podium under threat

The FIA have announced the result of Red Bull’s protest against George Russell for allegedly failing to slow under yellow flags during the Miami Grand Prix, declaring it ‘not founded’.

Russell had beaten Max Verstappen to the final position on the podium behind the McLaren team-mates, pipping the reigning World Champion by two seconds.

Red Bull protest Mercedes: Team alleged yellow flag infringement

Russell’s podium, though, was in jeopardy when Red Bull alleged that he had not slowed sufficiently when Oliver Bearman’s Haas ground to a halt, triggering the second of three Virtual Safety Car periods in Miami.

Russell was able to claim a cheap pit stop in the process as the Mercedes driver dived into the pits for medium tyres and returned to the track ahead of Verstappen in P3.

Verstappen was quick to come over the radio and query whether Russell had sufficiently slowed under the double waved yellows.

Russell held on to that final podium spot to the chequered flag, but after the race, Red Bull officially protested the result, claiming a breach of Appendix H, Article 2.5.5 b) of the International Sporting Code.

This particular section reads: “Double Waved Yellow Flag: Any driver passing through a double waved yellow flag marshalling sector must reduce speed significantly and be prepared to change direction or stop.”

F1 2025: The season’s winners and losers

👉 The results of the F1 2025 championship

👉 The updated Drivers’ and Constructors’ Championship standings

Red Bull protest Mercedes: FIA announce protest is ‘rejected’

The FIA heard evidence from Red Bull and Mercedes, the former claiming that while Russell lifted the throttle when the yellow flag was displayed, he did not reduce speed.

Red Bull argued that ‘discernibly reduced speed’ meant ‘passing the yellow flag zone at an absolute speed which is lower than the speed before entering the yellow flag zone’ as Verstappen, who was following Russell, had done.

Mercedes, though, countered that it was ‘common practice accepted by all teams and the FIA’ that ‘significantly lifting the throttle’ through a yellow flag zone is considered an ‘appropriate reaction’. Russell had therefore complied with the relevant regulations.

As for Russell, he said that he saw the single yellow and had ‘significantly lifted the throttle to react to the yellow flag’.

Mercedes also stated that the Briton’s lift was ‘more significant’ than what could be observed by other cars.

The stewards found in favour of Mercedes, ruling that the ‘protest is rejected as it is not founded’.

Their statement read: “It was evident from the onboard footage as well as from telemetry that Car 63 lifted the throttle when passing the yellow flag zone. The throttle was lifted by approx. 25 percent and this resulted in a reduction of torque of approx. 30 percent.

‘Article 26.1. a) requires the driver to have “discernibly reduced speed” in a yellow flag zone but does not specify if that means reducing the absolute speed or reducing the speed relative to the regular racing speed in the relevant part of the track.

‘The speed of Car 63 in the yellow flag zone was considerably slower than the regular racing speed, but the absolute speed while passing through the yellow flag zone increased slightly.

‘The Stewards determine that the requirement of Article 26.1 a) concerning the reduction of speed in a yellow flag zone can only relate to a reduction relative to the regular racing speed as the reduction of the absolute speed can, depending on the part of the track in which the yellow flag is displayed, represent a compliance or a non-compliance with the regulations whereas a reduction of the relative speed always signals that the driver has acknowledged and respected the yellow flag. For instance, in a braking zone the absolute speed can be reduced without necessarily complying with the regulations.’

Read next – Miami GP: Piastri continues winning streak after more Verstappen v Norris fireworks