MELBOURNE, Australia - Aston Martin's Fernando Alonso has been given a 20-second penalty for what the Australian Grand Prix stewards deemed an "unusual manoeuvre" which led to George Russell's dramatic crash on the final lap.
The penalty drops Alonso from sixth to eighth in the standings.
Russell crashed through Turn Six while chasing Alonso for position.
The incident was referred to the stewards due to the way Alonso had appeared to dramatically lose speed on entry, with Russell following less than half a second behind.
After an investigation on Sunday evening Alonso was found to have breached Article 33.4 of the sporting regulations, which states: "At no time may a car be driven unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner which could be deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers or any other person."
The stewards verdict said: "Telemetry shows that Alonso lifted slightly more than 100m earlier than he ever had going into that corner during the race.
"He also braked very slightly at a point that he did not usually brake (although the amount of brake was so slight that it was not the main reason for his car slowing) and he downshifted at a point he never usually downshifted.
"He then upshifted again, and accelerated to the corner before lifting again to make the corner. Alonso explained that while his plan was to slow earlier, he got it slightly wrong and had to take extra steps to get back up to speed.
"Nonetheless, this manoeuvre created a considerable and unusual closing speed between the cars."
Alonso's was given a drive-through penalty, but as the race had already finished that was converted in 20 seconds added onto his race time.
That dropped the two-time world champion behind Aston Martin teammate Lance Stroll and RB's Yuki Tsunoda, although the rest of the points-paying positions were unaffected.
Alonso also had three points added to his superlicence.
The 42-year-old said in a statement on social media: "Double points for the team and a better race pace than the rest of the weekend allowed us to cross the finish line in sixth and seventh place. A bit surprised by a penalty at the end of the race regarding how we should approach the corners or how we should drive the race cars.
"At no point do we want to do anything wrong at these speeds. I believe that without gravel on that corner, on any other corner in the world we will never be even investigated.
"In F1, with over 20 years of experience, with epic duels like Imola 2005/2006/, Brazil 2023, changing racing lines, sacrificing entry speed to have good exits from corners is part of the art of motorsport.
"We never drive at 100% every race lap and every corner, we save fuel, tyres, brakes, so being responsible for not making every lap the same is a bit surprising. We have to accept it and think about Japan, to have more pace and fight for positions further up the field. Thank you, team!"
The stewards elaborated on the decision in their verdict, part of which they wrote in a question and answer format to explain some of the finer details.
"Specifically, in this case, the stewards have not considered the consequences of the crash," they wrote. "Further, the stewards considered that they do not have sufficient information to determine whether Alonso's manoeuvre was intended to cause Russell problems, or whether as he stated to the stewards that he simply was trying to get a better exit.
"Should Alonso have the right to try a different approach to the corner? -- yes.
"Should Alonso be responsible for dirty air, that ultimately caused the incident? -- no.
"However, did he choose to do something, with whatever intent, that was extraordinary, i.e. lifting, braking, downshifting and all the other elements of the manoeuvre over 100m earlier than previously, and much greater than was needed to simply slow earlier for the corner? -- yes. By his own account of the incident he did, and in the opinion of the stewards by doing these things, he drove in a manner that was at very least "potentially dangerous" given the very high speed nature of that point of the track."
Aston Martin has the right to appeal the verdict.