MotoGP Stewards ‘wrong’ not to investigate Bastianini, Martin incident?

It was the major talking point after Sunday’s Emilia Romagna race and, as such, opens the discussion on this week’s Crash.net MotoGP podcast.

A controversial last-lap clash between Jorge Martin and Enea Bastianini resulted in Bastianini passing the Pramac rider to win the race. That also meant Martin’s title lead over Francesco Bagnaia grew by 20 instead of 25 points.

But with the FIM Stewards not even investigating the incident, there was no official judgement on the rights and wrongs of the move, potentially opening a can of worms for the future.

Martin has already indicated he is now prepared to do the same move as Bastianini, while Aleix Espargaro was stunned that the Stewards felt the incident didn’t justify an investigation.

“I don't understand what the Steward panel is doing,” said Espargaro. “One rider touched the other, both riders went out of the track, and they didn't even put under investigation.

“I'm a little bit worried, because the message they are sending to all of the riders is that you can do whatever you want… This is a very dangerous announcement [message].”

Podcast host Jordan Moreland began: “The incident on the last lap with Enea Bastianini and Jorge Martin has certainly split opinion. I think [no penalty] was the right outcome. But I want to discuss the opinion of the Stewards, which seemed to be lacking in this case. There was no real clarification about why that wasn't investigated.”

“That was the one thing we were all waiting for, an explanation as to why they declared the result,” replied Crash.net MotoGP journalist Lewis Duncan.  “It was the last lap but it wasn’t a particularly light incident. Martin was pushed well off track and obviously we saw Bastianini off track as well. So you can understand Martin’s frustrations at there not being any kind of at least investigation.

“In terms of a precedent, yeah, but when it comes to these Stewards, we know consistency is completely lacking. There's kind of a thought - we haven't actually ever been officially told by the Stewards - that on the last lap all bets are off. You can get away with a bit more than you could do in a normal race.

“We have seen that this year. At Le Mans, Franco Morbidelli made contact with Aleix Espargaro at the last corner and Aleix lost a few positions and there was no investigation, which - as you can imagine with Aleix! - he was not very happy about.

“But then at the Spanish Grand Prix, Pedro Acosta was nudged wide by Johann Zarco in the first lap at Turn 5. Acosta only lost one position, he didn't run off track and it wasn't as serious an incident as we saw in Misano. The Stewards said afterwards that had Zarco not given the place back on his own accord, he would have been given a penalty.

“So where's the line? That's what I think everyone wants to know. The fact that there is no transparency – how do we and the riders know what the rules of engagement are? I think this is the key issue, rather than should Bastianini have been given a penalty.”

Moreland added: “That’s it isn’t it Pete, the Stewards needed to come out and say, ‘This is why he didn’t get a penalty’.”

Crash.net MotoGP editor Pete McLaren said: “It’s these kind of big moves that we all remember, isn't it? And, more importantly, the riders use the decisions made as a gauge for the future. 

"Let's remember, we're not just talking about MotoGP riders, but also Moto2 riders, Moto3 riders, Red Bull Rookies. They all look at this kind of incident and go, ‘OK, so where is the line?’.

“On the last lap you're allowed to do more. And that's fine. But there's still got to be a line somewhere. And for a lot of people, Marc Marquez included, that line is literally the line on the edge of the race track: You've got to stay on the track.

“We've seen penalties for moves in the past where people haven't even gone off the race track. We see track limits measured by millimetres and riders being told to drop a position. This wasn't a track limits area, but you know what I'm saying. We just needed some sort of explanation.

“As far as the move itself, you can argue it either way. I think most people thought the level of contact was fine for a last lap. It didn't cross into dangerous, for me. But at the same time, neither Martin or Bastianini made the corner.

“What would have happened if it was on a faster part of the track and they both went off? I think probably the Stewards would have punished it, but that's what we needed them to say.

“Something like: ‘It was a slow corner, it was the last lap, Bastianini only ran off while taking evasive action to avoid more contact’ or whatever the reasons might be. But explain why it was OK for him not to stay on the racetrack.

“Every incident is covered by the rule that says you must ride in a responsible manner, not cause danger or gain an unfair advantage. There's so much opinion involved in judging that rule, so that’s why we have the Stewards panel.

“But staying on the racetrack is important because it’s black and white. It’s a good measure of if the rule about being responsible and fair has been broken and it’s why you often hear riders say ‘I made the corner’ to defend their actions.

“Usually the overtaking rider bumps the rider ahead wide, but they stay on the track. Even then, they are often called to see the Stewards and we’ve seen penalties given for ‘disturbing’ other riders, being ‘overly ambitious’.

“So for the overtaking rider to make contact, then not make the corner either, and to have no investigation is a surprise.

“I think the Stewards needed to do as they did with the Alex Marquez and Bagnaia incident at Aragon. Investigate it and explain why they were not taking action. Most people said, 'OK, fair enough' after Aragon.

“But now there are a lot of riders saying, ‘So we can do that in future?’”

Moreland replied: “That's a good point, because they went into a lot of detail for that Alex Marquez-Bagnaia incident, which was quite refreshing. You got a hint that they looked at data as well. They were explaining the process, but here it's just radio silence.

“What was your take on Marc Marquez’s comments Lewis? He basically said the move was fine, if Bastianini had stayed on the track.”

Duncan replied: “We've moved away from all run-off areas having green paint to the ones that don't have green paint not being monitored, which is kind of a stupid thing in itself in terms of consistency.

“But it does raise the question of, what if that been a green painted zone? We know on a last lap if you touch the green, you're supposed to drop a position. Would that then have been the case for Bastianini? That’s another reason why the Stewards needed to explain it.

“I think Marquez was a really good voice on this because he's often been criticised for being one of the more aggressive riders. I think he was correct: If you make an aggressive overtake, fine. But you’ve got to stay on track!

“There’s the question of did Bastianini only run wide because he looked over his shoulder blah, blah, blah. But regardless, he ran off track. This is also why there needed to be an investigation.”

Moreland said: “It’s got people talking about MotoGP, it’s a good thing that we had someone try a last-lap overtake. It was really dramatic! And I have to say Jorge Martin handled it pretty well afterwards. But he also said if he’s in that situation in future, we might see him do something like that now.”

McLaren said: “That’s why we need an official explanation, to know where the line is in these situations. Most riders seem to be saying the line is clearly a lot further away than we thought.

“We all want to see passes made. Everyone's fine with some contact. Nobody fell off, and that's the main thing. But still there's a lot of questions about this move. In the past, we saw the famous Laguna Seca passes, with riders going off but being allowed to keep the position. That probably wouldn't be allowed to happen now, or maybe it would after what we saw on Sunday.

“There's a lot of people, including some riders, saying it was all okay. Just hard racing. I think Bagnaia said Martin did something similar to him in Qatar last year. But while the level of contact was similar, Martin was nowhere near going off the race track in Qatar and neither was Bagnaia.

“It comes back to what Marc said about staying on the track. That’s what keeps the riders within certain responsible limits. Because now, does it matter if you go off track by one metre, like Bastianini, or spear off track in fifth gear and take someone wide with you?

“I think most riders believe if you make a move and another rider goes down, there’s going to be an investigation. And if you make a move and gain a position while running off the track, there would also be an investigation. That’s why there's a lot of unanswered questions.”

Duncan said: “I think you do have to split it into two categories: Was it good for the show and was it the correct decision. Was it good for the show? 100%. And the Stewards were in a bit of an awkward position because they're deciding a race win and then you throw in the added context of an impact on the championship.

“I’m quite a big National Hockey League fan and we see in the playoffs that the referees tend to be a bit more relaxed in terms of penalty calls because they don't want to be seen as the ones making crucial decisions that could decide playoff games. But that in itself leads to an erosion in trust, because then a lot of calls end up getting missed!

“So the Stewards are in a bit of an unwinnable situation, but that's their job. To put the rules into practice and also to redefine them as necessary. I think there needs to be an element of that here because, as we've said, the rule book is very ambiguous.

“Is this going to set a new precedent? Sete Gibernau said some years back that he thinks the precedent was set at Jerez 2005. And we do kind of accept these things now.

“But we don't want people just clattering each other off and causing injuries that could also decide the championship.

“I don't think there is a correct answer to, ‘were the Stewards right or wrong’ in terms of giving a penalty. But they were 100% wrong not to investigate it.”