Normal service was resumed in Austria last weekend as Mercedes took another one-two after a minor blip
in Canada
. Rosberg lead Hamilton, placing even more pressure on the Brit, while Bottas in the Williams scored his first podium in the top class.
Other big news from the weekend was Audi claiming its second 24-hour race victory in seven days. Just over a week ago at Le Mans and last weekend with the #4 Phoenix R8 LMS Ultra at the Nurburgring. Heading into both races as underdogs, it marks two massive results for Audi and a message to its rivals: never write off those four rings.
However, it was something earlier in the week that piqued our interest, also cropping up over the weekend and providing the subject matter for this week's column: penalties in motorsport.
It came to light last Thursday that the FIA was prepared to back off on driver standards investigations and penalties to encourage harder racing and more overtaking. To me, that either implies the FIA had their review and penalty processes wrong in the first place, or that the latest bulletin means it'll be potentially putting more drivers in danger through letting dubious lunges go unnoticed.
I'm in the former camp to be honest. And I think there are probably a few out there who might agree (if you don't, tell us why in the comments).
It's certainly a positive development, but is this yet another example of the FIA tweaking sport to how it's feeling one week? Next you'll be telling me it'll be artificially engineering sparks from the cars and sticking trumpets on the end of exhaust pipes.
Harris's LM nightmare showed there are limits
The issue is consistency. Consistency makes racing more of a spectacle for the fans. With consistency, the drivers know exactly what they can and can't get away with.
Racers shouldn't be forced to shy away from a move for fear that a touch or a tap might mean a stop and go, or demotion on the grid at the next race.
Knowing that a wrap on the wrists - potentially ruining your race or hurting your chances in the next one - won't be a default response for even having a sniff at a competitor has to mean we'll see more dicing. But the window in which the race stewards operate must remain constant.
Take the British Touring Car Championship; panel bashing since 1958 and filling grandstands year after year. It's these wince moments when you're watching on telly or at the circuit that have you unknowingly creeping towards the edge of your seat as the excitement builds. A bit of contact as a consequence often even makes it more involving. As they say, rubbing's racing.
Drivers on the BTCC grid know this is part of the championship and it can be used strategically. Sometimes it's purely in the heat of the moment - take Shedden and Turkington at the last corner of the last lap of the last race at Donington.
Of course, contact in Formula cars will more than likely end up in a shower of fluttering carbon, with at least one driver probably having to park it. We're not expecting contact here, but for the rules to consistently allow someone to have a go if they're quicker. This is how drivers used to impress in motorsport - not by seeing how little fuel they can use and how well they can conserve rubber, waiting for a mistake or a mechanical.
And normal service resumed for Merc...
Unsurprisingly, there is a caveat though. Not only do we need consistency in the rules, we need consistency in enforcing sanctions - and the right sanctions for the right offence, too.
Take Harris' unfortunate race at Le Mans. If there's clearly no gap available and your opponent makes a dive Felix Baumgartner would be proud of, you'd expect them to get punished.
Take Harris at the N24 last weekend. If a GT3 car makes contact with your Aston N430 in the dark of the forest in the small hours, despite your best efforts in checking your mirrors, that's a racing incident - and one that however unfortunate for both parties is almost a certainty in multi-class racing round a narrow, sinuous track.
Missing waved yellows in a slow zone, tagging the back of a slowing MINI Cooper S and narrowly avoiding wiping out an intervention car in your Dodge Viper, however... That's about as big as errors come.
Penalties should be applied accordingly, and be proportional to the level of indiscretion. Drivers shouldn't be penalised for racing - it's their job - they should be reprimanded for stupidity. And it's identifying this difference that also needs to be consistent. We could call it the Pastor Maldonado test.
A pair of 24-hour wins for Audi in a week!
When rule makers get it wrong
In the most part, in most series, officiators get it right. Sometimes though, they're further off target than a Chris Waddle penalty.
For example, IMSA admitted doling out a penalty to the wrong car at this year's Sebring 12 hours, smacking the #22 Porsche with a stop and go plus an 80-second hold for contact with another car.
Only thing is, the #22 wasn't involved. Both the #911 and #912 911 GT3s - also painted white - tagged the #49 Ferrari, but neither were reprimanded. One very disgruntled team's race ruined, then.
Like we say, mostly the stewards get it right. But if the level of adjudication is so poor, how are drivers ever supposed to put enough trust in officials to actually race?