Shane van Gisbergen has been stripped of his season-opening Supercars victory for adding dry ice “to the wrong spot” in a bid to cool down his new Gen3 Camaro in Newcastle.
But the case is not yet closed, with Red Bull Ampol Racing launching an immediate appeal on Sunday morning, claiming they were granted permission to use additional cooling methods for their drivers as a “safety tool”.
Both Red Bull entries, van Gisbergen and the second-placed Broc Feeney, were disqualified for their use of dry ice in the driver’s seat door during Saturday’s first race.
Tickford Racing, whose entry Cam Waters finished in third but has since inherited the win, was the first team to lodge a protest to Red Bull’s cooling tactics – complaining just eight minutes after the race finish.
Almost an hour later, Walkinshaw Andretti United launched their protest against van Gisbergen’s car 97 – after their entry Chaz Mostert finished in fourth, claiming the dry ice use was “an unfair advantage”.
“Triple Eight is disappointed in the decision handed down by Motorsport Australia resulting in the disqualification of both Red Bull Ampol Racing cars from Race 1 of the Newcastle 500, and we have lodged notices of our intention to appeal for both cars,” the Red Bull team said in a statement.
“The team sought permission from the Supercars head of motorsport prior to Race 1 of the Supercars championship, which was granted, and we acted upon this permission.
“This was not a performance enhancement method, but a driver safety tool.
“Our team ethos is to race hard and fair every time we hit the track and our full focus is on today’s race in Newcastle.”
At a hearing conducted on Saturday night, a series of six photographs were produced to show the Red Bull cooling tactics used in race one.
Supercars rules state cooling methods must be applied on the passenger side of vehicles – not the driver’s side as Red Bull pit crew were broadcast doing with dry ice on Saturday.
“The cooling requirement in the regulations are that anything to do with the cooling system has to be in the passenger seat area,” Fox Motorsport’s Mark Skaife said.
“We saw yesterday dry ice going in on the right hand side.
“They’ve modified it now.
“Clearly within the system they’ve actually got a mechanism that can be used – they just added it in the wrong spot.”
Pit lane commentator Mark Larkham explained why he believed Red Bull opted for a driver’s side cooling method and not the passenger side – as he showed how the passenger door would hit the refueller’s arm when opened during a stop.
“Imagine how smart it would be if you put your ice in the other door where no one’s out there – very clever albeit outside the rule book.” he said.
Triple Eight’s team manager Mark Dutton said he believed the team had permission to use dry ice in the driver’s side after showing Supercars head of motorsport Adrian Burgess the system on Thursday night.
“Did I say the words, ‘Do I have approval for this’? No, I didn’t,” he conceded on FoxSports.
“The fact that the HOM (Burgess) saw the box installed in the car, said it was a good idea, you can probably understand why I thought that was (fine).”
In the official stewards ruling, Burgess disagreed with the proposition he had given Triple Eight approval to use dry ice in the driver’s side during the race.
Tickford Racing team principal Tim Edwards said the “rules are very clear”, while WAU director Ryan Walkinshaw said he believed the decision to disqualify the Red Bull entries was “the right call”.
“For us there’s nothing great about the rule, it’s black and white,” Edwards said.
“It’s a very clear rule – we’ve had no issues with driver comfort and temperature issues at all.
“Unfortunately the rules are very clear about where you can put the cooling mediums in the car.
“Ultimately they have the right to appeal which they’re doing and if I was in their shoes I would appeal as well.”
“(Burgess’) clear determination is that the systems in issue do not comply with the rules,” the verdict read on Sunday morning.
“It is important to record that the stewards find that there was no intention on the part of the respondent to compete with a non-compliant car and that it was an honest, though mistaken, belief that it had the permission of (Burgess) to install the systems in issue. Despite the honest, though mistaken belief, the breach has still occurred, and the penalty is both required and appropriate.”
Skaife said there was no doubt the decision would leave van Gisbergen “pretty angry”.
“We know when he’s angry he goes very well.”
Van Gisbergen has explained how his feet felt “on fire” during practice sessions on Friday due to the heat coming from the firewall inside his new Camaro.
But teams were granted permission to use additional cooling methods as a result of the overheating issue.
Driver Will Brown was left visibly significantly distressed on Saturday as his team attempted to cool him post-race.
His team later confirmed Brown was taken for medical treatment overnight where he needed IV hydration.
David Reynolds described his race one as being in a “world of hurt”.
“With about 50 laps to go I actually cried while I was trying to throw up in the car,” he said.
“Not sure whether I was having a heart attack or stomach ache so I was in a real world of hurt yesterday.”
