WRT Wins Sprint Title After Successful Barcelona Appeal

The Race 1 result from the Fanatec GT World Challenge Europe powered by AWS Sprint Cup finale in Barcelona has been canceled after Team WRT filed an appeal regarding the application of the safety car procedure, with the Belgian team set to win the overall teams’ title in as a result of the subsequent points deductions.

The first of two races during October’s Sprint Cup decider was won by Boutsen VDS pairing Jules Gounon and Maximilian Goetz after a safety car period that was called early and subsequently lengthened because of severe rain fall.

Although initially triggered by a first-lap accident involving Tresor Attempto Racing and Winward Racing, the arrival of rain meant that the race wasn’t restarted until less than ten minutes were remaining.

However, the result from the race were rendered null and void as SRO Motorsports Group confirmed Thursday that Team WRT had succesfully filed an appeal with the Royal Automobile Club of Belgium (RACB) Sport National Court.

The hearing, held on Nov. 12, followed after an initial protest filed by the WRT in the immediate aftermath of the race was rejected.

During the appeal, for which the team was represented by team principal Vincent Vosse, sporting director Pierre Dieudonne and performance and data engineer Antoine Herblot, WRT argued that stewards acted in violation of article 20.5.2 of the Fanatec GT Europe sporting regulations.

This article states that the mandatory pit window in place during a Sprint Cup race will be delayed “if the safety car is on track or a Full Course Yellow period is in operation at the time when the pit window is scheduled to open.”

However, WRT pointed that once the initial safety car, triggered by the first lap crash, was lengthened because of the rain, the pit window was opened and not delayed, which it argued “obviously occurred in breach of the clear wording of article 20.5.2.”

The team goes on to add: “If safety, as stated by the race director during the hearing, was his concern at that time, it is hard to understand why he did not suspend the race by using the red flag,” further stating that the opening of the pit window during the safety car could have led to unsafe situations in the pits due to the large number of cars pitting at the same time.

Also present at the hearing was Emil Frey Racing, which attended as “an interested party” and was allowed to present arguments “since it may obtain a higher ranking if the appeal is successful.”

The Swiss squad argued that the confusion over the status of the safety car period, with a message concerning the removal of the safety car being issued and subsequently withdrawn as well as additional uncertainty over the pitstop window (the opening of which was shown on the broadcast but not communicated to teams until several minutes later) allowed some teams to gain an advantage.

Emil Frey argued that the No. 9 Mercedes-AMG GT3 Evo, which pitted shortly after the pit window message on the broadcast was shown, was able to make up significant ground due to the timing of its stop as it was not being slowed down by the safety car or other cars struggling with slicks on an increasingly wet track.

This, the team stated, allowed the Boutsen VDS car to ‘gain almost a full lap’ compared to cars that pitted later and thus contributed to its eventual victory.

In its verdict, the court of appeals stated that it agreed with WRT that the articles regarding the pit stop window under safety car “have not been correctly applied” and that a red flag should have been declared, stating: