The emergence of new video footage posted by the of👍ficial Formula 1 Twitter account led to a U-turn by the stewards and ultimately resulted in Lewis Hamilton’s Austria🔜n Grand Prix grid drop.

More than three hours after qualifying ended on Saturd🀅ay, Hamilton had been c♈leared of failing to slow down sufficiently under yellow caution flags caused, rather ironically, by his Mercedes teammate Valtteri Bottas who took a trip across the grass in Q3 en route to claiming pole position for the opening round of the delayed 2020 season.

Case closed, right?

Wrong. In 🐻an unusual turn of events, less than two hours before lights out in Spielberg, Red Bull requ🍸ested the stewards take another look at the incident.

Following a second investigation, it soon became evident that Hamilton was in line for a grid penalty when his race crew began preparing his car in the fifth slot on the grid, while Red Bull pair Max Verstappen and Alex Albon had moꦺved up to second and fourth respectively, with McLaren’s Lando Norris sandwiched in-between in P3.

Confirmation followed 40 minutes before the race start that th🙈e six-times world champion had been slapped with a three-place grid penalty, dropping hi🌸m to fifth.

of any wrongdoing following this yellow flags incident at the end of qualifying on Saturday

— Formula 1 (@F1)

“It was pointed out to us on social media that there was 🎃a different camera angle, with a 360-degree camera, that showed very clearly there was a yellow light box that he had driven through,” Red Bull team boss Christian Horner explained.

“It only seemed consistent with Mexico, so we asked the FIA to have another look at it and they said they hadn’t seen that footage previously,🔯 so for whatever reason they hadn’t had the access o🐠r looked at the camera.

“Having looked at that, and reviewed it, it then became a very clear decisioꦇn for them.”

But why did the stewards not have such crucial footage during the initial hearing on Saturday? According ෴to F1 race director Michael Masi, logistics relating to the technology had prevented it from being available in time.

"It’s actually 🗹something that we’ve been speaking with FOM [about],” ꧂Masi said.

“Obviously, it’s not something it’s availab💛le live due to bandwidth. It needs to be downloaded off the car, processed, et cetera.”

Masi also explaine🃏d how the request to re-open the case had come about, under F1’s right of review rules.

“There’s been some misquotation that it was a ‘pr💯otest’ from Red Bull. It wasn’t actually🌳 a protest,” he said. “It was a question that they raised of: ‘Is this a new and significant element?’

“Which i🌃s why there was actually two separate decisions. That’s why the first decision is: Is it a new and signifi🎉cant element? The stewards determined that, yes, it was.

“Then, obviously, they went into a hearing as a result of that and determined that, effectively, if they’d had that footage [on Saturday], they would have deemed and came to the same decision they did prio🌱r to the race.”