The upcoming 109th Indianapolis 500 faces significant controversy after Team Penske was found in violation of technical rules during Sunday’s Fast 12 qualifying session at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Modified rear attenuators were detected on the No. 12 and No. 2 Penske cars, resulting initially in Josef Newgarden and Will Power being assigned to start 11th and 12th. Subsequent penalties announced Monday demoted both drivers to the back of the field, accompanied by other sanctions imposed on Team Penske.
As this major infringement unfolded, McLaren’s Pato O’Ward notably voiced his criticism of the penalties and their implications, arguing for even harsher consequences based on fairness and integrity.
Pato O’Ward’s View on the Integrity of the Indianapolis 500 Competition
Following his achievement securing a front-row start in Fast 6, O’Ward expressed to media that both Penske cars should have been relegated to the last-chance qualifier (LCQ), a more severe penalty than what was initially decided. Emphasizing the gravity of this breach amidst a globally prestigious event, he underlined why strict adherence to legality is crucial given the scale and status of the Indianapolis 500.
“My answer was never to force IndyCar into a decision. I think that’s just something that naturally had to come about. You need to put yourself in the position of the guy that’s going home (Jacob Abel). I think he doesn’t want to be a part of this event just because of the technicality of someone else, but there’s so much that goes into this event. It’s a world-class event. This is not a national event. This is a world-class event. It’s so important to make sure that we’re fighting all in an even playing field. At least with legality.”
—Pato O’Ward, IndyCar Driver
Conflict of Interest Concerns Surrounding Team Penske and Series Ownership
O’Ward drew attention to an underlying issue complicating this situation: Roger Penske’s dual role as both the owner of Team Penske and the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, as well as the IndyCar Series itself. This connection raises questions about fairness and the example the organization sets within the sport. For O’Ward, Team Penske represents the standard competitors aspire to equal or surpass, making any rules violations by the team especially impactful.
He challenged the team not just on the grounds of competition but also on the broader implications for fans, the integrity of the series, and the example set to other teams and drivers who push for excellence while staying within the rules.
“It’s important to also realize that while there’s so much at stake. The team that is also doing these infractions owns the series. They own the Speedway. They own the series. They are the benchmark. They’re the heroes to many of us. We are the underdogs striving to be like them. We are the team that’s striving to beat them. What example are you setting? First of all for your fans. Second of all for the honor of your own series. And three: what are you showing people? Are you doing that because you don’t believe in your drivers? You’ve got amazing drivers in your team. I get that we’re always pushing the limits of what’s legal or not in order to gain that advantage, (but) it’s not a good look.”
—Pato O’Ward, IndyCar Driver
History of Infractions Involving Team Penske Adds to Controversy
This recent violation is not an isolated case for Team Penske. Over the last 14 months, the team was publicly penalized for a double disqualification at the St. Petersburg race due to an illegal push-to-pass system. O’Ward also revealed that there have been multiple lesser infractions that led only to fines and were handled discreetly by IndyCar officials.
“I’m not sure if many people know. They’ve been caught twice already in a span of a year. These are the only two times that it’s been public. But it hasn’t been the only two times. There’s been another two or three things that they’ve caught about them, IndyCar Tech, where they just received fines. But ultimately it’s not a good look. It’s not a good look at all. Whether it’s become public or not. This one obviously was very public. But some of the other things are also performance enhancers. For the race cars, not for the drivers. Those were not public. It was: ‘Oh, something was off.’ And they just got a fine.”
—Pato O’Ward, IndyCar Driver
“They don’t have to be doing this. Especially when the first thing people are going to go to is a conflict of interest. Because they obviously own the series. And no one’s going to be doing extra work just for the aesthetic of something. That is just the biggest BS I’ve ever heard. You will do this to gain an advantage and to be better and faster. You’re not going to do this just because it looks better.”
—Pato O’Ward, IndyCar Driver
Reflection on Last Year’s Indianapolis 500 and Current Motivations
O’Ward was runner-up in last year’s Indianapolis 500, losing in a final-lap duel to Josef Newgarden, whose Team Penske Chevrolet No. 2 car featured a similarly modified rear attenuator. That car now resides in the renovated IMS Museum. Reports indicate that the modified part was in use during the race itself, raising additional questions about the legitimacy of performance advantage.
Although O’Ward chose not to dwell extensively on unproven advantages, he suggested these technical advantages help explain some otherwise “unexplainable” performance gaps on the track. He remains motivated to overcome Team Penske’s dominance and secure his first Indy 500 victory.
“I mean, I feel like in a certain way it explains the unexplainable. From a gap that you wouldn’t be able to see any other car on the grid close. At that moment, at least in the last lap, the way that he just caught up even when the toe was broken a bit and just cleared. Like the speed, the natural speed of those cars currently. Even without this piece. What makes me wonder is that… that’s something we can see. I wonder what else and what other things are among those cars that we cannot see, that explain the ability to do some of the things where you’re like ‘How are they doing this?’ But I don’t want to get into it really. I think that’s just more motivation to when we actually get it done and we beat them. It’s going to feel real good.”
—Pato O’Ward, IndyCar Driver
Implications for IndyCar and the Future of Competition
The controversy surrounding Team Penske’s rule breaches intensifies scrutiny on IndyCar’s governance and enforcement processes, especially given Roger Penske’s ownership role. Ensuring an even playing field is critical to maintaining the prestige and integrity of the Indianapolis 500, widely regarded as one of the most significant motorsport events worldwide.
The penalties imposed reflect the seriousness of the infractions, but the calls for stricter measures underscore the tension between competition and fairness. For drivers like Pato O’Ward and other competitors, these developments serve as both a warning and motivation, highlighting the need for transparency and consistency in technical regulation adherence moving forward.
