The governing body of motorsport convened with F1 Drivers in Qatar this week to address mounting concerns over stewarding consistency and racing standards. The high-stakes discussion at Losail International Circuit marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate about how incidents are judged during Grand Prix weekends.
No Immediate Changes to Stewarding Framework
The FIA confirmed in an official statement that current guidelines will remain unchanged for the season’s final two races. This decision means stewards will continue using the existing reference document when evaluating on-track incidents during the Qatar and Abu Dhabi rounds.
The Thursday evening session brought together racing F1 Drivers and officials to discuss one of the season’s most contentious topics: the framework used to assess racing incidents and penalties.
Background: Understanding the Guidelines Document
Introduced in 2022, the stewarding reference framework aimed to bring greater uniformity to decision-making across race weekends. The document became publicly available earlier this year, representing a significant step toward transparency in motorsport governance.
The guidelines serve as reference points rather than rigid regulations. However, professional F1 Drivers have consistently voiced concerns that practical application often deviates from the document’s intended flexibility, with decisions appearing overly mechanical rather than contextual.
Charles Leclerc of Ferrari articulated this frustration before the meeting: “Today we are really sticking to the book, and that makes it difficult to have common sense sometimes in specific situations.”
Five Key Incidents Under Review
Recent Brazil Controversy
The FIA statement revealed that five specific cases from the current season received detailed examination. The most recent involved the Interlagos incident between Andrea Kimi Antonelli, Oscar Piastri, and Charles Leclerc. Piastri received a 10-second penalty during the race—a decision that fellow competitors widely considered unjustified despite its technical alignment with existing guidelines.
Netherlands and Italy Collisions
Two crash-related incidents dominated the discussion. The Carlos Sainz-Liam Lawson contact at Zandvoort initially resulted in a 10-second penalty for Sainz, which Williams successfully overturned through the protest process. Additionally, the Monza collision between Oliver Bearman and Sainz, where Bearman faced penalization, came under scrutiny.
These incidents highlighted a fundamental concern: rigid guideline application can produce decisions that racing professionals view as incorrect. The framework’s heavy emphasis on car positioning at corner entry has created what many describe as a “race to the apex” mentality—where drivers prioritize technical positioning over natural racing dynamics.
Track Limits Discussions
Two track limits cases received attention. The group examined the Mexico incident between Leclerc and Max Verstappen regarding “leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage.” They also reviewed the Austin situation involving Lando Norris and Leclerc, questioning whether leaving the circuit during overtaking attempts constitutes a violation.
Key Takeaways from the Discussion
The governing body characterized the meeting as “frank, open and collegial” but stopped short of announcing specific reforms. According to the FIA, data spanning three seasons demonstrates that current guidelines have enhanced consistency, with detailed analysis from teams supporting this conclusion.
Four Main Outcomes
Delayed Decision-Making: Racing professionals and officials agreed on a “clear preference” for postponing certain rulings until post-race when complete information isn’t immediately available. This approach would allow stewards to hear directly from competitors involved—a point Carlos Sainz emphasized following the Zandvoort incident.
Scenario Limitations: Both parties acknowledged that no document can address every possible racing situation, reinforcing the critical importance of including an experienced driver-steward on each panel. Notably, despite calls from several competitors for permanent stewarding positions, the official statement made no reference to whether this topic was discussed.
The question of professional, permanent stewards has previously shown alignment between the FIA president and the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association (GPDA), though disagreement exists over funding responsibility.
Yellow Flag Compliance: Stronger emphasis on respecting yellow flag procedures emerged as a priority, along with discussions on additional safety enhancement measures.
Blue Flag Protocol: Officials will review procedures for lapped traffic, potentially adding clarifications to define expected behavior from slower cars being overtaken.
The Road Ahead
While no immediate modifications will affect the championship conclusion, this meeting represents an important dialogue between competitors and officials. The FIA noted that the current framework “has been reviewed and agreed with the GPDA,” pointing out that F1 drivers themselves participated in developing the document they now frequently criticize.
This apparent contradiction underscores the complexity of creating universal standards for split-second racing decisions. What works in theory on paper may not always translate effectively to high-speed competition where physics, positioning, and racing instinct intersect.
The sport now faces a critical off-season period where these discussions could shape the future of race stewarding. Whether meaningful reforms emerge will significantly impact how incidents are judged in upcoming seasons.