Are F1’s racing guidelines working? Our writers have their say

The decision to hand Max Verstappen a five-second penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage – by cutting Turn 2 to keep the lead against Oscar Piastri – resurfaced the debate over racing rules in Formula 1.

But whichever side of the fence you sit on, it was apparent that it was the latest incident to place the spotlight on F1’s racing guidelines and what drivers can and cannot do when battling for position on the track.

This incident ended with Verstappen getting a five-second penalty and ultimately losing the race to Piastri when he dropped down the order after serving the punishment during his pitstop. The penalty split opinion, naturally, and posed the question about if F1’s racing rules are working. Our writers offer their views.

There will always be grey areas over who is in front – Stuart Codling

Rules, guidelines, whatever – we saw last year with the events of Max Verstappen vs Lando Norris at the US GP in Austin that grey areas exist around the given areas of what is acceptable. At that time the guidelines stated that whoever had their front axle ahead at the apex had the right to the corner.

And as demonstrated there, it will always be relatively straightforward for a driver of Max Verstappen’s calibre to head off the possibility of being overtaken around the outside by releasing the brakes, knowing there is no hope of making the corner, but knowing also that he will be enshrined as the one with the axle line in the right place while the other guy spears off the track.

Those guidelines were then amended in the wake of what was regarded by the majority of the drivers allowed to express an opinion as Verstappen’s borderline egregious exploitation of the grey areas.

Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing, Oscar Piastri, McLaren

Photo by: Alex Pantling – Formula 1

So we should welcome the stance of the stewards in Saudi Arabia, who stood firm against Red Bull’s lobbying. There will always be an element of subjectivity in such cases and, ultimately, they decided circumstances merited a five-second penalty rather than a 10-second one.

But it was clear that Verstappen was never going to make the corner while Piastri was – and on the correct line. When Christian Horner arrived for his post-race press conference bearing a sheaf of screen grabs showing Verstappen ahead, it was a transparent and clumsy attempt at spinning the issue via the media and fanbase, having already lost the argument with the stewards.

Read Also:

At the point of those shots, Verstappen was well past the point of no return. Obviously some people will buy what Horner was trying to sell, and perhaps he may get what he wants – a “re-look at” the guidelines.

To do what – add more grey areas to exploit?

Penalties are too lenient these days – Fabien Gaillard

Given that the guidelines are a means for stewards to judge incidents, they serve this purpose fairly well. However, as we saw at the end of last season, the underlying principles are flexible – as, when several controversial situations arise in quick succession, modifications are quickly announced.

However, the example of Verstappen and Piastri speaks for itself: you can implement all the guidelines in the world, but if a driver consciously decides that it is better to cut the corner to unduly stay in front of another car (and therefore risk a penalty) rather than accept to concede on the track or return the position later, your guidelines will be useless.

Beyond the guidelines, when the circuit does not allow for a better outcome, penalties should be a real deterrent. When Verstappen decides to take a corner at absurdly high speed on the outside of Turn 1, knowing fully well that he would never make it through the corner on the track, seeing the stewards impose only a five-second penalty instead of 10s because it was the first lap is almost laughable.

Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing, Oscar Piastri, McLaren

Photo by: Alex Pantling – Formula 1

The current penalties in F1 for track incidents are abysmally lenient compared to those of previous decades. Penalising misconduct more harshly would be a good way to remind drivers and teams that there are consequences for breaking the rules and ignoring the guidelines.

Guidelines are all well and good, but humans still make the final decision – Oleg Karpov

Whenever there is a controversial decision by the stewards – and it seems it’s always going to be controversial when the race win is on the line – there will inevitably be those who disagree. But amid all the outcry about the lack of consistency, perhaps it’s also necessary to note that something is actually working when the decisions make sense. Of course, Verstappen feels (or says) that he’s been wronged – but apart from him and his bosses, there perhaps aren’t many in the paddock who would dispute the stewards’ verdict on the Turn 1 battle.

After all, you can write pages and pages of guidelines, but the nature of sport is that there will never be two absolutely identical episodes – and we’ll always need a human being to make the final call. And it’s not an easy job, because inevitably someone will vent their frustration to the media, or even bring a piece of paper with ‘evidence’ printed on it to try and prove them wrong. But that’s just the way it is.

Someone had to make the call – and to me, at least, it feels like there’d be a much bigger outcry if Verstappen had been let off the hook. You can watch his onboard frame by frame and pause the footage at the right moment to see where his wheels are compared to Piastri’s McLaren – but the stewards are not new to the series either and they probably know that Verstappen will never give up the lead like that. One can be forgiven for feeling that it’s not the first time he’s just lifted the brake pedal to claim he was in front at the apex. And yes, there needs to be a human being for those occasions to simply say, “Yeah, that’s just naughty.”

For me, a five-second penalty was the most appropriate penalty there could have been – and it did exactly what it was supposed to do: put Verstappen behind Piastri. And that’s where the discussion should have ended. But there will always be those who disagree.

Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing, Oscar Piastri, McLaren

Photo by: Gabriel Bouys – AFP – Getty Images

Are the racing guidelines out of touch? No, it’s the tracks that are wrong – Jake Boxall-Legge

I don’t think there’s a real issue with the racing guidelines; most drivers have no trouble obeying, and a clear marker has been laid down in the wake of the Verstappen-Piastri side-by-side jostle into Turn 1 at Jeddah. All of the chatter about who has “the right” to the corner in their apex positioning could be viewed as slightly nebulous, but it’s clear the stewards won’t tolerate bleeding the brake off to be level into the corner anymore. Now that there’s precedent for trying that on the opening lap, one has to decide if the five-second penalty is worth it.

But this brings me back to my usual argument for this situation: does this situation happen with grass or gravel instead of run-off? The answer is, as always, no.

We must give a bit of credit to those who came up with the solution of blue-bordered white lines solution and corner exit gravel. They’ve not eradicated the track limits offences at those areas entirely, but at least it adds immediate punishment in those cases.

But when you’ve got a first corner that is bordered by a white line and an asphalt expanse, there’s nothing stopping you from just skipping across and picking up a penalty. Per the FIA’s guidelines, if you run across and gain an advantage, that’s a 10-second penalty; Verstappen only got five because it was the first lap. If you think you can take the lead and run a five or 10-second advantage, why not take the punt? That’s what the system allows.

And if you don’t think that’s in the spirit of the rules, you’re right. Vote for change. Vote Grass/Gravel.