Carlos Sainz Proposes Inclusion of Ex-F1 Drivers on Stewarding Panel to Enhance Incident Adjudication

Ferrari driver Carlos Sainz has ignited a crucial debate within Formula 1, advocating for a significant overhaul of the sport’s stewarding system. Speaking ahead of a pivotal discussion between drivers and the FIA, Sainz suggested that integrating two or three former Grand Prix drivers into the permanent stewarding panel could negate the necessity for the controversial and often subjective driving guidelines currently in place. This proposal, stemming from his high regard for the analytical prowess of broadcast pundits, aims to foster a more consistent and intuitively understood application of racing rules.

The core of Sainz’s argument lies in the perceived shortcomings of the existing FIA driving guidelines. Drivers and the sport’s governing body were scheduled to convene on Thursday evening to address the widespread dissatisfaction with these regulations. Sainz, a prominent voice as a director of the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association (GPDA) alongside Mercedes’ George Russell, articulated a common sentiment among his peers: the application of these guidelines has generated more problems than solutions due to their inherent subjectivity and varying interpretations. Many drivers, according to Sainz, fundamentally disagree with how the guidelines are currently applied, leading to what they believe are incorrect investigations and penalties.

Sainz’s perspective is particularly informed by his experience reviewing post-race analyses from television broadcasters. He lauded the in-depth assessments provided by former drivers now working as analysts, specifically naming F1 TV’s Jolyon Palmer and Sky F1’s Karun Chandhok and Anthony Davidson. The Spaniard revealed a striking level of agreement with their verdicts, stating he concurred "90%" of the time with their assessments of racing incidents. This stark contrast between his agreement with ex-driver analysts and his disagreement with official stewarding decisions forms the bedrock of his proposal. He posits that these analysts consistently "put the blame correctly most of the time on who actually has the blame, or if it’s actually just a racing incident," demonstrating the invaluable insight a driver with recent, direct F1 experience can bring to the adjudication process.

When questioned by Motorsport.com about the fundamental necessity of racing guidelines, Sainz expressed a vision for a future where strict regulations might be rendered obsolete. He believes that by incorporating former drivers of a similar caliber and recent vintage to those employed by current broadcasters into the official decision-making process, the sport could effectively move beyond the need for overly prescriptive rules. "My future ideal is no guidelines and people that are able to judge these sort of incidents, as well as these three people that I just mentioned do after the races," Sainz elaborated.

Related News :

The Ferrari star continued to articulate his admiration for the media’s analytical depth. "Again, this is just my opinion, but I’m quite impressed at the job that some of the broadcasts do after a race with this in-depth analysis of each of the incidents and how they apply blame or no blame into certain scenarios," he stated. Sainz views this level of analytical rigor as exceptionally high, suggesting it represents a benchmark for effective "steward-ness." While acknowledging that perfect 100% agreement with any panel of judges is unrealistic, he firmly believes that the assessments offered by these ex-drivers are "very close to being 90% correct." For Sainz, their key strength lies in their ability to truly grasp the nuances of on-track events. "I really feel like they understood what happened in that incident and the judgment that they take," he added, emphasizing that this observation is not a criticism of the current stewards’ dedication but a recognition of a superior level of insight available from those with direct competitive experience. He concluded this point by asserting, "I think without guidelines they would be able to judge each decision correctly and there wouldn’t be a bias or anything like that."

Sainz’s critique of the current guidelines extends to their tendency to mandate penalties for situations that, in his view, would historically have been classified as genuine "racing incidents." This rigid adherence to predefined criteria, he argues, stifles the natural flow and judgment inherent to motor racing. The upcoming discussion with the FIA and other drivers is therefore seen as a critical juncture to address these deep-seated concerns. "I think first we need to sit together, analyse quite a few of the incidents, and I think there’s been quite a lot of division in opinion between drivers, FIA stewards, just different ways to judge different incidents," Sainz noted, highlighting the internal inconsistencies that have plagued the sport’s judicial process.

The 2024 season has seen a noticeable increase in "confusion regarding a few of them [incidents]," as observed by Sainz. The objective of the Thursday meeting is to provide a calm, post-race environment to dissect these contentious moments, away from the immediate pressure of competition, in hopes of forging a more coherent and equitable path forward. Sainz, speaking candidly from his personal viewpoint rather than strictly as a GPDA representative, unequivocally stated his belief in the potential for improvement. "My personal opinion on here – I’m not talking from a GPDA perspective, I’m just talking as Carlos Sainz – is that there is potential to do better. And I think the guidelines themselves have created more problems than solutions to a lot of issues that have happened this year in the ways we judge incidents."

The heart of the issue, according to Sainz, is the erosion of the concept of a "racing incident." Under the current framework, incidents are almost invariably categorized as either unequivocally "white or black," leaving little room for the complex, grey areas inherent in wheel-to-wheel racing. "There’s been barely any room for racing incidents this year," he lamented. He cited examples where specific guideline clauses, such as those dictating "a tyre in front, or behind a mirror," force stewards to assign blame based on minute technicalities rather than the broader context of a racing maneuver. This mechanistic application, he believes, has led to a "not successful implementation of those guidelines," fundamentally altering how drivers race and how incidents are perceived.

Contextualizing the Debate: The Role of Stewarding and Driver Input in F1

Formula 1 stewarding has long been a subject of intense scrutiny and debate, given the high stakes and razor-thin margins that define the pinnacle of motorsport. The FIA’s judicial system typically involves a panel of stewards, which includes a rotating "driver steward" – a former F1 competitor whose role is to provide a racer’s perspective on incidents. However, Sainz’s proposal suggests this current structure, while a step in the right direction, may not be sufficient. His call for "two or three" ex-drivers implies a desire for a more dominant and consistent driver-centric influence within the stewarding body, moving beyond the current single, rotating role.

The Grand Prix Drivers’ Association (GPDA), where Sainz holds a director position, has historically served as a crucial advocacy group for drivers’ interests, particularly concerning safety and fairness in competition. Their input is vital in shaping the sport’s future regulations. Sainz’s public comments, backed by his role within the GPDA, indicate a widespread dissatisfaction among the current grid with the clarity and fairness of current penalty decisions. This is not merely a singular opinion but reflects a collective concern about the consistency and interpretation of the sporting regulations that govern their profession.

The expertise of broadcast analysts like Jolyon Palmer, Karun Chandhok, and Anthony Davidson is widely recognized. Palmer, a former F1 driver himself, is celebrated for his detailed technical breakdowns of incidents on F1 TV, often utilizing data and on-board footage to explain complex scenarios. Chandhok, also a former F1 driver and now a Sky F1 analyst, provides sharp, informed commentary, drawing on his extensive racing experience and technical understanding. Anthony Davidson, a former F1 driver and current Mercedes simulator driver, offers unparalleled insight into car behavior and driver intent. Their analyses, broadcast to millions globally, often resonate with both fans and, critically, the drivers themselves, precisely because they offer a nuanced, "racer’s eye" view that sometimes appears to diverge from the official rulings. This perceived disconnect between a widely accepted "racing opinion" and official decisions fuels Sainz’s argument for greater driver representation in the stewarding process.

The implications of Sainz’s proposal are far-reaching. Should the FIA embrace a system with a stronger, more permanent presence of ex-F1 drivers in stewarding, it could lead to several outcomes. Firstly, it might enhance the perceived legitimacy and consistency of penalty decisions, reducing driver frustration and improving fan understanding. Secondly, it could foster a more organic and adaptable approach to incident management, moving away from rigid rulebook interpretations towards a more holistic assessment of racing dynamics. This shift could potentially reintroduce the concept of "racing incidents" as a valid outcome, allowing for more aggressive yet fair wheel-to-wheel battles without immediate fear of penalty. However, implementing such a change would also require careful consideration of impartiality, potential conflicts of interest, and ensuring a robust, transparent framework for decision-making. The upcoming discussions between the drivers and the FIA will be instrumental in determining if F1 is prepared to evolve its judicial process in line with the direct experience of those who race at its highest level.

💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook

Author Profile

Jonas Leo: Jonas Leo is a passionate motorsport journalist and lifelong Formula 1 enthusiast. With a sharp eye for race strategy and driver performance, he brings readers closer to the world of Grand Prix racing through in-depth analysis, breaking news, and exclusive paddock insights. Jonas has covered everything from preseason testing to dramatic title deciders, capturing the emotion and precision that define modern F1. When he’s not tracking lap times or pit stop tactics, he enjoys exploring classic racing archives and writing about the evolution of F1 technology.