Oscar Piastri’s penalty in the Brazilian Grand Prix is further evidence of Formula 1 desperately needing revisions to the racing guidelines for next year, or a change in how they are applied.
What the guidelines say for 2025 about overtaking on the inside, and the overly prescribed way racing is now being monitored, means there can technically be no disputing Piastri was at fault for the collision with Kimi Antonelli that subsequently wiped out Charles Leclerc.
Applying the guidelines to the letter, and then seemingly the guidelines being definitive rather than treated as guidelines, gives the stewards little choice but to penalise Piastri because there is now a stringent demand on relative car positioning up to and through the apex of the corner.
Piastri, who was well within his rights to contest the corner, tried to back out of the move on the inside because Antonelli braked later then closed the space on the inside turning into the corner more tightly than was necessary given the space Leclerc was leaving on the outside.
However, the guidelines say that the car on the inside doesn’t need to be left space if they do not hold their front wheel at least level with the wing mirror of the car they are trying to overtake. So Piastri has, in essence, been punished for not barrelling in more, probably clobbering Antonelli in the process and taking out Leclerc anyway, just to claim a specific bit of track position by the apex.
This wholly two-dimensional approach to devising racing rules makes ‘who needs to do what, by where and when’ so tortured that shared accountability has gone out the window.
The racing guidelines were already flawed in their first form and the changes for 2025 have created new problems, which may have been avoided had some feedback known to have been given during the process of drafting them been taken onboard. Racing is being redefined in F1 as a dash for the apex, the high-risk move around the outside has been made even harder – and now it’s also clear the guidelines can absolve of blame a driver who pins another into the corner and clearly contributes to an accident.
Racing only works when there is a degree of mutual respect and accountability and consequence. Sometimes, because of how hard racing is and what is at stake especially in F1, there will be collisions. Racing incidents are, and should remain, a thing. And another point to stress here is I do not think Antonelli should have been penalised instead. Leclerc’s grievance is absolutely understandable and justified but he’s just the innocent victim of something that can happen in F1 – sometimes, racing isn’t fair.
In this case, at the restart, three drivers were racing hard and going three wide into a corner that is notoriously challenging and invites this kind of predicament – it’s the best overtaking spot and a big braking zone but the corner tightens at the apex and drops downhill. In this case there was maybe even a tiny little bit of dampness in places to factor in.
There was a good chance this would not end well without all three drivers playing ball and all three drivers have taken a degree of risk in what they are doing. Leclerc, passing on the outside, knew or would have a very good idea that there are likely two cars fighting and attacking the braking zone as well on the inside. He did nothing wrong and mitigated his risk more than any of the three, leaving loads of space – but there was still a small risk by virtue of trying to pass on the outside.
Piastri, who is in championship recovery mode and sensed his best chance yet to pass one or both cars together, was entitled to go for the move on the inside. He had a great run, got more than far enough alongside Antonelli to contest the braking zone, and stayed in control enough to not have done anything outlandish. Yes, there was a lock-up from Piastri but not one that actually lost him control of the car.
He was slowing down, tight to the inside, clearly capable of making the corner – the lock-up was a very visible consequence of trying to brake a little more in response to Antonelli closing the space off. To quote Jolyon Palmer during F1’s commentary: “It looks bad in the end for Piastri…it ultimately makes him look more guilty than he probably was in that.”
As for Antonelli, he tried to duke it out in the middle. Arguably, given his position in squeezing Piastri to the apex (permitted by the guidelines according to their relative positions) and not making the most of the space that existed to his right, Antonelli contributed the most to this incident. But had the hardest job of the three drivers and was in the worst place, which is a significant mitigating factor, even without caring about what the guidelines actually allow him to do. Punishing him would be wrong too.
It was an incident that did not need a punishment based on the general principles of racing, but the current F1 racing guidelines essentially demanded one. So, the penalty was ‘right’, for the wrong reasons, and actually quite easy to see coming once the replays determined the positions of the two cars.
Perhaps F1 and the FIA would benefit from acknowledging ‘we don’t want penalties in this situation’ and maybe even reverse engineering some guidelines from that if they are adamant they are needed. Or just scrap the guidelines altogether and use the basics of the International Sporting Code combined with a subjective ‘don’t be a t**t’ rule to reflect the fact that drivers race in different ways, with different levels of aggression.
There will also be different interpretations of whatever set of rules – formal or informal – racing is governed by. That is actually fine. Variety makes for a good spectacle, and mirrors reality. Not everybody’s wired the same, so you’re going to have to allow for different levels of aggression and different tolerances of decision-making within that.
Accepting subjectivity in the decision-making process could be a starting point for a solution but F1 and the FIA need to work from a better base, including investing more in professional full-time stewarding.
That is a long-term fix. Some short-term changes are also required, to move away from this sad version of F1 that has warped who has accountability, shifted the emphasis of racing wheel-to-wheel into the wrong places, and created new problems without really solving old ones.
