Between the Racing Lines
Formula One is complicated, confusing and constantly evolving. This story is part of our guide to help any fan — regardless of how long they’ve watched the sport or how they discovered it — navigate the pinnacle of motorsports.
A Formula One talking point that rears its head each year is the complicated matter of racing rules.
Multiple times during the 2024 season, drivers have faced questions — and raised some of their own — about what is and is not allowed under the regulations when it comes to hard racing and overtaking. In recent years, Max Verstappen and his aggressive driving style have often been part of these conversations. “I mean it’s always been a gray area. That’s why he’s got away with it for so long,” Lewis Hamilton said in Mexico City on Thursday.
Take Austria, where Verstappen and Lando Norris collided after a late-race battle that ended in a dramatic collision and the Dutchman receiving a time penalty. Questions about moving under braking and racing lines emerged but soon faded as a championship battle began brewing.
But in Austin, what is or is not allowed with hard racing came back to the forefront after another Verstappen-Norris incident, one where it came down to who reached the apex first despite both cars exceeding track limits. The McLaren driver was initially deemed the one at fault for making the overtaking move off the track, but questions emerged about whether Verstappen should have been penalized as well.
As numerous drivers have indicated, FIA’s guidelines are murky at best, and creating a rulebook that accounts for every possible situation is hard. And then there’s the case of consistency from the stewards, a group of volunteers who rotate rather than serving every race for the entire season.
It’s a complex debate.
What the regulations state
A couple of rules outlined in the FIA’s International Sporting Code touch on how drivers should race each other and what the parameters are, including a ‘Code of Driving Conduct on Circuits.’
Appendix L, Chapter IV, Article 2 b) — which is included in the code of conduct — states, in part: “A driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason. More than one change of direction to defend a position is not permitted. Any driver moving back towards the racing line, having earlier defended his position off-line, should leave at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited.”
One key portion from that article is how there needs to be “at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track on the approach to the corner” for drivers who defended their race position off line and are moving back into the racing line. As noted by the stewards from the 2024 Austrian GP, video evidence showed Verstappen veering to the left heading into Turn 3 before turning into the corner, squeezing Norris on the outside.
“You’re supposed to give a driver a car’s width, and he didn’t,” McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown said the following week at the British Grand Prix. “And it’s unfortunate. It could have just been a small rub, and they both carried on.”
However, Verstappen got a 10-second penalty for breaching Appendix L, Chapter IV, Article 2 d), which covers causing a collision (among other infringements).
The racing rules debate surfaced again after the 2024 United States Grand Prix when Norris and Verstappen were involved in another late-race incident. Norris overtook the Red Bull on the outside, leaving the track and re-joining ahead of Verstappen. He received a five-second penalty, as a result. According to the stewards’ decision, Norris “was not level with Car 1 at the apex. Therefore, under the Driving Standards Guidelines, Car 4 had lost the “right” to the corner.”
When it comes to how drivers should battle each other, the regulations are a bit murkier. Later in Article 2, section e) reads: “It is not permitted to drive any car unnecessarily slowly, erratically or in a manner deemed potentially dangerous to other drivers at any time.” The regulations’ vagueness leaves the infringement decisions up to the stewards’ discretion, a panel of people who alternate throughout the season rather than a permanent set of judges.
Currently in the works is a set of Driving Standards Guidelines, which “covers a number of key topics, from driving standards to defending and overtaking manoeuvres, track limits, yellow flags, driver advisors and safety car re-start procedures.” The goal is to work towards consistency and fairness in decision-making, and the expectation is that the guidelines will be added to the International Sporting Code from 2025.
But should the rules be tightened?
As the seasons wear on, the rulebook grows thicker and thicker. Even Verstappen said, “I think we are getting to a stage where I almost need the book in the car. That’s how it is.”
But questions do sometimes arise, and clarity is needed.
Verstappen and Norris’ Austrian GP collision in July kicked off the debate about F1 racing etiquette. (SIPA USA)
One of the big talking points from the Austrian GP was Verstappen’s defensive driving and whether he moved under braking, something the Dutchman denied doing. His battles have come into question before, like the ones with Hamilton in 2021. In Austria, McLaren team principal Andrea Stella felt that if things aren’t properly addressed, then future incidents will “escalate.”
“This episode today should be taken as an opportunity to tighten up, to plump up the boundaries, and, in fairness, enforcing some of the rules that are already in place,” Stella said. “We need to be very clear that these rules cannot be abused in a way that then leaves a margin to do a couple of times the same maneuver, and you know the third time there is going to be an accident. Of course, even statistically, there is going to be an accident.”
Stella was right. Eight races later at the U.S. GP, racing rules were back in the headlines after another Norris-Verstappen incident. It begs the question — again — whether the guidelines need to be reviewed. Ferrari’s Carlos Sainz feels they should, so the drivers will know what will result in a penalty. For example, Charles Leclerc said he felt Oscar Piastri’s overtake on Saturday, which also resulted in a five-second penalty, didn’t deserve the punishment.
“I think if you read the rule by the book, the way the penalties are applied might be logical if you apply the rulebook,” Sainz said in Mexico City. “In the way that racing is, I feel like sometimes it’s a bit difficult to apply the rulebook exactly in that manner.”
Take Norris and Verstappen’s incident in Austin, for example. The Dutchman did have the lead at the apex, as noted by the stewards, but both went off track, neither making the corner and Norris on the outside of the Red Bull with no room within track limits. “It means the guy defending and on the inside can brake as late as you want and you can fake that fact that you’re trying to hit the apex when you’re maybe not,” Sainz said. “So that’s exactly one of the main points that we have to discuss.”
“If I remember correctly, the cars inside were ahead at the apex,” RB’s Yuki Tsunoda said. “The outside car shouldn’t come back off — or if the outside car (was) ahead of the inside car on the apex, he’s the guy who had priority. In that case, it’s better to just launch it into the apex, even if you go off-track, try to get priority and make the corner. It’s a bit different to what we’re trying to achieve in the corner and what (the stewards are) thinking, I think.”
“It’s hard to be aligned.”
Pierre Gasly feels one rule needs to be changed: who gets the priority at the apex. It can potentially lead to scenarios where a divebomb can be an advantageous move to get the “right” of the corner, essentially when the front axle is at the apex ahead of the other competitor — regardless of whether a driver can make the corner.
The Alpine driver elaborated. “But then you might create other problems that you end up having all cars off the racetrack. And whoever gets the priority doesn’t get penalized, et cetera. So I just think that specific rule, the way it’s written, I get it. That’s the way it is. And at the moment, we’ve got to respect it.
“Moving forward, this needs a change to allow us to have more fairness in the way we fight. So I think there is this really clear point in the regulation that needs updating.”
Or is this a stewards’ issue?
The rules’ application has become a consistency issue. The stewards are a rotating group analyzing the same guidelines each race weekend but potentially reaching different interpretations.
There have been permanent stewards before in F1. Unlike other professional sporting leagues, the current stewards are unpaid individuals who spend their time reviewing different infractions.
Former F1 driver Derek Warwick is one of the FIA stewards during the 2024 season (Clive Mason/Getty Images)
But given that it is not the same people who judge the regulations week in and week out, questions about consistency often arise, and the stewards occasionally fall under heavy criticism, despite the appreciation for the challenges of the job.
“The only way you can have consistency is if you have the same stewards at every single race weekend,” Mercedes’ George Russell said. “And at the moment, they are very experienced, but they are here as almost volunteers. It is not a professionally paid job, and if you look at football as an example, even though there is still controversy (with) a referee, they are professionals and that is their full-time job. That is where they make their income.
“As the sport we are at the moment, that’s probably the direction we should be heading.”
Asked whether he has concerns over the FIA’s operations and wants clarity for the future, Russell acknowledged the “difficult” balance of governing the rules with letting the racers race.
“You can argue that Max’s driving is not against the regulations. It’s just finding a bit of a loophole. But equally, the more complicated you make these regulations, the harder it is going to be for us to race and apply a little bit of common sense.”
“I just think you need to know intent of drivers, you need to understand their thought process and you can only really do that with people who have been drivers and understand racing because they’ve been in those positions,” Norris said. “And maybe some people who haven’t driven cars and haven’t raced, maybe they still understand those things.
“But it is a complicated thing.”
Racing on the limit
It raises the question of how one races Verstappen, someone incredibly tough to compete against.
“Max has always been on the limit of regulations, but that’s what makes racing Max so exciting,” Leclerc said in Mexico City. “And that’s also why I really like having those fights with him, is that you know that he will never let any room to you, and it will be always at the limit of the regulations. And that’s what makes those fights very exciting.
“Having said that, I feel like there are a few things maybe in Austin that I have seen that we maybe have to discuss with the FIA because I feel like the penalties were sometimes a little bit too harsh, and we’ve got to make sure that we are all aligned, the FIA and us drivers, in order to make sure that it’s clear what we can do and what we cannot do.”
Verstappen and Hamilton didn’t play nice in 2021 at Brazil. (Buda Mendes/Getty Images)
Sainz discussed Verstappen and Hamilton’s Brazil 2021 battle during his media session. Verstappen ran Hamilton off the track, missing the corner but staying ahead of the Mercedes driver. Sainz felt “that was almost quite clear that you have to stay within the track limits when you are defending.”
When looking at the Austin incident between Norris and Verstappen, both arguably could be at fault. Sainz noted Norris “overtook outside of the track,” which he said “is also not fair.” However, the Red Bull driver ran wide, which broke the rules.
“That’s why that specific scenario is a very complicated one to rule on.”
Russell also felt Verstappen should have been penalized but acknowledged that the Dutchman and Norris are fighting for the title, similar to Hamilton and Verstappen in 2021. Russell said that “if it was any other driver,” he’s not sure Verstappen would’ve made such a move.
“The same way in Brazil ’21, I don’t think he would have done the same maneuver if it was any other driver,” Russell said. “It was a bit do or die, and I think he’s quite happy to drive in that manner against your title rival, which for me, I totally understand.”
Hamilton, who acknowledged he’s “experienced it many times with Max,” felt the move was wrong. “You shouldn’t be able to just launch the car on the inside and be ahead and then you go off and still hold your position. So, they need to definitely work on this.”
Where do we go from here?
There are other solutions to this issue, such as including natural deterrents like at the exit of Turn 12 at Circuit of the Americas. Sainz said circuit modifications like that can help solve some scenarios. “I think if you put a gravel trap at the exit of Turn 12, Lando doesn’t think about braking so late and releasing the brake and happy to overtake around the outside because he will lose two seconds and get dirt on the tires by going round the outside. And Max will think twice about braking so late, risking going in the gravel himself.”
Regardless, as Russell noted during his media session in Mexico City, regulations are needed. It is a fine line to walk on whether the rulebooks are overdone.
“It is definitely over-regulated, but then I also, I can see the other point of if we take rules away, and then there is again an incident like, no, we need more rules, we need to be stronger on this,” Verstappen said. “It’s always the same thing, because in the past we had maybe some lesser rules, and then you have the same argument. No, we need to be stronger on this or that. It’s always the same story.”
Sainz was honest.“It’s very difficult to think about the guidelines when you’re about to perform an overtake and brake 20 meters later down the inside,” he said. While the drivers sit in the cockpit, they must navigate highly expensive cars with low visibility at speeds we (hopefully) don’t see on our everyday roads. They change gears and settings, trying to recall strategies they’ve reviewed. Their minds are constantly at work.
“You’re not thinking ‘Am I going to make it ahead to the apex, release the brake just to put my nose ahead so the steward at this race thinks I’m not at fault …’ Maybe some drivers do, but me, when I was in Austin going like hell to overtake people, I wasn’t thinking much about the guidelines,” Sainz continued. “I was trying to be aggressive, but fair — or what I consider to be fair — and hope that the stewards interpret my moves in a fair manner, because I’m always trying to be aggressive but fair.”
Fair but aggressive — that’s the fine line the drivers need to find. It’s a complicated situation, so it’s not entirely surprising that these gray-area incidents continue to arise. A world of options lay at the FIA and F1’s feet.
“I think there is the rule as it’s written,” Gasly said, “and there is more the common sense on how you want to approach racing.”
Additional reporting by Luke Smith.
(Top photo: ANGELA WEISS / AFP; Design: Meech Robinson/The Athletic)
