Max Verstappen cut short his post-race interview and refused to discuss the penalty which potentially cost him victory in the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix.
The Red Bull driver was given a five-second time penalty for overtaking Oscar Piastri off the track on the first lap of the race.However the stewards later confirmed he could have been penalised twice as severely.
Verstappen and Piastri shared the front row, the Red Bull driver ahead, but Piastri got away more quickly and drew ahead of his rival as they approached the first corner. While Piastri used the full width of the track at the exit, Verstappen went off and rejoined the track ahead of his rival.
“He needs to give that back,” said Piastri immediately afterwards. “I was ahead.”
Verstappen claimed Piastri “forced me off” and had “no intention of making that corner.” The McLaren driver accused his rival of the same: “He was never going to make that corner regardless of whether I was there or not.”
The stewards came down on Piastri’s side, handing Verstappen a five-second time penalty. “Well that is very lovely,” he remarked when told by race engineer Gianpiero Lambiase, who urged him: “No comment.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Verstappen was further displeased to be told his off-track excursion had been counted against him. “I thought they wouldn’t count that,” he said. “They literally said that in the briefing.”
He was still unhappy when the race came to an end and refused to discuss the grand prix when asked for his comments for the television broadcast by David Coulthard.
“I’m going to keep it quite short,” he said. “I just want to say a big thank you to the fans here in Jeddah. It’s been a great weekend, I love the track and yeah, the rest is what it is. I’m looking forward to Miami, so I’ll see you there.”
Verstappen, who has criticised the FIA for clamping down on drivers swearing, claimed later he is not allowed to give his point of view on the incident. “I think it’s better we don’t talk about it because we are anyway not allowed to express our opinions on that,” he told the official F1 channel.
The stewards pointed out that ordinarily a driver in Verstappen’s position would have been given a 10-second penalty, but his was reduced because the incident occured at the start.
“The stewards reviewed positioning/marshalling system data, video, timing, telemetry and in-car video evidence and determined that car 81 [Piastri] had its front axle at least alongside the mirror of car one [Verstappen] prior to and at the apex of corner one when trying to overtake car one on the inside,” they explained. “In fact, car 81 was alongside car one at the apex.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
“Based on the [Drivers’] Standards Guidelines, it was therefore car 81’s corner and he was entitled to be given room.
“Car one then left the track and gained a lasting advantage that was not given back. He stayed in front of car 81 and sought to build on the advantage.
“Ordinarily, the baseline penalty for leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage is 10 seconds. However, given that this was lap one and turn one incident, we considered that to be a mitigating circumstance and imposed a five-second time penalty instead.”
Liam Lawson was given a 10-second penalty for leaving the track and gaining an advantage at the same corner later in the race. The stewards said he failed to make the corner because he went in too fast.
“While he completed the overtake before turn one, the speed that he carried into the turn meant that he could not navigate turn one without leaving the track. He therefore could not successfully overtake car seven [Doohan] without leaving the track and thereby gained a lasting advantage which he did not give back. “The standard penalty of 10 seconds was therefore applied.”
Pictures: Verstappen passing Piastri off-track on lap one
You say
Were Verstappen and Doohan’s time penalties for gaining a position off the track correct? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.
Max Verstappen's five-second penalty for his first-lap incident with Oscar Piastri was:
- No opinion (1%)
- Far too lenient (17%)
- Slightly too lenient (34%)
- Correct (39%)
- Slightly too harsh (4%)
- Far too harsh (4%)
Total Voters: 163
Loading ...Liam Lawson's 10-second time penalty for his incident with Jack Doohan was:
- No opinion (2%)
- Far too lenient (1%)
- Slightly too lenient (0%)
- Correct (57%)
- Slightly too harsh (24%)
- Far too harsh (15%)
Total Voters: 94
Loading ...A RaceFans account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed instead of the voting form.
Miss nothing from RaceFans
Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2025 Saudi Arabian Grand Prix
- Red Bull made tactical decision not to avoid a penalty in Jeddah, Horner confirms
- Norris’s starts were far poorer than Verstappen’s but the balance is shifting
- McLaren’s rivals “just one upgrade away from being the lead car” – Brown
- Russell told race control what he thought of Verstappen’s first lap corner cut
- Doohan’s final corner pass on Bortoleto was F1’s closest fight for last place in seven years
Jere (@jerejj)
20th April 2025, 19:45
He didn’t ‘walk away’ per se, but while the penalty itself proved correct in the end, I still think a direct swap at the earliest possible opportunity would be the fairest approach by race control.
BasCB (@bascb)
20th April 2025, 19:45
That is why they raised it to 10 seconds for everyone else on the grid, to make sure giving back the place is the better choice.
Edvaldo
20th April 2025, 20:01
It was so blatant that race direction probably gave them the penalty based on the fact that they were waiting to see if they would be told to give the position or not.
Kimi did exactly the same and gave the position on the spot, but Max tried to exploit the system again. It was a good call.
And they better install some bump on that space because it has happened way too many times already.
Jere (@jerejj)
20th April 2025, 21:19
Edvaldo I couldn’t agree more & the questionable thing is that, for example, Lawson barely even went over the wide line with full car width & he definitely didn’t manage to maintain position thanks to that marginality, i.e., he would’ve remained ahead of Doohan even with a tighter turning angle.
A bump, extra techpro portion, basically anything that would prevent blatant corner-cutting since this has clearly been an issue at T2 ever since the inaugural race, yet FIA doesn’t bother to change anything at that corner, or even go as far as effectively eliminating T2 altogether.
Lee1
20th April 2025, 20:23
I agree. I think the penalty should simply be that you have to drop behind the driver or drivers you overtook off track. If that means you have to wait around for 40 seconds then that is what you need to do. That would make it better to give the place straight back rather than attempt to pull enough gap so that you can nullify the penalty. After all verstappen had a huge advantage of having clean air for a large number of laps that really should have been piastris…
LosD (@losd)
20th April 2025, 20:59
That would mean that drivers just tries it, instead of being sensible.
He wasted the steward’s time, and possibly held Piastri back from advancing by keeping in front, or at least made sure that Piastri’s tires had a much rougher time. 5 seconds is fair, but so would 10 have been.
LosD (@losd)
20th April 2025, 21:00
Oh, I misread your reasoning. That could be true, but then they need to react much, much faster.
AlanD
21st April 2025, 0:45
Lee, I remember a time when doing that was an automatic time penalty, no option, possibly a drive through penalty, I cannot remember now. But I remember a race where I think it was Hakkinen who cut a corner to pass, and then slowed to give the place back, and the commentator, possibly Brundle, commented on how clever that was, that “he might get away with that”. Gradually that became the norm, that if a driver gave the place back before the stewards had the chance to penalise them, they could get away with it on the basis of no advantage gained. I’m not sure when it changed to drivers taking three laps to discuss it with their race engineer and deciding whether or not to take the penalty or keep the advantage. I’d like to see it go back to drivers only being able to escape the penalty if they gave up any advantage immediately, and I’d like the penalty to be an immediate drive through. It should not be possible to gain any advantage at all by making an illegal overtake.
Ferdi
23rd April 2025, 7:07
I changed my opinion on this one after seeing multiple angles. Oscar should have gotten a penalty for forcing another car off the track. It is clear over 7 sets of racing cars behind Max and Oscar perfectly fine make the corners side by side. The anti Max stewarding is really getting ridiculously childish at this stage. These guys do not even have to take the decision in the heat of the moment. It is a disgrace for a sport that labels itself the pinnacle.
BasCB (@bascb)
20th April 2025, 19:45
It should have just been the same 10 seconds everyone else gets. Now it paid off for them to stay ahead given the benefit of running in fresh air. Had they dropped behind Piastri there, Max would have been the one whose tyres gave up first and might have ended up behind Leclerc (or risk an undercut to try and get back ahead) and potentially be at risk even from Norris.
Ben
20th April 2025, 20:17
+1
Penalties need to be way more harsh. It’s the same situation last week where Norris made 2 places by false starting. The advantage almost makes up for the penalty. Teams and drivers shouldn’t be in a position to come close to gaining from cheating. Make those penalties 30 seconds or drive throughs and this nonsense stops the next race. No way Max cuts the corner if he thinks there’s the risk of an actual penalty.
AlanD
21st April 2025, 0:28
Ben “Penalties need to be way more harsh. It’s the same situation last week where Norris made 2 places by false starting.”
Ben, no, last week Norris was a couple of centimeters too far forward from his start position. He didn’t jump the start. He didn’t make up any places at all as a result of that tiny advantage. It didn’t affect anyone around him. Whilst many penalties do need to be more consquential, I think the time penalty Norris incurred last week was harsh enough for the error he made.
Osnola
21st April 2025, 9:09
Well he moved before the start. Normally thats a jump start.
AlanD
21st April 2025, 18:30
Osnola, I agree it was classed as a jump start, I agree with him receiving a penalty, what I am disputing is that “he made up two places as a result”. No way did he gain any advantage from his error. I thought Norris’s penalty was already harsh enough for a no-benefit technical error on his part, and equating it to Max gaining a place and clean air by cuttin a corner is invalid.
Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
20th April 2025, 23:46
Yeah, that unwritten rule about “incidents at the start are treated differently” needs to go. This was 1v1, not a multicar incident.
I still believe they should either impose a more severe penalty or just go with the more obvious give the place back. Because depending on how the playing field is, even a 10 second penalty is easily recoverable.
Carsten Nielsen (@carstenb)
20th April 2025, 19:46
A slam dunk penalty, whether it should be 5 or 10 seconds could be discussed. Voted correct
Nm
20th April 2025, 21:45
Just as it was a slamdunk penalty in Ad21 for hamilton, bit somehow the rules always bend.
Sham (@sham)
20th April 2025, 22:14
Whataboutism at its finest. In the same season both drivers got away with a lot, because the FIA had a ‘let them race’ policy that allowed first Verstappen to bend the rules and then Hamilton to be forced to be just as unyielding to stay in the championship. But it was 4 years ago.
Things are different now, with incidents usually dealt with in a much fairer way.
I’m happy to see the Verstappen defence attract a penalty for a change – it was clear that he just ran himself out of road, rather than yield, in the hope that it would be treated as it always had in the past – he was wrong. I hope that such ‘racing’ is consigned to the history books – it should never have been allowed in the first place.
James
20th April 2025, 22:21
Correct decision
Jim from US (@jimfromus)
21st April 2025, 0:20
And you probably think no penalty in Brazil that year was fine. Max was 10 meters or more off the track forcing Hamilton even farther out. No penalty at all.
Osnola
21st April 2025, 9:10
Both drivers off track…
SteveP
21st April 2025, 9:53
Reading comprehension issues:
“Max was 10 meters or more off the track forcing Hamilton even farther out.”
Craig
21st April 2025, 9:19
It was a slam dunk penalty for Verstappen forcing another driver off track, same with Brazil. I had a feeling people would bring this false equivalence up which they deliberately twisted when they knew they couldn’t defend Verstappen again.
Johnny
20th April 2025, 19:46
We’ll see a lot more of 2021 Verstappen this year. Thankfully the stewards aren’t having it.
Roger Ayles (@roger-ayles)
20th April 2025, 19:48
It was probably the correct call but I still really wish that race control would simply go back to instructing drivers to swap places rather than handing out time penalties.
With the time penalties half the time if the car been penalised has built a gap the penalty end up been meaningless but then you also have cases like today where the penalty kinda ended up neutering the race as it took away a proper fight for the lead as well as any real interest over the pit strategies.
In basically every other category now race control can talk directly to the teams and drivers and in situations like this they just say ‘give the place back’ which is just a far better way of dealing with these things imo.
And of course if there was something like a strip of gravel or something in the runoff you wouldn’t have drivers almost been encouraged to open up the steering a bit to cut the corner to begin with.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
20th April 2025, 20:44
The track limits is the heart of the problem. They’ve solved that at many other circuits with gravel, grass, rejoin routs and so on. Time to put a fix in place here.
Ferdi
23rd April 2025, 7:30
Although I am in general in favour of this, it will need proper stewarding firstly, to actually work. Taking the most recent example and then taking the angle Oscar was at fault*, it would then mean it wouldn’t just not punish Piastri for forcing another car off track, but on top of that also end Max’ race. So, gravel trap or not the stewarding needs to be brought to an acceptable level first.
* there is actually something to say for this as behind Max and Oscar about 7 sets of cars made it perfectly fine side by side through that corner (I am sure not all 7 sets were clear on who was ahead at what moment). That requires the ones on the inside to take a sharper angle in the first corner to allow a cars width (they all had the intent to make it together through the corner). Clearly Oscar didn’t feel the need to do that. At the bare minimum it was a disputable situation, especially when looking at footage of various angles going into the corner.
F1 in Figures (@f1infigures)
20th April 2025, 21:21
They actually did this back in 2021, or more accurately, the stewards basically said: give back the place or you’ll get a penalty. That time, he decided to give the place back.
DMC
20th April 2025, 19:50
This says more to me than the penalty. Max has realised he has a real threat in Hakkinen 2.0
Ferdi
23rd April 2025, 9:18
I think the real threat to Max is the stewards.
Gerrit
20th April 2025, 19:55
Verstappen a 5 second penalty Lawson a 10 second penalty for the same offense. Verstappen favouratism again?
Duncan
20th April 2025, 20:49
Yet Lando had a wheel over the pit lane exit line (rules state the outer edge of the tyre cannot be over the line) and was given no penalty 🤔….McLaren favouritism?
Nm
20th April 2025, 21:47
He could even start a race on its own with Marshall on track without getting a penalty.
Gerrit
20th April 2025, 23:01
No, for the world feed only showed Norris touching the white line. The feed never showed all the other drivers touching that white line and not getting time penalties. To issue one to Norris when not having issued to any other driver would be patently unfair hence the no penalty call. The world feed don’t show everything the stewards see. Mind you the top teams can infringe with no (or in Verstappen’s case a lesser) penalty call, any lesser team is fair game. Unfortunately there are no rights to a recall, decisions stand rightly or wrongly.
Osnola
21st April 2025, 9:12
On the feed you could see the frontwheel completely on the line. The rear is wider..so draw your conclusion.
Jere (@jerejj)
20th April 2025, 21:21
Ikr, especially considering that Lawson barely even went over the wide line with full car width & therefore, he definitely didn’t manage to remain ahead of Doohan thanks to that marginality.
Patrick (@anunaki)
20th April 2025, 19:59
These penalties take away some of the fun.
Turn one incident. It was so close at the apex. Max was actually ahead but he didn’t make the corner. There also wasn’t any room left by Piastri. What rule has priority?
Also these rules are not enforced consistently.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 20:01
“Max was actually ahead” – except he wasn’t while he was on track, only when he took the shortcut. But in Max World, that’s enough.
Patrick (@anunaki)
20th April 2025, 20:05
They a just showed on viaplay and he was slightly ahead at the apex.
Edvaldo
20th April 2025, 20:10
He was ahead because he didn’t brake as much to take the corner, he went straight for the run-off area, of course he would be ahead.
Patrick (@anunaki)
20th April 2025, 20:13
Well there was no room on track left by Piastri
You understand why these rules suck?
Edvaldo
20th April 2025, 20:21
Mate, the move was done. Imagine there was a patch of grass or gravel there, what do you think Max would’ve done? He would be obliged to yield, or he would hit Piastri right in the middle of his car.
Drivers take avoiding action ALL THE TIME, it has nothing to do with the rules.
He went to the runoff not because he was out of space, but because he tried to imply he was pushed out so as to avoid losing position and not be told to give it back. That’s crystal clear. Max is extremely smart, knows the rules and how to exploit its flaws. Today he got caught.
anon
20th April 2025, 20:57
So, the media organisation that signed a deal with Max for exclusive media deals with Max that partially paid for the deal by giving him shares in the channel is taking a pro-Max view?
Chris (@austin-healey)
20th April 2025, 20:23
Max wasn’t ahead at the Apex.
He was only ahead when he stopped braking, and drove straight ahead.
That’s Max’s strategy.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 20:47
@anunaki) He’s clearly, visibly, demonstrably behind at the apex to the first corner. Piastri had the position and the racing line. Please stop inventing your own reality.
Osnola
21st April 2025, 9:15
Nope. You are looking at only one view point. He was alongside pia so pia should have reacted. But still: just a racing incident first corner first lap.
Messy rules
Jere (@jerejj)
20th April 2025, 21:22
@anunaki Getting forced off doesn’t give a right to gain an advantage outside track limits anyway.
Ferdi
22nd April 2025, 7:55
I agree, but that level of relativism you won’t find on this forum. I have looked at various angles of the incident and Piastri wasn’t in the lead in all of those different angles. So at the bare minimum it was up for debate. But the supposedly pinnacle of Motorsport doesn’t have the pinnacle of stewarding. That has been known for many years and is a real shame.
The scripting of race outcomes has reached some serious levels since Liberty took over. And it works (for them). Look at all the new transient fans Liberty gets its revenue from and takes them like a real-time soap opera via the media and Netflix in a race to the bottom of our society. The comments in here are a testament to that.
Mark (@mrcento)
20th April 2025, 20:04
For me it’s a fair penalty (if it’s consistently applied, which is another matter in itself).
Piastri has the corner, is just ahead at the apex, tries to give racing room whilst Max tries to hang it around the outside, The door naturally closes and Max does the right thing and bails out of the corner, BUT where the issue is, is having done that, he just nails the throttle, effectively takes P1 back and pulls out about a half second gap having went into the corner in P2. So an advantage off the track.
Had he eased off and at very least let Oscar back level and or even through right away, then he probably avoids the penalty. He doesn’t. It’s a slam dunk 5 seconds.
Patrick (@anunaki)
20th April 2025, 20:07
They just showed a still on viaplay where max was ahead at the apex
Addme (@dontme)
20th April 2025, 20:14
The first corner was clearly Piastri’s corner. Max didn’t back off and overtook outside of track limits. I think people are to focussed on the apex and don’t look at the big picture. If you brake really late, you often hit the apex first, but can’t make the corner.
Patrick (@anunaki)
20th April 2025, 20:15
I’m not focused on the apex. The rules are. Literally
Addme (@dontme)
20th April 2025, 20:25
Clearly not, cause Max got a penalty
Mark (@mrcento)
20th April 2025, 20:18
If so, stills can be deceptive. He isn’t ahead at the apex. Piastri is ahead on the way in, all the way to the apex (so has the corner), They only even get level just after the apex. At no point where it matters is Max ahead, The ONLY point Max gets ahead is where he bails out and nails it across the run off.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 20:55
@mrcento 100%. I agree with your reading entirely. It was fair for Verstappen to have a go but he wasn’t ahead, didn’t have the racing line, passed off track and should have returned the position.
He didn’t because he knows that having the race lead advantage matters more and even if he eventually gets a penalty and loses out to Piastri, it’ll be worth it for the time advantage gained over everyone else. It’s not the first or even second time he’s done this, taken the 5 second penalty and the team has strategized his way out of it. Which is why it should be 10 seconds at least for not returning the place when adjudged to have gained a position off track and not returning the place. What bit of this don’t supposed ‘racing stewards’ not get? It’s obvious to everyone that the 5 second penalty is seen as better than returning the place. Just frustrating that every single year we’re back to discussing how (deliberately?) inept the FIA stewards are when it comes to penalizing Verstappen for the obvious.
Mark Z.
20th April 2025, 21:17
I’ve watched the replay back from both Piastri’s and Verstappen’s onboards. My conclusion is that Verstappen was ahead at the apex. It doesn’t look like it from Piastri’s onboard due to the perspective of the camera lens. But comparing the two, Verstappen was clearly ahead.
Having said that, being ahead at the apex is not a licence to shortcut the course and advance position. The situation is unfortunate and we’d be better off with a better track design and penalty structure. If I were writing and enforcing the regs, I would order Verstappen to give the position back and assess Piastri a 5-second penalty for not leaving room.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 21:47
How can onboards accurately tell you who is ahead at the apex? Ideally you need an overhead directly above the corner or a camera more or less pointed at 90 degrees to the apex, which is essentially what the race coverage shows – and, as the stewards with all their data confirmed, Piasti was ahead.
Mark Z.
21st April 2025, 4:55
@david-br The angle on the broadcast was nowhere near 90° to the apex, though, and the skewed perspective flattered Piastri. With the onboard cameras mounted in the same position, you can at least compare reference points across feeds. Looking at Piastri’s onboard, it’s not clear to me who’s ahead. On Verstappen’s onboard, at the same moment, he’s clearly ahead, with his wheels beyond the respective reference points on his car from Piastri’s onboard. But again, that’s no license to shortcut and gain positions.
By the way, the stewards did not conclude that Piastri was ahead of Verstappen. They weren’t even interested in that question — they were concerned with whether Piastri had “his front axle at least alongside the mirror of Car 1,” which was obviously true. They did note he was “alongside” at the apex (not ahead), but they invoked the Driving Standards Guidelines and said that Piastri “was entitled to be given room.” That means Piastri fulfilled the “have a significant portion of the car alongside the car being overtaken” requirement and that Verstappen could not close the door on Piastri, not that Piastri was allowed to run Verstappen off the track.
The real question is whether Verstappen could have made the corner, which I find unlikely. (And in that case, I retract my previous statement about assessing Piastri a time penalty!) But apparently the stewards did not feel certain enough about that conclusion to include it in their reasoning in the published decision.
I do think your question about onboards is a fair one. From the published rulings over the years, particularly on track limits, it’s clear that in many cases the stewards “with all their data” are simply relying on the same on-board cameras we see. Since the FIA’s positioning data is not deemed reliable enough for the purpose of determining track limits violations, I don’t see how it can be relied upon to determine who is ahead at the apex. And if the FIA do have cameras such as you suggest — overhead or at the apex — they should publish the images from them. And if not, if they want to persist with this approach, they should put those cameras there. We have goal-line cameras for VAR, so why not a stationary camera or timing strip at the apex of every corner that can be shown on the broadcast?
Jolyon Direnko-Smith
20th April 2025, 21:27
I don’t know which race you were watching, but the one I saw had Piastri almost leaving the circuit as well. The idea that this constitutes ‘(trying) to give racing room’ is absurd. Piastri almost ran himself out of room, let alone leaving any for anyone else.
Had he gone just a few cms deeper then both would have ‘left the track’ and no penalty would have applied, which strongly suggests this was a deliberate ploy by Piastri, knowing he would get MV pinged.
Had he actually left room, MV would have retained the place.
Still, MV would have done the same were the positions reversed; all just part of modern F1 (sadly).
But let’s not kid ourselves that the rule are fair in corners like that or that any driver is giving away any more advantage than they absolutely have to to exploit those rules.
slowmo (@slowmo)
20th April 2025, 23:29
There was zero chance Verstappen could make the turn 2 apex, he was going too fast. The leave them room rule no longer applies, it’s all about who owns the corner which were rules made up to accommodate Verstappens racing. He should have got a 10 second penalty.
Edvaldo
21st April 2025, 1:11
Watch onboard footage on this track and see how’s the racing line. There’s no “leaving a space” in that corner from the position he was.
Piastri had a better start, arriving at the corner slightly earlier, and Max stayed with him even though he would be pushed out of space because that’s how the corner is. When he realized that, he went for the run-off area, fine, avoiding action, but then he didn’t let Piastri by.
Had they touched there, it would be a racing incident, not Piastri’s fault for not leaving a space.
jamt
20th April 2025, 20:08
As usual, a poor circuit layout ends in stewards taking controversial decisions.
Patrick (@paeschli)
20th April 2025, 20:31
This is not controversial in the slightest. Max should have given the place back, stewards applied a penalty which would achieve the same result.
There really is nothing to talk about, but that won’t stop this article from getting 100 comments.
ajay
20th April 2025, 20:31
well… a race that could have been won on driver capability missed due to arrogance and the urge to game the system.
max with his experience and bulldog attitude could have easily taken over the race lead during the race without 5 sec penalty. missed opportunity. this is where horner and co should have stepped in, instead they encourage this behavior
reggie747
20th April 2025, 21:11
They don’t encourage it, the tail wags the dog at Red Bull.
Nulla Pax (@nullapax)
20th April 2025, 20:44
A 5 second penalty for anything is a joke.
These teams have dozens of people working in real time to re-calculate strategies.
Max cheated, and was then allowed free air in the lead whilst his crew fixed the problem.
Steal something – give it back.
Applebook
21st April 2025, 0:13
He was actually smart not to give back the place had he known that it was going to be only 5 seconds, but the standard penalty is actually 10 seconds, and that would have been too punitive. It’s nuts, but he genuinely believed that he was in the right, even claiming that Oscar “was never going to make the corner,” even though he did. Insane.
Esmiz (@esmiz)
20th April 2025, 20:52
Racetracks should have something (grass, gravel, sand…) that make the drivers not to gain a clear advantage cutting the corner. This is the real problem. Inconsistency in penalties is other. Why 5 seconds? Why not 10? Why not 20? It seems like they decide with a dice. I think that for the future FIA has to look after these runoff areas in all circuits (fortunately it seems like in some they have made good changes) and put something here to eliminate the possibility of things like the one from today. Bollards can be a solution too, like we saw in Miami last year. Something. And in the other hand, a clear penalty system based on what happened and not what is the humour of the steward in charge this race (for example: yu overtake out of track: 20 seconds, you maintain position: 10 seconds, you gain time but is not in a fight: 5 seconds… is only an example, the penalties can be others… ¡but mark clearly what is the penalty for each fault!
AlanD
21st April 2025, 1:07
Esmi: “put something here to eliminate the possibility”
I think they could very easily put a sensor strip there. If your transponder goes over the sensor strip, immediate mechanical penalty, e.g the ICU disables top gear for a lap, or a rev limiter kicks in for a period, or something like that. It wouldn’t end a drivers race in the way that an armco barrier would but it would be a significant disadvantage, and it would be out of the hands of both the stewards and the drivers.
Kris
20th April 2025, 20:58
It’s nice to see RB lose out from trying to game the rules.
They could and should have given the place back which would have left Max directly behind Piastri and then they could have continued racing and potentially undercut during the stops.
By letting it go to the stewards they handed the upper hand to McLaren to control the strategy.
Applebook
21st April 2025, 0:15
I don’t think that they lost out. Had he given back the position, he would have had to battle Leclerc at the end. Having that clear air during his first stint was worth the 5 seconds. It should have been 10 seconds, as it was a slam dunk penalty.
Yes (@come-on-kubica)
20th April 2025, 21:10
I’d prefer the end of 5 or 10 second penalties and return of drive throughs. Max lost one position in the race – Limited punishment in the grand scheme of things.
Pjotr (@pietkoster)
20th April 2025, 21:32
We are talking about Verstappen, he was angry for the 5 seconds he got for leaving the track was not what was told in the drivers breefing for leaving the track in lap one. Otherwise he would have given the position back. So he was framed.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 21:34
Hilarious. ‘Framed’ for the driver who was literally handed his first championship by the race director. What a victim.
David BR (@david-br)
20th April 2025, 21:32
So congratulations to the stewards for perceiving the totally obvious and giving a penalty. But:
This is just wrong. ‘First lap’ and ‘turn one incident’ apply when there is a lot of confusion, multiple overtakes, drivers unclear of where other drivers are and so on. If you’re having to calculate, say, four cars into the first corner together then, sure, some leniency may be applicable given that the dynamics of the situation may be beyond reasonable calculation even for a Formula 1 driver. But Verstappen wasn’t in any confused situation: he had control of the car, only had one driver, Piastri, near him and in his sights, and didn’t miscalculate anything. 10 second penalty minimum.
SuperIU
20th April 2025, 21:49
Inthink it was correct sanction, but I think that all tracks must be design to penalized on track if you did not make the corner, like in Monza, and its more ridiculoua to have thay escape on a street circuit like Jedah. (Monza or Baku cannot be done). Utimetlly all drivers wants to gain ad advantange on some circuits like this one or Abi-Dabhi.
Put gravel , barriers or something on that escape would penalized the driver on track instead onleaving the decision to the stewards
slowmo (@slowmo)
20th April 2025, 23:34
Another joke no penalty by the stewards for a first lap incident. I absolutely agree though that race control or stewards shouldn’t be making them switch back. If teams want to try and take their chance on these incidents then the stewards should apply the most severe penalty for the infringement if teams make them waste time ruling on them. A lot less teams would risk a cheap 5s penalty that way and race fairer.
Applebook
21st April 2025, 0:18
I think that 10 seconds is fine. If you can overcome a 10 second penalty, then your car is so dominant that you probably don’t need to overtake off the track anyway…except in Monaco. 5 seconds is almost pointless though on a track like this.
MichaelN
20th April 2025, 23:39
I just don’t see how this is a penalty under the rules. The actual rules. Not some “guidelines”. Piastri made all of zero effort to leave space and thus forced Verstappen off. Indeed, he nearly went wide himself.
Also, it’s a horribly designed first corner. It’s like those old Need for Speed tracks with the super obvious shortcut that the bots never take.
Applebook
21st April 2025, 0:21
Oscar was on the racing line at the apex and made the corner. The other guy was never on the racing line, was always behind, and drove off the track. I’m going to take a wild guess and assume which driver you just want to win at any cost. No one who knows racing, except Max or RB, would dispute that this was against the rules. Your boy was gifted a lenient penalty.
MichaelN
21st April 2025, 7:55
There is nothing in the rules about lines, apexes and whatnot. That’s all from the guidelines, the validity of which is doubtful when it directly contradicts the Code.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
21st April 2025, 8:11
The “actual rules” state that one cannot leave the track and gain and advantage, nor force anyone off. The guidelines are there to indicate when one becomes the other, because it turns out the distinction is way too long to put in the literal regulations (and even a heavily-truncated version, attempted in 2023, confused more than it enlightened).
PS
21st April 2025, 0:20
Oscar did not leave racing room into turn 2, this cannot be debated. This is with Max alongside him in T1 and throughout into the entry of T2. Max just needed to give the position back, just by a nose, the width of the front wing, and only momentarily, and attempt to retake it. If he had immediately done this (let Oscar alongside again), I think it would have been judged as a first lap thingy and let go. The mistake Max made was taking the position off track limits and holding the position.
Jim from US (@jimfromus)
21st April 2025, 0:25
I think the stewards were obligated to give Max the penalty when he said that PIA made a move and was never going to make the corner when the video clearly shows PIA making the corner just fine.
Mooa42
21st April 2025, 0:53
I agree, Piastri making the corner was what won him the race, I think Max was angry because he assumed Piastri didn’t make the corner either.
Piastri’s approach is the only way to deal with this strategy from Max, most would have bottled it. I am sure the stewards could see all the data and could tell even if Piastri wasn’t there, Max wasn’t going to make the corner.
Well done Oscar!
Tommy C (@tommy-c)
21st April 2025, 1:56
I think Piastri is going to be quite a different beast for Max. I can’t see any emotional outbursts or retaliatory action from him and Max’s usual tactics won’t work so effectively. His demeanour and attitude in the post-race interview shows he’s already losing the mental battle.
MichaelN
21st April 2025, 8:01
This is what has been so frustrating in recent years. People have rolled over for Verstappen way too easily. He has already shown he is more than willing to drive people off, even have a tangle. Anything sort of that won’t impress him. Part of this is the stewards’ fault, of course, but the drivers have a role to play as well.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
21st April 2025, 8:09
@tommy-c What mental battle? What you were seeing was Max vs the FIA. Oscar isn’t trying to play any sort of mind game (sensible of him, given that this generation of drivers tends to be strong mentally, in a sense that the drivers of previous decades were not).
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
21st April 2025, 8:07
It would have been hard for the stewards to have found a worse way of handling this.
Lap one of a stint is the time when doing an illegitimate overtake has the greatest results. A 20-lap stint (and remember, some people did more than that on their medium start tyre) only requires 0.251 seconds’ advantage per lap to fully cancel out the standard 10-second penalty. This is easily gained – an extra lap worth of tyre life can be worth that much time on its own, let alone any other benefits of running in clean air. In an optimal situation (taking the lead, not getting even a distant disruption from the next DRS train down the road, not having to worry about DRS response and thus being able to condition tyres and temperatures for a few corners before pressing on, not having to even think about the possibility of needing a plan B if the pass doesn’t work…) the first lap of the race probably gains a whole second of advantage, followed by half a second on subsequent ones in that stint.
At the beginning of the race, where drivers are closer together, even a second of accumulated advantage will get past 1 car other than the car that was passed, because in the early race the entire grid is typically separated by fewer seconds than there are undamaged cars remaining in the queue. That is a significant amount of advantage that isn’t getting cancelled out by the standard penalty, let alone a discount.
Skipping a chicane later in the stint means that less advantage can be gained before the penalty is taken. Cars are also further away from each other, so there’s less chance of gaining multiple places from such a move. That means it is likely the only person who loses out from the move is the driver that was overtaken. If one is going to issue a discounted penalty, it would be reasonable to do so for occasions where it happens later in the stint, when there’s less time to press an advantage before the penalty must be taken.
However, if Verstappen was literally told there wouldn’t be a penalty for cutting the chicane at the drivers’ briefing, then the FIA has contradicted itself by issuing any penalty at all. After all, he wasn’t the only one who cut the chicane, and perhaps if the likes of Antonelli had gained a place by doing so on lap 1, they might not have given the place back due to such information either. The fact nobody else gained time on that corner on that lap makes it hard for an outsider to adjudge whether Verstappen is likely to have understood the situation correctly. It’s not like the drivers get any opportunity to check, thanks to the way the anti-dissent regulations work (getting clarification from an official depends on attracting their attention, and these days trying to do it the direct way doesn’t appear to work, otherwise the drivers’ briefing would have sufficed to clear this one up).
Drivers are meant to be able to trust the drivers’ briefing as the mechanism for interpreting the regulations. If drivers are coming away from it thinking that behaviour is allowed that in reality will get them penalties, the system has failed. Drivers will then not trust what FIA officials tell them, which means there will be more infractions – drivers who aren’t clear on what is allowed are apt to follow their instincts, and regulations are often designed to check those instincts.
It is not clear whether Verstappen should have been given a 10-second penalty or a pat on the back for paying attention to the drivers’ briefing. What is clear is that the stewards were wrong to try to split it down the middle. It makes it seem like the FIA’s regulations are negotiable in a manner that has nothing to do with the proper administration of a sporting event (even if the people who are regulated aren’t the ones who can engage in the negotiation).
BenjaminS (@benihana)
21st April 2025, 12:22
Get rid of the rules, change the runoff areas. Let them race! All this whining, discussion, analysis is just driving the interest on this drama away. Let us get back to this being a sport on track and not about radios, lines and tires ahead or behind debates.