Is Johnny Herbert allowed to have an opinion on Formula 1 drivers if he’s acting as a steward? Should the FIA be more open about its stewarding decisions? Or should stewarding happen entirely behind closed doors, with no elaboration afterward?
In the F1 world, the ethics of stewarding and speaking to media has been one of the most hotly debated topics, as drivers and fans question where to draw the line on a welcome expression of personal opinion and an unwelcome expression of bias. But there’s one simple solution to the stewarding problem, at least as far as the media goes: Adopt NASCAR’s stance.
F1 needs NASCAR’s penalty clarification system
Last weekend at Martinsville, the NASCAR Cup Series world exploded with allegations of race manipulation. Eight drivers entered the race eligible to make the Championship 4 in the series’ eliminations-style title decider the following weekend in Phoenix, but four of those drivers were going to lose that opportunity at the checkered flag.
The high tension resulted in two of NASCAR’s manufacturers, Chevrolet and Toyota, issuing directives to drivers of different teams designed to prioritize the performance of its Championship-eligible drivers. It left a sour taste in the mouths of many fans, and NASCAR acknowledged that this is a problem it would have to address before the weekend.
On Tuesday evening, NASCAR made its decision and issued a formal document sharing that nine crew members had been suspended from the offending teams, and that those teams and drivers were also issued fines.
Then, NASCAR’s senior vice president of competition, Elton Sawyer, spoke to media.
“We felt like we wanted to ramp this one up, and we did,” Sawyer said of the penalties, as reported in RACER.
Sawyer went on to note that NASCAR’s responsibility as a sanctioning body is to create fair racing, but that the Cup Series’ current ruleset does not include any explicit stipulations about manufacturer behavior, or about what penalties those manufacturers could receive for violating the series’ code of ethics. It’s an issue that Sawyer promised would be addressed in the off-season.
I won’t claim that NASCAR’s penalty system is always easy to understand, or that the application of penalties is always clear to fans of stock car racing, or that every penalty is explained — but having Sawyer issue further clarification about potential decisions goes a long way in shedding light on a complex process.
Dig deeper into Formula 1 penalties:
👉 F1 penalty points: Max Verstappen more than halfway to race ban after Brazil VSC incident
👉 What happens if an F1 team is found to be in breach of the FIA budget cap?
Formula 1 could benefit from that kind of transparency.
While streaming with Ash Vandelay this Tuesday on The Elizabeth + Ash Show, many viewers expressed their own thoughts on the way Formula 1 and the FIA handle penalties, and there was significant tension in the idea that FIA stewards should take more time to speak to media, while also feeling that Johnny Herbert’s approach to speaking to media feels somehow inappropriate.
More than anything, though, it seems as as if fans crave regulatory clarity — not personal opinions. There’s a big difference between a steward sharing his hot takes with the media and a sanctioning body appointing a representative to explain why a particular penalty was issued.
Throughout any given F1 weekend, the FIA keeps a detailed paper trail of any potential penalties, any investigations, and any rulings thereafter. These documents often pinpoint the rule that is being violated, a description of how that rule was violated, and what constitutes appropriate punishment after the fact.
That doesn’t mean it’s always clear or easy to understand.
Let’s look at the Brazilian Grand Prix. Mercedes was fined a total of €10,000 for a tyre pressure infringement in violation of “TD003 N, items 2. c) and 2. h) i.” Trying to find the full text of this technical directive, though, is very challenging; as a result, many fans were confused about the ultimate decision to levy a fine to punish the infringement. There has been no further elaboration from the FIA on this topic, either.
And it’s not just fans who are confused about the ways the FIA stewards are interpreting Formula 1’s rules on any given weekend. Throughout this past triple-header, drivers and team personnel have questioned the logic of Lando Norris’ five-second penalty in the closing laps of the US Grand Prix, or why Max Verstappen was hit with two 10-second penalties in Mexico, or why the FIA only dished out fines for violations of the aborted start procedure in Brazil.
Instead, headlines have been dedicated to the ongoing spat between Verstappen and the perceived British bias against him — a conversation that exists largely because FIA steward (and former pundit) Johnny Herbert has a tendency to reach out to sports betting websites to share his personal critiques of Verstappen’s driving style.
That isn’t a “clarification of a penalty” so much as it is a chance to gin up controversy — and it leaves both fans and drivers worse off for it. We still don’t know exactly why the FIA levied some of these hotly debated penalties, but we do know that some of the people making the decisions feel strongly enough about certain drivers that they’ll engage in a weeks-long media battle with them. It only engenders further agitation between the people who enforce the rules and the people who are governed by them.
There’s one easy way to start building back that goodwill: Appoint a stewarding spokesperson, and have that spokesperson explain why certain decisions were made. Allow the media to ask questions. Take full accountability for all decisions and their repercussions. And don’t be afraid to point out that sometimes, the rulebook just isn’t equipped to deal with certain situations.
A spokesperson won’t necessarily guarantee good stewarding, or more consistent calls, or complete transparency. After all, Elton Sawyer generally only approaches media when something damaging has happened, and even NASCAR could benefit from more regular interactions with media about the smaller infractions that take place each weekend. But accountability is the first step toward better racing, and Formula 1 could certainly benefit from more of it.
Read next: Explained: The nine race manipulation penalties from NASCAR Martinsville
