‘Stop guessing’: Sainz pushes for permanent FIA stewards as 2025 rotation stirs the pot
Carlos Sainz isn’t hiding behind diplomacy on this one. After another weekend of post-race paperwork and uncertainty, the Williams driver says Formula 1 needs permanent FIA stewards — and soon.
The debate flared again after Zandvoort, where Sainz had two penalty points removed from his Super Licence following contact with Liam Lawson. He’s been consistent all year: rotating steward panels create gray areas, and gray areas become delays, protests and drivers second-guessing what’s allowed.
Speaking in Baku, Sainz said the sport’s key players “all agree” on the principle of reducing rotation — but not on how to make it work. The pushback? Money, structure, and the age-old fear of bias.
The financial question has always been a sticking point. Stewards are volunteers, with expenses covered, not salaried staff. That’s partly why the roster rotates from race to race, with a blend of permanent FIA-appointed members and local sporting authority officials. For 2025, the FIA trimmed most panels from four stewards to three across the majority of the calendar, with four on duty at six high-workload rounds: Australia, China, Canada, Singapore, Mexico City and São Paulo.
Sainz wants more stability inside that smaller room. His proposal is simple: two permanent stewards, one rotational. That way, decisions carry continuity and the rotating member still brings local expertise and a pathway for training. And, he added, let’s not pretend the money isn’t there to fund it.
The broader frustration isn’t just who’s in the chair — it’s when they decide. Sainz doesn’t want to see chequered flags followed by two hours of limbo. He wants races decided on track, with stewards making as many calls as possible in real time. Drivers, teams, fans — everyone wants the result to be the result.
There are reasonable objections. Some inside the paddock argue that rotating stewards, like rotating referees in football, reduce the risk of perceived grudges and keep individuals from becoming lightning rods for controversy. If a driver collects a few penalties, who wants the conspiracy chorus: “That steward’s got it in for me”?
Sainz gets that argument; he just doesn’t buy it. He points to the race director model as proof that consistency pays off. Since Rui Marques took over, he says the relationship has settled, decisions are more predictable, and the trust is growing — precisely because drivers and teams are learning how he operates, and he’s learning them. You don’t change the race director every Sunday, so why accept a carousel in the stewards’ room?
This isn’t a crusade born out of one incident. It’s a long-simmering complaint about unclear boundaries and inconsistent sanctions from one venue to the next. The 31-year-old is hardly alone, either. Several drivers have voiced discomfort with late calls and post-race investigations deciding results. The 2025 tweaks were meant to streamline the process, but shrinking the panel without locking in more permanent expertise has, in Sainz’s view, only underlined the need for a core group that travels.
There’s also a practical upside to permanence: pattern recognition. Drivers would better understand what’s likely to be deemed racing contact, what’s reckless, and what’s a slam-dunk penalty. Teams could coach strategy around that. And fans would spend fewer Sunday evenings refreshing their phones.
Where does this go next? That’s the tricky part. While Sainz insists there’s broad agreement between F1 and the FIA on direction, there isn’t a unified plan. The finance question remains on the table, as does the specter of bias and the politics of who gets the badge. Until the governance side aligns, we’re stuck in discussion mode.
But the Williams man isn’t backing off. He wants predictability, accountability and decisions that land before parc fermé has cooled down.
The sport can live with the occasional unpopular verdict. What it can’t afford, especially in a year this tight, is a culture of uncertainty. Permanent stewards won’t fix everything, but they’d give everyone the same script — and that’s a start.
