FIA opens the books: fewer than 1% of F1 stewarding calls flagged as ‘controversial’ in 2025
The noise around stewarding has been loud this season, amplified by flashpoints like Oscar Piastri’s run-in with Kimi Antonelli in Brazil. The FIA’s answer? Numbers. Lots of them.
In a closed-door briefing with drivers in Qatar, the governing body rolled out a season-to-date audit of incidents, investigations and penalties — and the headline figure undercuts much of the weekend-to-weekend outrage: just five decisions were logged by drivers as “controversial” in 2025, representing under one percent of all matters referred to the stewards up to the Las Vegas Grand Prix.
That Qatar sit-down, which some paddock chatter painted as going nowhere, was anything but, according to sources. The intent now is to make those debriefs a regular cadence from 2026 — one at season’s end (Qatar, again) and another mid-year — to keep the dialogue alive and the interpretations aligned.
The data drop itself was comprehensive. Here’s the shape of 2025 stewarding through Vegas, as presented by FIA stewards’ chair Garry Connelly:
– 509 incidents and cases referred to the stewards
– 405 formally investigated
– 410 written decisions issued (including two petitions for review and three protests)
– 153 penalties applied — a little over a quarter of the investigated incidents
And those five “controversial” calls? They were the ones drivers specifically asked to revisit in the meeting — a small slice of a large pie, but enough to matter when outcomes swing points and podiums.
Penalty types in 2025 to date:
– Pit lane speeding fines: 12
– Other fines: 11
– Formal warnings: 31
– Reprimands: 19
– 5-second penalties: 25 (6 for causing a collision)
– 10-second penalties: 22 (11 for causing a collision)
– Drive-through penalties: 2
– Stop-and-go penalties: 0
– Grid drops or pit-lane starts: 22
– Disqualifications: 9
A big piece of the Qatar conversation revolved around the Driving Standards Guidelines — the “living document” created with input from drivers to clarify what’s expected in wheel-to-wheel combat. Think overlap thresholds for claiming racing room, car placement duties in various corners, and how relative positioning is weighed.
The drivers’ gripe wasn’t the idea of guidelines, but whether they were being treated as hard regulations. The FIA’s clarification was clear: they aren’t rules; they’re advisory frameworks to help the panel decide. The rulebook remains the International Sporting Code and the F1 Sporting Regulations. The guidelines help apply those rules consistently, but they do not carry regulatory force on their own.
That distinction matters because no document can capture every nuance. The guidelines set the template; the stewards still need room to judge what’s in front of them.
The FIA also laid out how the stewarding panel is staffed and how decisions are reached — a peek behind the curtain that’s often requested but rarely offered in this level of detail.
For 2026, the FIA F1 Stewards group will comprise four experienced Chairs, three former F1 drivers and five “Number 2” FIA stewards. Each event is staffed by one Chair, one Number 2 FIA Steward and one Driver Steward, plus a local ASN Steward. Every steward must hold an FIA Super Licence, attend annual training and pass the assessment. The panel is a permanent pool of just 12 people across the season — far leaner than a decade ago — with processes in place to carry continuity from race to race, including having one steward from the previous event present where possible, or the previous Chair available online.
Emphasis for driving incidents is deliberately placed on the Driver Steward’s view, with the panel deciding collectively and independently of the FIA’s other departments. Alongside the regulations and the Driving Standards Guidelines, they consider penalty guidelines and relevant precedent.
On race weekends, the pipeline is familiar but tightly structured:
– Race Control notes an incident (you’ll see “NOTED” on timing).
– Stewards do a preliminary look. If there’s nothing in it, “No Further Investigation” goes up.
– If it warrants deeper scrutiny, “Under Investigation” is posted and the full toolkit comes out: broadcast feeds, non-public CCTV, onboards, radio, individual car telemetry, GPS and other tracking, sector and mini-sector timing, and reports from officials.
– If no breach is found, “No Further Action” is published. If there is, a penalty lands — and in either case, a written decision is issued with the breach (if any), the outcome and, crucially, the reasoning. Some matters are handled post-session or post-race.
So where does that leave the temperature of the debate? The five-call stat doesn’t mean drivers are suddenly zen about every ruling; it does suggest the crisis narrative is overcooked. But there’s also a real takeaway from Qatar: clarity is a moving target in modern F1, where cars are quicker, margins thinner and racecraft more choreographed by data than ever. The guidelines are evolving by design; the consultation windows are set to expand; the technology backing the calls is robust.
Fans will still argue track limits over brunch and intent versus outcome over dinner. That’s part of the sport’s rhythm. But for 2025, at least, the numbers say the system isn’t lurching from controversy to controversy — even if the odd Brazil-style tangle keeps social feeds buzzing.
