JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia — Sunday’s Saudi Arabian Grand Prix hinged on a first corner incident between eventual race winner Oscar Piastri and the man who started from pole position, Max Verstappen. Ultimately, the outcome rested on a stewards’ decision rather than the on-track action itself, and inevitably the verdict divided opinions between the two drivers and their teams.
The vast majority of the footage seemed to back the decision to penalize Verstappen, but Red Bull continued to fight its corner — at least in the media — late into the night. One voice, however, was missing in the post-race polemics, with Verstappen opting to keep his silence for fear of retribution from the governing body.
What happened?
Piastri made a better getaway from the line, allowing him to draw alongside Verstappen while positioning his McLaren on the inside for Turn 1. Both the on- and off-board footage showed Piastri was ahead of Verstappen as they approached the corner, but as they reached the apex, Verstappen returns level and then sails back past on the outside as they approach Turn 2.
Carrying extra speed while on the outside of the corner meant Verstappen was never likely to stay on track, but it became a moot point when the two cars turned right for Turn 2 and Piastri’s presence to Verstappen’s left meant he had no choice but to cut the corner to avoid a collision.
Verstappen rejoined the track ahead of Piastri on the exit of Turn 2, and within the space of the next three corners a collision between Yuki Tsunoda and Pierre Gasly resulted in a safety car coming out further round the lap. Once the safety was deployed, the race was neutralized with Verstappen ahead of Piastri.
Piastri clearly felt hard done by and said as much on the team radio.
“He needs to give that [position] back,” he said. “I was ahead. He was never going to make that corner regardless of whether I was there or not.”
Verstappen opened his radio to say: “He just forced me off. There was no intention to make that corner.”
Verstappen kept the position when racing resumed, and by lap six the stewards had issued a five-second penalty to the Red Bull driver, effectively handing Piastri the lead as long as he could stay close enough to Verstappen until the first round of pit stops when the Red Bull driver served the penalty.
What did the stewards say?
In making their judgement on the incident, the stewards relied on the Drivers’ Standards Guidelines — essentially F1’s rules of racing.
The guidelines, which are not published to the public, became a hot topic following controversial incidents at the U.S. and Mexican Grands Prix last year, and a meeting between the FIA and drivers at the penultimate round of the 2024 championship in Qatar ostensibly provided further clarity on the rules going forward.
The incident at Turn 1 in Saudi Arabia was a close call with fine margins, but was covered by the guidelines. Because Piastri, as the driver overtaking on the inside, had his front wheels ahead of the mirror of Verstappen’s car at the apex, the corner was effectively his and he was not obliged to leave Verstappen racing room on the exit. It was therefore up to Verstappen to either keep the lead by staying on track, which seemed impossible given the trajectory of the cars, or cede the position — even if he did so later round the lap.
As it played out, Verstappen skipped Turn 2 on the inside to avoid the collision, but in not giving the position back, “gained a lasting advantage” in the view of the stewards.
“The stewards reviewed positioning/marshaling 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 1 [Verstappen] prior to and at the apex of Turn 1 when trying to overtake Car 1 on the inside. In fact, Car 81 was alongside Car 1 at the apex,” the stewards statement said. “Based on the Driver’s Standards Guidelines, it was therefore Car 81’s corner and he was entitled to be given room.
“Car 1 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.”
The stewards noted that leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage is usually met by a 10-second penalty, but they decided on a five-second penalty because the incident took place in the melee of the first corner of the race.
What did the drivers say?
As ever, Piastri was matter of fact about the incident, saying he left his braking to the last moment, but had no complaints with how the racing or stewards’ decision unfolded.
“I knew that I obviously had to brake quite late, but I knew that I had enough of my car alongside to take the corner,” Piastri said. “We obviously both braked extremely late. For me, I braked as late as I could while staying on the track. And I think how it unfolded is how it should have been dealt with.”
Verstappen, meanwhile, refused to comment on the incident, saying it would be better for him to stay silent. The reigning champion said his words could be “twisted” on social media, but also referenced recent FIA guidelines that outlaw “any words, deeds or writings that have caused moral injury or loss to the FIA” with the threat of financial penalties and potential race bans for repeat offenders. It’s unfortunate Verstappen felt he was unable to comment on such a pivotal moment in the race for fear of reprisal, but it may become a common theme this season given the FIA’s draconian stance on such issues. “I know I cannot swear in here, but at the same time, you also can’t be critical in any form that might ‘harm’ or ‘danger’… Let me get the sheet out,” Verstappen said. “There’s a lot of lines, you know? So that’s why it’s better not to talk about it — you can put yourself in trouble, and I don’t think anyone wants that.” Verstappen’s silence meant it was left to team principal Christian Horner to put forward Red Bull’s case, which he did at his usual post-race media session while referencing a printout of an image from one of Verstappen’s onboard cameras. Because the image was from a camera mounted lower than the Red Bull’s roll-hoop camera, it provided a slightly different perspective to the one that had been broadcast and used by the stewards in their investigation. The position of the two cars relative to the apex in Horner’s image isn’t entirely clear, but Piastri’s front wheel is visible and is clearly behind Verstappen’s. Nevertheless, even though Verstappen is ahead in the moment depicted in the image, Piastri’s front wheel still appears to be in line with the Red Bull’s mirror, which, as the stewards pointed out, was a key factor in issuing the penalty. For Horner, though, the image was proof Verstappen’s actions should have been viewed as a racing incident rather than a penalty. “We felt we hadn’t really done anything wrong,” he said. “First corner, racing incident, two cars going … I don’t know where he [Verstappen] is supposed to go. “At this point [in the image], he can’t just vanish. Oscar’s had a good start, Max has had an average start, they’ve ended up [close to each other], but as per their [the stewards’] thing, the front wheel has to be at least in line with the mirror. It’s very, very, very, very close.” He added: “When you look at that [the image], I can’t see how they got to that conclusion. They’ve both gone in at the same speed, Oscar’s run deep into the corner, Max can’t just disappear at this point in time, so perhaps these rules need a look at. I don’t know what happened to let them race on the first lap, that just seemed to have been abandoned. I thought it was very harsh.” Despite his protestations, Horner played down the possibility of a seeking a right to review the penalty decision. “We spoke to the stewards after the race. They think it’s a slam dunk,” Horner said. “So the problem is, if we were to protest it, then they’re going to most likely hold their line. We’ve asked them to have a look at the onboard footage that wasn’t available at the time.” Horner’s opposite number at McLaren, Andrea Stella, agreed it was a close call but was in no doubt about the validity of the penalty. “The situation in Turn 1 was very close in fairness, but this is a business of close margin, small margin, and this time Oscar — thanks to a very good launch off the grid and thanks to positioning the car on the inside, slightly higher than Max, keeping the car within the track limits — he gained the rights [to the corner] and obviously in that situation you can’t overtake off track,” he said. “So I think the case is very clear. It shouldn’t create any polemic really and if anything I want to take the opportunity to emphasize how well Oscar is racing, he’s racing clean, he’s tough racing and extremely precise.” With the benefit of hindsight, Red Bull may have been better off telling Verstappen to give the position back to Piastri to avoid the penalty and then try to manufacture a way past the McLaren with a superior tire strategy. However, there was also a good argument for staying in the clear air at the front of the pack in the hope Verstappen could pull a five-second gap to Piastri and negate the penalty that way. “If we’d have given it up, the problem is you then obviously run in the dirty air [behind Piastri] as well,” Horner said. “You could have dropped back behind, the problem is you are then at risk with George [Russell in third] as well. The best thing to do was at that point, we got the penalty, get your head down, keep going. “I think what was a great shame today was that you can see our pace versus certainly the McLarens or all other cars in that first stint on the medium [tire], we were in good shape. We had to serve the five-second penalty and thereafter on the same basic stint as Oscar, he finished 2.6 seconds behind, so without that five-second penalty today, it would have been a win. “There’s always going to be a difference of opinion over a very marginal decision like that.” The incident ultimately decided the race, with Piastri taking his third win of the season along with the lead of the championship 10 points ahead of teammate Lando Norris and 12 ahead of Verstappen.Small margins and big wins
