The FIA has given new powers to the Formula 1 race director to instruct teams to park any seriously damaged cars.
The new rule has been introduced after Sergio Perez was given a three-place grid penalty last year for driving a damaged car during the Canadian Grand Prix. Parts fell from his damaged car as he completed more than half a lap with his rear wing hanging off.Perez suffered race-ending damage when he spun into a barrier during the race. However the stewards ruled Red Bull instructed him to drive back to the pits in order to avoid triggering a Safety Car period while his team mate Max Verstappen was leading.
A revised rule for this year states drivers “must leave the track as soon as it is safe to do so” if their car “has significant and obvious damage to a structural component which results in it being in a condition presenting an immediate risk of endangering the driver or others.” The race director can also order the competitor to leave the track if they believe the damage to their car is sufficiently serious.
Revised Sporting Regulation article 26.10
Original rule
If a driver has serious mechanical difficulties, he must leave the track as soon as it is safe to do so.
New rule
Any driver whose car has significant and obvious damage to a structural component which results in it being in a condition presenting an immediate risk of endangering the driver or others, or whose car has a significant failure or fault which means it cannot reasonably return to the pit lane without unnecessarily impeding another competitor or otherwise hindering the competition must leave the track as soon as it is safe to do so.
At the sole discretion of the race director, should a car be deemed to have such significant and obvious damage to a structural component, or such significant failure or fault, the competitor may be instructed that the car must leave the track as soon as it is safe to do so.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Formula 1
- Eddie Jordan, 1948-2025
- Contact with team mate may have led to Bortoleto’s Australian GP crash
- FIA extends DRS zone on Shanghai’s longest straight to make passing easier
- McLaren would have been “stupid” not to use hold position order – Norris
- Hamilton dismisses ‘negativity’ over his radio calls. ‘Other drivers are almost abusive’
lynn-m
3rd March 2025, 14:19
A new way for the FIA to manipulate more ‘for show’ safety car and red flags i guess.
If a driver can drive the car back to the pits and potentially get it repaired to rejoin the race then they should be allowed to do so.
Of course however if it’s dropping some sort of fluid all over the track, is on fire or is shredding big bits of itself then drivers should stop but for something like we saw with Perez at Montreal last year where there wasn’t really any danger of big bits falling off and where other than the rear wing been a bit loose (But held on safely by the DRS activator) I don’t see an issue with it been driven back and potentially repaired.
I wonder how much the fine for Gilles Villeneuve would have been if this rule was in place at Zandvoort in 1979….. You know when we got one of the most iconic images in F1 history thats been replayed over & over again through the years and something which was used to highlight just how much heart & passion he had to get the car back so he could continue racing. But in the show over sport era we know there’s no room for heart or passion.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 14:30
As the report says
Perez’s car was shedding bits, how can the FIA race director tell if a big bit is next? Or that one of those small bits might not damage another car? Also Red Bull’s instruction to their driver was to help their other driver, not Pérez.
L
3rd March 2025, 15:50
Now they just need to ban 3rd and 4th drivers aka second teams
lynn-m
3rd March 2025, 16:19
OK so i guess if it’s just ‘bits falling off’ then cars with damaged front wings should be asked to stop as well?
it’s just a silly unnecessary rule that we all know is going to be used to create more safety car and red flags in the name of the show. we all know this is exactly what is going to happen and to try to deny that is just blindness.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 18:26
So the problem isn’t the new rule (or power) but its implementation. It’s a good point that it might be over-implemented, always a problem with any power, but there have been a few isolated occasions where it was needed.
As for red flags and safety cars improving the show, maybe FIA/Liberty think so, but it’s highly debatable whether they do. More often stoppages interrupt the flow of the race and it’s especially bad when we’re seeing different strategies play out and then a SC or red flag neutralizes whatever was happening.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 14:27
Actually a good rule change. Drivers attempting to return to the pits with bits of carbon fibre falling off, potentially wrecking other drivers’ races, is really indefensible. In the past it was great to see a driver trundle back with a puncture, even a missing tyre, and attempt to salvage their race. But not strewing the track with debris.
Robbie1
3rd March 2025, 17:02
Couldn’t agree more, both Norris (Austria) and Leclerc (Monaco) deserved atleast a race ban for littering the track with debris while racing (emphasis on) back to the pit with a flat rear tire.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd March 2025, 18:06
Why do you want to ban people for doing things that were allowed, and to some extent officially encouraged, at the time? (Teams are also required to avoid doing things that artificially change the result of a race, due to the International Sporting Code, so they can’t park a car on track unless the regulations or physics requires it).
El Pollo Loco
3rd March 2025, 18:32
Really? I don’t have much faith they’ll apply this rule with any common sense based on how the race direction practices have been going. F1’s already overly safe and sanitized + teaming with way too many micro rules that see endless investigations popping up for things that were never regulated until 2020+. F1’s already horribly Mickey Mouse w/the recent practice of automatically triggering SCs, VSCs or RFs to recover cars from off track no matter how safely located, rarely racing in truly wet conditions, etc.
If they really only use this rule to stop hilariously crippled cars, OK fine. But I bet it won’t be long until you see cars ordered to stop for damage that is mostly cosmetic rather than terminal.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 20:30
It’s definitely up to FIA to implement the rule judiciously. Can I imagine a scenario where they stop a car that’s damaged but the driver and team insist it can return safely without strewing the track and that decision proves critical to the race or even the championship? I guess so, to be honest.
El Pollo Loco
4th March 2025, 3:30
I’m thinking George Russell has had a couple crashes where he might have been told to pull over but in which he was able to continue after coming into the pits. Alonso after flying through the air due to dear Lance. And I’m sure there have been some legendary drives with big body damage that would have been flagged over. But, yes, if they use it as judiciously as we hope and particularly in cases where it seems like a team is trying to use it to benefit its other car than I have no problem with it.
SteveP
4th March 2025, 7:33
George featured on my mental list, especially the one where he and Max collided and Max continued with, as Horner put it, “half the side pod missing” (hyperbole)
This was viewed variously as a valiant drive with a damaged car (Max fans), and stupid dangerous (Max haters) I suppose it would depend on which camp the Race Director was in.
Then we have a selection of KM incidents with bits flapping a little, and he’s called in; and RBR cars with bits actually falling off “no action”
Should make the after race discussions “interesting”
Just a thought, why do Merc parts either fall off cleanly, or stay put but bent?
AlanD
5th March 2025, 20:17
I agree. I’m worried they’ll be inclined to pull the trigger too early. I’m thinking back to the race not that long ago when Hamilton won it driving practically on the rims at the end. I could so easily imagine them saying, in the interests of safety, to retire the car one lap early.
El Pollo Loco
6th March 2025, 4:33
Didn’t he also try to continue in Canada after a big accident in Canada?
PeteB (@peteb)
3rd March 2025, 14:37
In theory, it makes a lot of sense but a rule like this has to be applied 100% consistently. This is F1…. So yeah, I think we all spot the glaring issue there.
A small, insignificant winglet weight less than a gram on the Haas comes loose. “Park the car immediately.”
Half a Ferrari missing whilst chunks of scarlet debris bounce off the halos of cars behind. “No further action.”
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 15:24
@peteb True but then it’s the inconsistency that adds some spice :)
PeteB (@peteb)
3rd March 2025, 15:44
It certainly does that and as we learned in 2021, F1 fans love nothing more than when the race director decides to add a bit of spice to proceedings!
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
4th March 2025, 4:42
Mmm, I’m guessing if one is in the points when ordered to park the car we might hear some plain refusal on team radio!
slowmo (@slowmo)
3rd March 2025, 15:11
Would this rule apply in the instance of a car like Hamilton’s infamous 3 wheeled win at the 2020 British GP for example would be my question. Instead of making the team responsible for deciding, how about race control do their job and make the instruction to drivers directly when the car is not safe. They have the capability and technology to do so and it takes all the grey out of the equation and people can stop blaming teams for having to guess what the FIA interpretation of whether something is “too dangerous” or not. No arguments, race control say you stop so you stop at the next possible opportunity or face a 10 place grid penalty.
David BR (@david-br)
3rd March 2025, 15:17
@slowmo Obviously a slower car that can’t be steered well is a potential hazard. Silverstone is a track with high visibility but certainly Hamilton doing the same at Monaco, Jeddah or some other circuits would be far more dangerous.
I think the communication has to be via the team at least, otherwise we’re going to get cars stopping and the team wondering what the hell is going on, but FIA could (can?) simply issue the instruction to stop, no discussion. That removes the teams from any decision making.
slowmo (@slowmo)
3rd March 2025, 15:54
I think instructions to stop on safety grounds should come from Race Control and not teams. You can see it now where the FIA instructs a team to stop and they then argue it’s not needed, then they delay the message a bit longer before finally giving the instruction when it’s too late. None of the latter part is required, if the FIA think they should stop the car then they should outright send that instruction and override the team. It’s literally making the concept open to interpretation when it should be a decisive decision. It also doesn’t stop teams instructing their driver to stop before race control intercede.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
3rd March 2025, 16:58
Race control do have the option to do that.
Red Andy (@red-andy)
3rd March 2025, 17:03
I think Hamilton’s three-wheeled win at Silverstone would have been fine because the tyre was basically structurally intact, just deflated – it wasn’t shedding debris everywhere. Compare with, for example, Norris in Austria last year after his collision with Verstappen, where the tyre had completely gone and his bodywork/floor was being shredded to bits. That’s the sort of situation where I could see the FIA stepping in.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd March 2025, 18:04
@slowmo The new regulation gives the FIA powers to decide a team needs to park its car immediately. However, the reason the regulation is written as it is, is because it means teams that are aware of something dangerous that isn’t yet visibly apparent have the obligation to stop as well. Not just teams whose cars are visibly in need of a parking command.
Coventry Climax
3rd March 2025, 15:24
I recall a mirror on the racing line being considered as an insignificant bit of debris. That’s a car shedding parts, and a part that’s quite essential to safety as well, yet the race control lightbulb didn’t light, until someone up there finally managed to get the flintstone to spark and the hay to catch on.
More inconcise wording, more room for controversy and more room for arbitrary interference.
It’s hard to believe race control didn’t already have the power to blackflag someone under the old rules.
MazdaChris (@mazdachris)
3rd March 2025, 16:36
Under the current flag rules, both the black flag and the meatball flag require the driver to return to the pits. This new rule allows the race director to instruct the driver to stop the car immediately and not return to the pits.
It would make sense for the implementation to be covered by a new flag, rather than just a verbal communication to the driver.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd March 2025, 18:02
@mazdachris It can’t be handled by a new flag, otherwise the existing flag would simply be re-purposed in that capacity.
Jere (@jerejj)
3rd March 2025, 15:53
I like this rule change.
David
3rd March 2025, 17:10
What’s that The Office meme?
“Corporate needs you to find the difference between these two rules”
“They’re the same rule”
Basically Perez should have been stopping at the first opportunity under the current rule (but didn’t). We’ve seen plenty of drivers do the same. Like Hamilton running 2/3rds of a lap on three wheels and going on to win the British GP. Would have loved to see the consequences of giving him a penalty for that!
Craig
5th March 2025, 9:28
This is the thing, those 2 incidents aren’t the same. Perez’s entire rear wing was hanging off and dropping debris which would have been a considerable danger if it fell off, whereas Hamilton (and Bottas and Saniz before him) had what was basically a puncture which was at no risk of shading debris.
If you count them as the same then you may as well order any car that throws out sparks when it bottoms out over bumps to stop as that’s technically debris.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
3rd March 2025, 18:00
The first paragraph could simply have been left the same as the original regulation, with no difference in meaning. Now that the regulation is more complex, the temptation will be for teams to wait for the actually new element (verbal instruction power for the FIA, as opposed to only having the black-and-orange-circle flag power). I predict this will lead to more, rather than fewer, cars dropping debris and causing other hazards.
Neil (@neilosjames)
3rd March 2025, 18:20
Nice rule, as long as it’s done quickly enough. I’m not convinced a race director could actually make a decision on exactly how damaged a car is, whether it’s OK to be on the track, and communicate it to a team (and have it accepted by said team without multiple attempts to argue against it) in much less than two minutes.
By which time the car would have trundled round half a lap and arrived at the pits.
Grapmg
4th March 2025, 17:16
Agree. Probably Perez would have made it to the pits before RC could act. Still a better rule than a penalty after the race as they did with Perez and also Alonso for the lost mirror. If it’s unsafe RC should have the authority to intervene.
Pjotr (@pietkoster)
5th March 2025, 9:08
The question is: at what point is it unsafe? Sometimes even fans can judge that, but there are many grey area’s. Glad I am not a steward or race director.
AlanD
5th March 2025, 20:33
I wish they’d also look at this issue of drivers being told by teams to “stop imediately, switch off the engine” resulting in drivers parking somewhere stupid and bringing out yellow flags. Suee teams want to try and save an engine, but if they can somehow get it to a spot where they can drive off behind a barier or limp it back to the pit lane, they should be required to do so. Part of that problem though is that modern circuits don’t seem to have nearly enough escape lanes for failing cars. Maybe if a driver stops the car on circuit when it was still drivable, (i.e. NOT with bits dropping off and a safety hazard) then the team loses the engine anyway, and if it also results in a safety car, I think that should incur a grid place penalty. Basically, I’m saying cars fail, whether it be due to race incidents or poor engineering, and no-one should be penalised for that, but once it fails, the objective should be to do everything you can to get that car out of the way so that no-one else’s race is compromised.
El Pollo Loco
9th March 2025, 4:36
I agree, but that seems like it’d be very tough police. Or maybe not. I’m sure outside engineers could see from the data how much time/how close to blowing an engine or transmission was. Two other major issues also seem to be that:
-counterintuitively, even as VSCs and SCs have become so much more common that we’ve seen single GPs have more SCs than entire single seasons combined had combined just a few years ago, they’ve gotten extremely slow at removing cars
-this new, non-formal, policy where any car pulled over automatically means VSC/SC until recovered no matter how safe of a position it’s located in. That is, above all, the biggest issue IMO