Mohammed Ben Sulayem and Max Verstappen were seen in close but a brief conversation following his second place in the 2025 Saudi Arabia Grand Prix. A number of F1 media outlets reported the discussion had been hers, following the world champion being issued a five second time penalty by the FIA appointed stewards which cost him the race win.
During the Grand Prix, Max’s race engineer informed him of the five second penalty, to which the FOM broadcast played his response with a bleep. It was assumed Verstappen had sworn, something Ben Sulayem is seeking to clamp down on, although in reality the Red Bull driver had said, “thats bloody lovely,” and not used the dreaded F-bomb.
Clearly the drama was enhanced by FOM TV cresting the impression Verstappen had used foul language. Bizarrely, the wearing rules are now defined as only for those occasions when a driver is in an official FIA approved media event. So swearing in the cockpit is allowed and the drivers called on FOM TV to bleep out this profanities if the viewers were genuinely upset bye their outbursts.
Fake swearing bleeped
The drama was amplified by Gianpiero Lambiase then instructing Max in a stern fashion, “No comment, please, Max.” Whilst happy his Red Bull car could match the pace of the McLaren’s, Verstappen refused to comment on the incident at the end of the Grand Prix on the penalty the FIA stewards had handed down.
“You can’t share your opinion because it’s not appreciated apparently, or people can’t handle the full truth. Honestly, it’s better if I don’t say too much,” explained Max to assembled media. “It’s honestly just how everything is becoming. Everyone is super-sensitive about everything. And what we have (in the rules) currently, we cannot be critical anyway. So less talking – even better for me.”
Off course Verstappen was clearly referring to the Ben Sulaymen clamp own on drivers swearing and informing thew F1 media that he and other drivers will be saying less and less under the current regime.
The FIA president has also sought to toughen the stewards attitude towards any kind of criticism of FIA officials and over the winter the sporting code was tightened and now forbids, “any words, deeds or writings that have caused moral injury or loss to the FIA, its bodies, its members or its executive officers, and more generally on the interest of motor sport and on the values defended by the FIA”.
Verstappen accosted by Ben Sulayem
Mohammed Ben Sulayem is up for re-election in November this year and his presidency has been marred with a number of authoritarian moves against F1 drivers. Jewellery bans forced Lewis Hamilton into a long stand off against Ben Sulayem, which the British driver finally resolved by resorting to medical opinion over his piercings.
Lucky underwear has also been targeted as the drivers were reminded they must use the FIA fire proof specified under garments when in the cockpit of the car and the latest action to restrict the drivers from swearing went down like a lead brick with the Grand Prix Drivers Association.
They co-authored an open letter to the FIA, demanding the FIA president himself be careful in how he describes the drivers, many believing his loose words comparing them to rappers were inappropriate. The drivers also demanded to know where the various fines they were being issued with were going, to which Ben Sulayem responded in effect, ‘its none oft your business.’
A further response to the drivers concerns came over the winter when an unprecedented and authoritarian regulation was enacted by the FIA., This quadrupled the fines for drivers using bad language in the first instance during the season from €10,000 to €40,000. A second strike now costs €80,000 and a third transgression will see a ridiculous one month ban for any driver sanctioned for swearing three times in a year.
Why McLaren should be concerned about Red Bull
Authoritarian oF1 driver bans
No driver in the history of F1 has been banned for such an extensive timespan, for something as relatively irrelevant as swearing. Yet this kind of attitude many in the paddock believe stems from Ben Sulayem’s own religious beliefs together with those of the middle eastern region he represents.
Whilst many in the paddock believe Ben Sulayem’s regime will be turned against when the votes are counted in November. Yet the Emirati swept to victory in 2021 with a mandate that the FIA should be more than just the F1 rule maker and policemen.
May of the hundreds of FIA associations around the world which will vote on who is the next president, have little or nothing to do with F1 and are concerned with their own national agendas far more. Despite a number of high profile members of the FIA departing their roles due to the alleged bullying behaviour of Ben Sulayem, he could easily be re-elected by the various global associations over issues of self interest.
F1 rolls into Miami next weekend and it will be interesting to see how the driers react to the latest bad language drama – that wasn’t. Of course whilst they wish to promote their sponsors emblazoned across their race suits, they may well feel its again time to show solidarity and treat the media with caution and short but sharp interviews.
Ferrari boss says Hamilton does not have a “transition” year
F1 becoming sanitised
There was another theory propounded by TJ13 regarding Max becoming a man of few words in Jeddah, by refusing to discuss the turn one incident and his subsequent penalty, this of course became the story of the Grand Prix. In fact Max wasn’t criticised by any of the broadcasters for the mistake he made leaving Piastri too much room into turn one, when keeping him squeezed against the wall which leads to the inside of the corner, wold have forced Piastri to brake before Verstappen.
Max wold then have braked later and swept around the turn reach the apex first, which is the all important factor when the stewards take these matters into consideration. Verstappen preferred to focus on ignoring the drama and his surprise over the leap forward his team had made, and how the pace of the RB19 was equal to that of his main rivals for the drivers’ title race.
Stefano Domenicali spoke this week about how he missed the drama of teams protesting the legality of each others car designs and upgrades. The danger is now that more drama is lost from the sport as those who believe offence is not in the eye of the offended. Regulating what people say or think with ever increasing vigour will lead to the kind of bland F1 interviews, max demonstrated will be the case.
Mercedes defeated in 2026 engine row
READ MORE F1 NEWS – Report: Newey not the secret of Red Bull’s success
There has been much said and written about Adrian Newey across his forty plus years in F1. ‘Genius’ and ‘maverick’ are but two of the titles accorded the mild mannered Englishman and of course Newey has racked up twelve constructors’ titles during his time in F1.
Given an F1 car designer does not drive the car itself, a slightly lesser value is placed on the drivers’ championships accumulated under his reign and to this end Newey is not the standout designer some may think.
John Barnard an often underestimated F1 designer has nine constructors titles from his efforts with McLaren and Benetton together with Patrick head whose nine came at Williams where he was part of the fabric of the company… READ MORE ON THIS STORY
With over 30 years of experience in Formula 1 as an insider journalist, I have built trusted connections across the paddock, from race engineers and mechanics to senior team figures. At The Judge 13, I and a handful of trusted colleagues share exclusive Formula 1 news, expert analysis and behind-the-scenes stories you will not find in mainstream motorsport media.
These articles would be so much better if they were proof read, with spelling, punctuation and grammar sorted out.
Agreed- 4 spelling mistakes in one article. Are you looking to employ a proof reader?
You need an editor or proofreader. Some of this was indecipherable.