The Canadian Grand Prix was a highly anticipated event following the on track antics which had taken place the race before in Barcelona. The feud between George Russell and Max Verstappen had been re-ignited at the Spanish Grand Prix when the Mercedes driver forced Verstappen off the track at turn one.
Ironically Russell attempted a move for which Verstappen has been much criticised – the classic dive bomb down the inside – to claim the apex of the corner. Yet the British driver miscalculated his braking, lost control the car momentarily and hit Verstappen – who was forced to take to the escape route and rejoined ahead his rival on track.
Red Bull decided given the tightness of the field following a safety car restart meant should the stewards make another of their erratic decisions and penalise Max, it would be prudent to tell their driver to relinquish the place to Russell and mitigate a decision that Verstappen had left the track and gained an advantage.
Verstappen/Russell feud intensifies
As it turned out the stewards decided Russell had been at fault and had no intention of penalising the world champion but yet they failed to adjudicate on a penalty for Russell even though it was he who was in the wrong – forcing another driver off track.
Incensed at his team’s instruction to allow Russell by, Verstappen appeared to make room for the Mercedes driver, who dithered somewhat before attempting the pass around turn five. The cars collided and it was decided by the stewards to award the dreaded ten second penalty Red Bull had feared, together with three penalty points taking him to within one of a race ban. This of course left the world champion vulnerable in Canada and in the coming round in Austria, should he be deemed to have misbehaved in anyway by the stewards.
Red Bull feared ‘gamesmanship’ against their driver which would see him punished by the stewards and to that end spoke with race director Rui Marques about the matter prior to the Canadian Grand Prix. As the race panned out, the win was to be contested hotly between Russell and Verstappen and another late safety car meant the drivers were line astern as they followed Bernd Maylander whilst the debris from Norris smashed up McLaren was cleared.
Russell appeared to be driving erratically behind the safety car and on two occasions appeared to have fallen behind the mandatory ten car lengths he was required to maintain to the safety car. Further the Mercedes driver was performing the usual tyre warm up procedures of accelerating and braking but on lap 68 Russell appeared to brake harder than previously, forcing Verstappen to overtake the Mercedes in avoiding action.
Stewards dismiss Red Bull protest
Immediately, Russell was on the radio pointing out to race control that Verstappen had overtaken him, something not allowed behind the safety car. Verstappen in turn made his case that Russell had braked too aggressively and forced the incident. The stewards decided no action was required as the race finished under the safety car but Red bull later protested the decision not to penalise George Russell.
Five hours of deliberation and evidence from both parties saw the final race classification stand and no penalties were issued to Russell by the race stewards. In their published judgement they stated: “We accept the driver of Car 63 [Russell]’s explanation of the incident and we are satisfied that the driver of Car 63 did not drive erratically by braking where he did or to the extent he did.
“We are not satisfied that by simply reporting to his team that Car 1 had overtaken that he engaged in unsportsmanlike conduct. The Protest is rejected as it is not founded.”
The decision regarding the ten lengths distance Russell failed to maintain appeared to concede to Russell’s argument that he broke the rule to allow a gap to build up so he could increase the temperatures in his tyres and brakes. Yet the regulation does not allow for mitigating circumstances and precedents set appear to contradict the Canadian stewards decisions.
Precedent set for ten lengths rule
Red Bull’s Sergio Perez was penalised for the same safety car infringement at the 2022 Singapore Grand Prix. He was penalised twice during the race for failing to maintain ten car lengths during a safety car period in appalling conditions. Perez later argued he found it difficult to maintain the correct distance to the safety car due to the visibility, yet the stewards issued him with a reprimand and a later time penalty.
Last season in Qatar, Russell was also hit with a penalty for failing to maintain the required ten lengths, so the question is why did the stewards not penalise him again in Canada? Whilst the stewards judgement does not deal with this matter, they may have drawn on a poor precedent set back in round one this year in Australia. There Lewis Hamilton was cited for exceeding the requires ten car lengths and as was the case with Perez, the wet conditions provided for poor visibility.
The stewards judgement in Melbourne stated: “Although the gap to the previous car exceed the ten car lengths as prescribed in the regulations, the stewards considered the weather conditions and also that the correct gap was restored prior to the restart, as mitigating circumstances in this case. Hence no penalty is applied.
Calls set to grow for full time F1 stewards
There is a clear inconsistency between the Perez and Hamilton decisions and further the regulation makes no reference to the gap “being restored” as an allowable mitigating circumstance. In Canada there were no poor conditions to take into account, visibility was 20/20 and yet there was no penalty issued to Russell despite a clear breach of the rules.
There is no reference in the regulation to safety cars driving more slowly than usual, the defence used by Russell who claimed he needed the increased but illegal gap to warm his tyres and brakes.
Of course a time penalty for Russell would have cost him the race, which in fact finished behind the safety car unlike the other cases cited above. This is yet another example of inconsistent F1 stewarding and it will now add to the pressure on the FIA to employ full time professional stewards. Further, this will foster the sense of injustice at Red Bull Racing who have seen the stewards throw the book at their driver while failing to enforce the proper rules against his competitors.
Toto Wolff SLAMS “petty” Red Bull Racing
Wolff slams Red Bull for ‘petty’ protest over Russell’s Montreal win – Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff launched a scathing attack on Red Bull Racing after the Milton Keynes-based team filed, and then partially retracted, a double protest against George Russell’s victory in the Canadian Grand Prix. Wolff labelled the move “embarrassing” and “insignificant”, accusing Red Bull of grasping at straws in what he portrayed as a bitter response to Mercedes’ first win of the 2025 Formula 1 season.
The drama unfolded after a thrilling and chaotic race in Montreal, where Russell fended off both McLarens and the advancing Max Verstappen to cross the finish line first. However, celebrations were briefly put on hold when Red Bull filed two protests relating to Russell’s actions during a safety car period. One was quickly withdrawn, while the other was summarily dismissed by the FIA stewards…. READ MORE
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.
As usual Max cannot be allowed to get the benefits other driver’s get, don’t be surprised when he leaves F1 but do be disappointed with what we are left with.
never expect the fia to penalize a british driver even if they sent another driver to death
You are 100% correct.
Take the stewards out of the equation by inputting the rule book into Ai and let it lurk and eventually decide.
If a rule is broken then an impartial decision will be handed out.
MUCH FARER BUT SOME BIG HEADED F1 STEWARDS WILL NO LONGER NEEDED!
They penalise British drivers all the time and when did a British driver ever send another driver to their death, you’re not Christian Horner by any chance?
I have to agree with both the above … WHY is GR allowed to get away with no penalties in more than one occasion? No wonder he strolls around with that irritatingly smug look on his face
It is NOT wise to severely handicap a driver simply because he’s far and away the best we’ve seen since Ayrton Senna
As long as the English Old Boys Club ( so called pundits) along with wanna be world champions sitting on the steward bench with the opinionated broadcasters, the chummy English drivers will always have the benefit of the doubt. Rules and Regulations are suppose to govern F1 but the present scenario will result in the destruction of the F1.
The drivers steward at Silverstone was an Italian, only one of the stewards was English, even the face director that referred the incident to the stewards Rui Marques (Portuguese) and his assistant Claire Dubbleman (Dutch). So yes I can see how you arrived at British bias.😂
Only ever 1 British steward at any event and often none at all, there was 1 at Silverstone and he is certainly not a wannabe world champion. The Race Director who referred the incident to the Stewards is Portuguese and his assistant is Dutch, care to explain your conspiracy theory.