The debate around Formula 1 penalties has once again taken centre stage following a striking admission from Williams driver Alex Albon. Speaking ahead of the Azerbaijan Grand Prix, the Thai driver admitted that he no longer knows what constitutes good racing, given the inconsistent stewarding decisions that have characterised much of the season.
Formula 1 has long prided itself on being the pinnacle of motorsport, but recent controversies have fuelled the perception that the sport’s rulebook is as flexible as a DRS flap under heavy load. Decisions from the FIA’s race stewards, ranging from five-second time penalties to harsher ten-second punishments, have repeatedly left fans, pundits and drivers themselves baffled. Sometimes aggressive defending is deemed acceptable; at other times, the same manoeuvre earns an instant sanction.
Carlos Sainz’s clash with Liam Lawson at Zandvoort is a prime example of this inconsistency. The Spaniard was handed a ten-second penalty that effectively ruined his Dutch Grand Prix, only for the ruling to be overturned after Williams lodged a protest between Monza and Baku. Similarly, Haas stand-in Ollie Bearman was given a ten-second penalty for an incident with Sainz at Monza, despite commentators and former drivers suggesting that the Ferrari driver was mostly at fault. Such irregularities highlight a troubling lack of consistency from the stewards.
Albon, who has raced in Formula 1 since 2019 and contested over 120 Grands Prix, believes that this uncertainty has now reached breaking point. With two career podiums and a current standing of seventh in the Drivers’ Championship, he is hardly inexperienced. Yet his candid remark ‘I still don’t know how to race properly’ illustrates the depth of the problem. For a seasoned competitor to admit bewilderment is revealing and underscores a crisis of confidence in Formula 1’s self-policing.
Alonso sets date for F1 retirement
The stewards are under the microscope
The stewards’ role in Formula 1 has always been precarious. Unlike referees in other sports, who generally apply rules on the spot with finality, F1 stewards must dissect replays, telemetry and radio transcripts while the race continues at 200 miles per hour. Each Grand Prix features a different panel, typically comprising a combination of FIA officials and one former driver.
This means that the application of penalties can vary subtly from race to race. What is deemed acceptable at Silverstone could be prohibited in Singapore.
This variation can lead to frustration. For teams, it introduces an element of chance, making race strategy more difficult to plan. For drivers, it erodes trust since the guidelines appear to change without warning. For fans, it breeds cynicism as the spectacle is repeatedly interrupted by seemingly arbitrary decisions. Many supporters now advocate the mantra “let them race”, feeling that the constant interventions rob the sport of its natural drama.
Albon’s bitter honesty
Albon’s admission carries unusual weight because it is not simply a complaint following a personal penalty. Rather, it is a wider commentary on the environment in which all drivers must operate. When a driver with his level of experience and ability expresses uncertainty about how to drive within the rules, it sends a clear message. After years of pledging to improve transparency and consistency, the FIA appears to have only deepened the confusion.
Despite this, the Williams driver has enjoyed a strong campaign, demonstrating remarkable form against teams with larger budgets and quicker machinery. Yet his remarks suggest that even amidst personal success, the threat of penalties is ever-present. One moment of wheel-to-wheel aggression could lead to heroics; another could ruin a race — and it is not always clear which outcome will follow until the stewards intervene.
A wider malaise in Formula 1
The debate over penalties touches on deeper issues within the sport. Formula 1 has been attempting to balance safety, fairness and entertainment, but these goals often conflict with each other. Modern cars, bristling with downforce and equipped with wide tyres, make on-track battles harder to sustain without contact. At the same time, the FIA is under constant pressure to protect drivers and prevent racing incidents from escalating into dangerous crashes.
However, the line between a racing incident and unsporting conduct remains blurred. Was Sainz’s clash with Lawson an unavoidable consequence of aggressive driving into a tight corner, or was it reckless aggression? Was Bearman’s move on Sainz in Monza the result of clumsy inexperience or bold opportunism? The answers depend largely on who is in the stewarding room that weekend.
Nico Rosberg, never one to mince his words, blamed Sainz rather than Bearman for the incident in Monza, showing that even world champions cannot agree on who is at fault. If the experts are divided, what hope does a fan have of deciphering the FIA’s logic?
‘Proper driving’
Here lies the irony: Formula 1 is a sport built on speed, daring and overtaking, yet it is now paralysed by debates about what constitutes ‘proper driving’. In the past, drivers such as Ayrton Senna, Nigel Mansell and Michael Schumacher defined the boundaries through their actions on the track. Today, however, those boundaries are defined by panels, paperwork, and penalty points.
When Alex Albon says he does not know how to drive properly, he may well be telling the truth, because ‘proper driving’ in modern Formula 1 is a moving target. It is more about guessing what a rotating jury of stewards will tolerate than about instinct. In that sense, perhaps the FIA has unwittingly created a second race every Sunday: one on the track and one in the stewarding office.
Harsh words directed at Hamilton
The path forward
What can be done? The FIA has pledged to improve communication by publishing more detailed explanations of decisions and introducing consistency briefings for drivers. However, critics argue that these steps are merely cosmetic since the underlying issues of rotating panels and subjective judgement persist.
Some suggest that having a permanent core of professional stewards, similar to referees in football, would reduce inconsistencies. Others believe that technology could play a greater role, with AI-assisted analysis of incidents eliminating bias.
However, even these reforms would not fully resolve the tension between racing and regulation. Formula 1 thrives on unpredictability and daring manoeuvres that bring crowds to their feet. To regulate that spontaneity too tightly would risk making the sport sterile. However, leaving it unchecked invites chaos and potential danger. This is an intractable problem, though Albon’s comments may serve as a reminder that the current system leaves too many participants dissatisfied.
By admitting his uncertainty about how to race properly, Alex Albon has voiced what many in the paddock quietly believe. Formula 1’s penalty system is broken. Inconsistencies undermine drivers, confuse fans and distract from the racing itself. The sport cannot afford to allow stewards’ decisions to become the defining narrative of each weekend.
Perhaps the FIA should ask itself a simple question: if even experienced drivers no longer understand the rules, how can Formula 1 deliver fair and thrilling competition?
MORE F1 NEWS – Hadjar breaks silence over the rumour
Isack Hadjar has emerged as one of the most promising newcomers of the 2025 Formula One season. Driving for Racing Bulls, the French rookie has stunned many observers with his consistently excellent performances, which far exceed expectations for a first-year driver. His success has inevitably led to speculation in the paddock that he is destined for a rapid promotion to the senior Red Bull Racing team, but Hadjar himself appears unmoved by the rumours.
Rumours have been circulating for several months, fuelled by his impressive on-track results and Red Bull’s ongoing struggle to find a reliable partner for Max Verstappen. Senior advisor Helmut Marko told German outlet Sport1 that a formal decision regarding Hadjar’s future could be made around the Mexico Grand Prix weekend at the end of October. For now, however, the 20-year-old insists that his focus remains firmly on driving rather than indulging in transfer gossip…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.
Craig.J. Alderson is Senior Editor at TJ13, where Craig oversees newsroom operations and coordinates editorial output across the site. With a background in online sports reporting and motorsport magazine editing, he plays a key role in maintaining consistency, speed, and accuracy in TJ13’s coverage.
During race weekends, Craig acts as desk lead, directing contributors, prioritising breaking stories, and ensuring timely publication across a fast-moving news cycle.
Craig’s work focuses heavily on real-time developments in the paddock, including team updates, regulatory decisions, and emerging controversies. This role requires a detailed understanding of Formula 1’s operational flow, from practice sessions through to race-day strategy and post-race fallout.
With experience managing editorial teams, Craig ensures that TJ13 delivers structured, reliable coverage while maintaining the site’s distinctive voice.
Craig has a particular interest in how information moves within the paddock environment, and how rapidly developing stories can be accurately translated into clear, accessible reporting for readers.
