This weekend in Hungary, the FIA held one of its two annual meetings with the Formula One drivers where in-depth discussions are held over a variety of matters, including stewarding decisions. These are over and above the meetings with the race director held before the cars hit the track each race weekend.
Hamilton was treated harshly by the stewards last time out for his coming together with George Russell on the first lap of the Belgian Grand Prix. As the Mercedes driver came up and over the rise at Eau Rouge, he was swamped by a number of other drivers due to a fault in the battery deployment of the W17.
Clash at Spa: The Hamilton-Russell Incident
Russell recovered somewhat toward the end of the long Kemmel Straight and was fully alongside Hamilton as they entered the Les Combes chicane. The seven-time champion experienced a snap of oversteer as he turned in, which saw his Ferrari clip the side of Russell’s Mercedes, spinning him around 180 degrees into the gravel and out of the race.
“I’m out, what the f— happened with the SoC down the straight? I had no f—ing battery down the straight! Guys, unacceptable. Un-f—ing-acceptable this whole weekend,” raged Russell from the cockpit of his stricken car.
Later, during his mandatory media duties, the British driver laid no blame at Hamilton’s door, preferring to continue blaming the team. “I shouldn’t have been in that position in the first place, that’s why I’m most angry. With Lewis, honestly, I think [it] was a racing incident,” Russell concluded.
Hamilton too was on the radio pleading his innocence after the incident. He explained that the car ahead moved in front of him and took the clean air from his wing, which created the oversteer. “I was a passenger,” Hamilton lamented.
Penalties and Impact on Ferrari’s Race Strategy
Yet the incident was noted by race control and investigated at length by the stewards. The result of their deliberations was a five-second penalty for Hamilton. The stewards did hear Lewis’ mitigating circumstances and reduced the penalty from ten to five seconds.
Fortunately for Ferrari, when the safety car was deployed and the team decided to double-stack both its drivers for fresh tyres, Hamilton was behind his teammate this time, so Leclerc was not delayed. In all probability, the penalty cost Hamilton a shot at a podium, as he finished in fourth place behind the Red Bull of Max Verstappen.
Hamilton refused to attend the FIA meeting in Hungary with the F1 stewards, so the matter was not included in the official discussions.
Leclerc vs. Piastri: Sparks Fly at Les Combes
However, there was a second incident a couple of laps later at the same chicane, where Charles Leclerc was under pressure from the McLaren of Oscar Piastri. As Piastri drew alongside on the outside of the corner, Leclerc appeared to jink to the left ever so slightly, causing the tyres on the Ferrari and the McLaren to touch, creating a momentary puff of smoke.
“He didn’t leave enough space. That could have been a massive crash,” Piastri reported in his usual laconic style over team radio.
Later, in the podium drivers’ cool-down room, the incident was replayed on the screen. Leclerc was seen taking a sharp intake of breath before commenting: “This one was…” But before he could finish, Verstappen interjected, “Calculated,” and laughed.
Piastri’s Frustration and Hidden Aerodynamic Damage
Piastri was measured in his post-race media interview, explaining: “From where I was sitting, I was on the white line and got squeezed. I think we were very lucky not to have a bigger crash because we touched wheels at the start of the braking zone, but I don’t really know where I was supposed to go.”
The young Aussie was fair in his assessment, suggesting a time penalty was maybe not deserved for his rival, but reckoned a black-and-white flag should have been shown to the Ferrari driver. His reasoning: “Because if we think that that’s fine, it’s one thing touching like that, but even the incentive of knowing you can leave everyone with the absolute bare minimum space and get away with it—that’s not the nicest place to be.”
Leclerc, on his part, refused to defend his actions, merely noting: “Lap 8 was too close,” he said. “Luckily, it didn’t have any consequences for either my race or his race, so that’s good.” In fact, it did have a detrimental effect on Piastri’s day, as during the contact he lost an element of his aero package, which the McLaren team boss reckoned cost between 5 and 10 points of downforce.
He went on to suggest that the excessive tyre wear Piastri experienced, which compromised his race pace, was in part due to the damage to Oscar’s car.
The FIA Stewards’ Official Ruling and Hungary U-Turn
The official report from the stewards stated:
“On the approach to Turn 5, Car 81 [Piastri] moved to overtake Car 16 [Leclerc] on the outside,” the stewards’ statement said. “Car 81 had some overlap on Car 16 but the front axle of Car 81 was not ahead of the front axle of Car 16 and there was no possibility of Car 81 completing an overtake from that position.
“In the Stewards’ determination, Car 16 did not deliberately crowd Car 81 off the edge of the track. Car 16 followed the racing line before the entry to Turn 5 by moving slightly to the left to open up for Turn 5 and side to side contact occurred between the two cars.”
Yet at the drivers’ meeting which Hamilton failed to attend, a lengthy debate was reported between the FIA officials and the drivers over the ‘no fault’ decision regarding Leclerc’s move. The stewarding representatives eventually admitted the ruling was incorrect and that, with hindsight, a five-second penalty should have been awarded.
Also during the meeting, the unpublished FIA driving standards guidelines were on the agenda. A number of topics were discussed for inclusion in the 2027 edition, but they will only be finalized at the second meeting of the season in three months’ time.
Would you like to see more TJ13 Formula 1 coverage? Add us to your favourites list on Google to receive trusted F1 news.
A.J. Hunt is Senior Editor at TJ13, where Andrew oversees editorial standards and contributes to the site’s Formula 1 coverage. A career journalist with experience in both print and digital sports media, Andrew trained in investigative journalism and has written for a range of European sports outlets.
At TJ13, Andrew plays a central role in shaping the site’s output, working across breaking news, analysis, and long-form features. Andrew’s responsibilities include fact-checking, refining editorial structure, and ensuring consistency in reporting across a fast-moving news cycle.
Andrew’s work focuses particularly on the intersection of Formula 1 politics, regulation, and team strategy. Andrew closely follows developments involving the FIA, team leadership, and driver market dynamics, helping to provide context behind the sport’s biggest stories.
With experience covering multiple seasons of Formula 1’s modern hybrid era, Andrew has developed a detailed understanding of how regulatory changes and competitive shifts influence the grid. Andrew’s editorial approach prioritises clarity and context, aiming to help readers navigate complex developments within the sport.
In addition to editorial duties, Andrew is particularly interested in how media narratives shape fan perception of Formula 1, and how reporting can balance speed with accuracy in an increasingly digital news environment.
