FIA to provide video evidence and improve stewarding of incidents in 2009

F1 fans will be able to scrutinise controversial incidents more closely in 2009

F1 fans will be able to scrutinise controversial incidents more closely in 2009

The FIA is to introduce a series of changes to how its rules are enforced during F1 weekends.

In a significant change the FIA will ensure all video evidence relating to controversial moments is made available to the public via its and FOM’s websites.

It did so following the questionable penalties given to Lewis Hamilton, Felipe Massa and Sebastien Bourdais during the Japanese Grand Prix.

It will also provided more detailed information as to why a particular penalty was handed out. At present the stewards issue very short statements that explain little more than what penalty has been issued.

It is also to begin bringing trainee stewads to five F1 rounds per year. Any stewards who is to officiate at an F1 race will have to have attended at least one race in this capacity to be qualified for stewarding duties in future. These trainee stewards may include former drivers.

There was outcry among F1 fans and criticism from several drivers including Nick Heidfeld, Jarno Trulli, Mark Webber and Jenson Button following a string of dubious decisions during the 2008 championship, chiefly at Fuji and Spa.

The changes go some way to making necessary improvements and the moves to improve transparency are especially welcome.

But these changes do not address the large grey areas in the application of the rules. The gap between the rules as written and how they are enforced can be huge – particularly on matters of driving standards. Past precedent on these matters is extremely hard to follow and often appears contradictory.

Still, at least the FIA understands improvement is urgently needed and has acted upon it.

Get the latest articles from F1 Fanatic for free via RSS or our email subscription service. Click here for more information.

Advert | Go Ad-free

19 comments on FIA to provide video evidence and improve stewarding of incidents in 2009

  1. Alex Cooper said on 5th November 2008, 15:27

    Agree with you there Keith – while there continues to be grey, hazy areas in the rules there will continue to be decisions that appear controversial.

    I applaud the FIA for taking action but don’t think it’s enough. What’s wrong with the same stewards at every round?

  2. John Spencer said on 5th November 2008, 15:29

    What’s funny is the (tongue-in-cheek?) ‘Note‘ at the end of the piece saying that former drivers are eligibile to become stewards. Can you imagine Jackie Stewart, Nicki Lauda or Jody Scheckter going through an FIA approval process and Max actually letting them make decisions?

    But your analysis is spot on, Keith. While these changes are welcome, what’s missing is any intention to spell out what the rules actually are.

  3. Alex has it right. Providing evidence of the “facts” will clarify nothing if the rules are neither clear nor applied consistently.

  4. getting rid of Donnelly would have made the whole thing a bit simpler

  5. I guess this is better than the earlier widely proposed solution of making former drivers stewards.
    I am strongly against it; since it would only lead to more controversy.

    Can you imagine what will happen if MSC does not penalise ferrari or Mika Hakkinen does not penalise Mclaren ! !

    Kudos to FIA! !Finally You people see some common sense

  6. It’s a start and finally too. Indeed some may even say hallelujah! The FIA is slowly being dragged, kicking and screaming I bet, into the 21st century.

    What a shame it needs controversial events to make them alter their ways. They should be leading the way just like F1 cars and F1 technology.

    tut tut FIA…

  7. Still not enough by the FIA in my opinion. Everything left it to them to decide whether or not to post any video, and they will still show only the video that supports their decisions.

    Clarification of the actual rules, providing detail as to the specific penalties associated with breaking them, and creating a history of precedents is what is needed. If they want to treat each infraction on the track like a legal case, with appeals and everything, then it all needs to be documented out in a detailed fashion so there is LESS private interpretation of what the rules and consequences are. I say ‘less’ because there will always be private interpretation, but the more detailed things become, the easier it is to determine when someone’s interpretation crosses the line.

    The stewards penalty at Spa could have been more clear cut if only the rules stated that the driver had to wait until the next corner to re-pass. Stating only that ‘the track and only the track shall be used’ (or whatever vague wording it has) leaves way to much for private interpretation by the stewards.

  8. donwatters said on 5th November 2008, 20:04

    As most everyone else has said: Yes, it’s a good start. But it certainly doesn’t address the “consistency of rules enforcement” issue. Also, I don’t see where it limits the imput and impact of Mad Max and his minions.

  9. decisions need to be speeded up during the race, hopefully this will happen

  10. D Winn said on 5th November 2008, 20:33

    It’s a step in the right direction, but only one step.
    As Alex (post 4) says, get rid of Donnelly and his ‘political’ guidance.
    Qualification for stewardship = watch one race !!!
    I guess we should all apply then :)
    Hopefully the results of any inquisition posted on the FIA site will not be a bunch of Max legalistic jargon.

  11. Anonymous said on 5th November 2008, 21:28

    I’m glad to hear this, it’s a good start. Next step would to be abolish after-race penalties. Decisions need to be made quickly and during the race.

  12. beneboy said on 5th November 2008, 21:50

    They had to start somewhere and this is as good a place as any.

    At least if we get a clearer explanation of rulings then we may be able to understand them a little better.

    As others have said, there is still a lot more to be done, I’m with D Winn, we should all contact the FIA and see if we can apply for the positions.

    Their contact details can be found at:
    http://www.fia.com/en-GB/global/pages/contact.aspx

    Good luck :~)

    I don’t mind who the stewards are although I think it’s about time we had a team of professional stewards who could be trained by people like Charlie Whiting to officiate the races.

    A team of 9 would mean that any 3 could be picked for each race, as they become more experienced they could then train up more stewards who are currently working on national & club races.

    It’s all a bit pointless without some clearly defined rules though.

  13. What i think they should do is keep a database of past stewarding decisions and make them accessible to the stewards during the race. that database could include videos of past incidents and their stewarding decisions and reasoning. Then link these incidents by key words such as chicane, overtake, unsafe pit exit. So anytime a new incident occurs, they can just search for past incidents, compare, and decide. I feel more consistency can be achieved this way, and less public furore.

  14. ceedas said on 5th November 2008, 22:56

    I don’t think there’s anything the FIA can do to please everyone anyway – ex-drivers would be accused of bias towards or against teams, any time a driver/team gets a penalty that is in any way less than black and white, there’ll be people on each side of the fence crying foul. They can only do so much.

  15. I am just staggered that there is no current requirement for Stewards to have attended an F1 race prior to officiating at one !

    That’s like asking me to be a ref at a soccer match ;)

    Well anyway, all of this appears to be a start. And as long as it improves the quality of stewarding, thats the main thing.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.