Carlos Sainz Proposes F1 Pundit-Led Incident Review for FIA
Carlos Sainz has proposed a radical shake-up of FIA incident reviews, suggesting that former F1 drivers and TV pundits like Karun Chandhok, Jolyon Palmer, and Anthony Davidson should analyze incidents instead of relying on current guidelines. Sainz, a GDPA director, believes their accurate, experienced-based judgments would provide a more consistent and respected system for F1, aligning closer with drivers' perceptions and potentially eliminating the need for strict regulations.
Carlos Sainz has put forward a novel idea to reform how FIA stewards review racing incidents, drawing inspiration from the in-depth analyses provided by various F1 television broadcasters.
The proposal emerged from a recent meeting of all 20 F1 drivers and the FIA, held prior to the Qatar Grand Prix. This gathering was specifically convened to address the widely criticized driving standards guidelines, which have been a point of contention throughout the current season.
Why it matters:
Ferrari driver Carlos Sainz, who also serves as a director for the Grand Prix Drivers' Association (GDPA), advocates for the abolition of current driving guidelines. His alternative vision involves engaging experienced ex-F1 drivers and pundits like Karun Chandhok, Jolyon Palmer, and Anthony Davidson to analyze incidents. Sainz believes their consistent accuracy in attributing blame or identifying racing incidents offers a superior model for adjudication compared to the FIA's current system.
The details:
- Sainz observed that post-race analyses by former drivers often provide highly accurate verdicts, correctly identifying fault or deeming incidents as purely racing occurrences.
- He proposes a future without rigid guidelines, where incidents are judged by individuals with similar expertise and judgment to these television pundits.
- Rationale for the Change: Sainz expressed significant admiration for the level of analysis and 'sharpness' demonstrated by broadcasters in their incident breakdowns, suggesting it aligns closely with how active drivers perceive events.
- He believes that while 100% agreement might not be achievable, the former drivers' analyses are '90 percent correct' and represent the ideal standard for sporting judgment in F1.
- Addressing the Stewarding Panel: Sainz acknowledged that while some current stewards do a good job, the insights from recently active drivers could simplify the adjudication process, potentially reducing the reliance on extensive guidelines.
- Practical Considerations: Implementing such a system would require structuring a 'fixed salary' and 'relatively important job' for these ex-drivers, given the demanding F1 calendar of 24 races.
Looking Ahead:
Sainz's proposal, if adopted, could significantly alter the impartiality and perception of fairness within F1's incident review process. By integrating the insights of recently retired drivers who possess deep, current understanding of racing dynamics, the sport could move towards more consistent and universally accepted decisions. This shift would aim to reduce controversies and align official rulings more closely with the racing community's perspective, enhancing the integrity and spectacle of Formula 1.