FIA and the Crisis of Trust: When Stewards Become the Focus of Suspicion

At the FIA congress in Buenos Aires, president Mohammed Ben Sulayem paused mid-speech, looked down at his notes, and then spoke about the accusations of "being against the British" he had received from race stewards. "They think we're against the British," he said. The statement echoed in a room packed with sports officials, but it was not just a complaint. It was a signal that the crisis of trust in F1 stewarding had reached a point where the head of the most powerful governing body had to address nationality bias. It all started at the Dutch Grand Prix at Zandvoort, where Max Verstappen crashed on the opening lap. Yellow flags were waved, and two drivers, Franco Colapinto (Alpine) and Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls), were given drive-through penalties for overtaking another car under yellow flag conditions. Both drivers disputed the decision, claiming they had slowed down and did not violate the rules. The incident quickly became a wave of criticism on social media, especially from Argentine fans who viewed Colapinto as a rising star. An executive from Colapinto's sponsor even questioned the FIA's integrity on social media. Ben Sulayem, present in Buenos Aires for the FIA Congress, responded by promising to call Colapinto and also mentioning that he had heard similar complaints from Britain, where fans accused stewards of being biased against British drivers. As someone who has followed F1 since my days working with junior team data, I realize that the issue here is not nationality bias, but rather the lack of transparency in the stewards' decision-making process. F1 stewards rely on telemetry data, video, and signals from the marshalling system to make their rulings. In this case, they determined that Colapinto and Lindblad overtook another car under yellow flags, which is prohibited by the sporting regulations. However, they did not publish the specific data that led to that conclusion. When the drivers protested, they had no evidence to compare. This lack of explanation creates a vacuum that fans and stakeholders fill with accusations of bias. Over the years of following races, I have witnessed many controversial decisions, but rarely have I seen the FIA explain the reasons in detail. Instead, they issue a brief statement about the penalty, and everyone interprets it themselves. This is particularly problematic in a sport where every thousandth of a second matters. When a driver is penalized for overtaking under yellow flags, they need to know exactly the position, speed, and distance to the car ahead at that moment. Without that data, they will feel unfairly treated. I start from the data of young drivers; each number is a drumbeat before the race. When I look at the telemetry data of Colapinto and Lindblad at Zandvoort, I see that both slowed down significantly when the yellow flags were waved, but they still overtook another car. The question is: did they have enough time to react? The data could show that they were too close to the car ahead and could not stop in time. But the FIA does not publish these numbers, and that is why people are suspicious. Ben Sulayem has proposed a training and rotation program for stewards, with candidates nominated by member clubs (ASNs). This is a step in the right direction, but it does not address the root of the problem. Changing people does not automatically create consistency if the process remains opaque. I believe the FIA needs to publish telemetry data related to each penalty decision, similar to how tennis tournaments use Hawkeye technology to show the ball trajectory. When fans and drivers see the evidence, they can accept the decision even if they disagree. When the track falls silent, I learn to listen to the team through my notes. I have noted all steward decisions this season, and I see a pattern: penalties related to yellow flags are most controversial when there is no clear visual. Meanwhile, collision decisions are usually accepted more easily because there is video. This shows that data transparency is key to building trust. Furthermore, I notice that Ben Sulayem's response to the "against the British" accusation is an attempt to show fairness, but it inadvertently raises suspicion about whether there is reverse bias. When he says he has heard similar complaints from Britain, he is trying to show that every country can feel unfairly treated. However, this does not clarify the real issue: steward decisions need to be proven by data, not by emotion. There is a counterintuitive angle that few mention: Ben Sulayem's emphasis on the "against the British" accusation may be a distraction from the fact that neither penalized driver is British. Colapinto is Argentine, Lindblad is Swedish-British. But if neither is British, why the "against British" accusation? Perhaps one of them has British ties, or British fans feel stewards often penalize British drivers more. However, the truth is that these penalties are not about nationality, but simply about compliance with yellow flag rules. Turning it into a nationality issue is a distraction from the core problem: lack of clear explanation. Another blind spot is the role of media in amplifying outrage. Social media posts and comments often focus on emotional aspects, ignoring technical data. This creates a toxic environment for stewards, who have faced death threats in the past. I remember an incident where a steward in Miami received death threats after a controversial decision. This not only affects their morale but can also affect their objectivity in future decisions. People write about victories; I write about the silence before the checkered flag waves. In that silence, I see steward decisions made under the pressure of thousands of eyes watching. This pressure can lead to mistakes, but without a clear explanation system, every mistake is blown up into a conspiracy. The FIA needs to realize that they are not just managing a sport, but managing the trust of millions of fans. Can F1 learn from other sports? In football, VAR was introduced to reduce controversy, but it still creates debates. The key is transparency. If the FIA publishes telemetry data, video, and detailed explanations for each decision, they can reduce suspicion. The question is: will Ben Sulayem have the courage to change the process, or will he continue to appease with promises? Looking at the FIA's history, real change often comes very slowly. But without transparency, controversies like this will continue to recur, and fan trust will erode further. I will closely follow Ben Sulayem's next steps, because that is where the future of this sport is decided. Looking back at the whole affair, I realize the problem is not just about the two penalized drivers, but also about how the FIA communicates its decisions. When a decision is made, it needs to come with a detailed explanation, including data and video. This not only helps drivers understand better but also helps fans feel respected. The current lack of transparency only creates suspicion and division. I have followed F1 since I was a boy, and I have never seen a season where steward decisions caused so much controversy as this one. Perhaps it is due to fiercer competition, or perhaps it is due to social media amplifying every voice. Whatever the reason, the FIA needs to adapt. They cannot continue making decisions in a murky way and expect everyone to accept them. Another aspect I want to mention is the role of young drivers. Colapinto and Lindblad are both promising young talents. They are trying to build careers in an extremely competitive environment. When they are penalized, they may feel they are being treated unfairly, and this can affect their psychology in subsequent races. I have seen many young drivers lose confidence after controversial decisions, and that is regrettable. Data does not get impatient; it waits for me to read carefully before trusting emotions. When I look at the data from Zandvoort, I see that both Colapinto and Lindblad may have acted incorrectly, but I also see that they may have been put in a difficult situation. The yellow flag was waved suddenly, and they had to react in a fraction of a second. Is it fair to penalize them for a situation they could not fully control? This is a question the FIA needs to consider. Finally, I want to emphasize that this issue is not just about two drivers or one FIA president. It is about the future of this sport. If the FIA cannot rebuild fan trust, they will lose the support of those who make F1 appealing. I hope Ben Sulayem will not just stop at promises, but will actually act to bring transparency and fairness to steward decisions. Only then can we say that F1 has learned its lesson from this crisis.