Former champion raises issue with F1 stewarding following Mexican GP controversy

Former Formula 1 champion Damon Hill has outlined the current stewarding process in F1 and proposed a streamlined approach – appointing a dedicated ‘referee’ rather than relying on the commonly suggested concept of a full-time job FIA stewards. Hill argued that appointing experienced drivers as stewards is problematic, suggesting instead that they should act as advisors, providing valuable insights to support and improve stewards’ decisions.

The FIA ​​faced heavy criticism after United States Grand Prix for allegedly inconsistent rulings regarding penalties for driver violations. In response, there have been many suggestions advocating for a more consistent stewarding process through the appointment of full-time stewards. Since 2010, the FIA ​​has included a rotating driver steward on its panel at each race.

However, the 1996 F1 champion rejected the idea, suggesting the problem arises when experienced drivers become stewards. Instead, he suggested they should be advisors to the judges who make the final decision before drivers take the podium. Asked about the idea of ​​having full-time FIA ​​stewards, Hill said on the program: Sky F1 Podcast: :

“I think the problem really came into play when drivers became stewards and I think the solution was to have someone to advise stewards what they were thinking, so they got the opinion of an experienced driver to help them make their decision.

“Because the way it works is that the race director reports something, so he sees something and says, ‘I think this needs to be investigated,’ and he passes it on to the stewards.

“The stewards then look at the rules and what they say and then they have to apply them depending on whether the rules are correct or not.

“It’s almost a legal interpretation of the situation, but it helps them if they have a driver there who says, ‘Well, personally I don’t think it’s acceptable, it’s the kind of driving that requires discipline,’ or ‘It’s fantastic racing, leave it in peace’.

“And we want the result to be the result. We want the result to be a podium. We don’t want, “Oh God, I’m sorry, can you just step off the podium and we have another 20 minutes before we decide what to do?” That’s not very satisfying, is it?

“That’s why I say you need a judge and his decision is final and not perfect, you can always accuse people of bias, but you give your all and as long as you take part in the competition, you accept the fact that someone will call and say it’s good or wrong, and if you accept that this is the fair way, then you can’t complain, you know?

“It’s not justice, it’s sport, and sport includes referee calls, good and bad.”