Herbert Calls for Steward Review on F1 Turn 1 Incidents

Former F1 driver and steward Johnny Herbert is advocating for a significant change in how Turn 1 incidents are officiated, arguing that the current leniency on the opening lap is being "abused" by drivers. He asserts that the 'cold tires' excuse for not penalizing drivers who cut corners on the first lap is enabling unfair advantages and creating a "free-for-all" situation.

Why it matters:

F1's stewarding consistency has been a recurring point of contention, and Herbert's comments highlight a specific area where perceived inconsistencies could be directly impacting race outcomes and driver behavior. A clearer, more stringent approach to Turn 1 incidents could lead to fairer racing and reduce the strategic exploitation of current rules, ensuring that advantages are earned, not taken.

The Details:

• Mexico City Grand Prix Incidents: Herbert specifically referenced the start of the Mexico City Grand Prix, where drivers including Max Verstappen and Charles Leclerc cut the first corners without penalty, despite going four-wide into Turn 1.
• Current Leniency: Stewards often turn a blind eye to Turn 1 incidents on the first lap, citing cold tires and lower speeds as mitigating factors.
• Herbert's Argument: He believes this approach is flawed, as drivers are the best in the world and should be able to manage cooler tires. He argues that drivers are exploiting this leniency, gaining advantages without repercussions.
• Verstappen and Leclerc: According to Herbert, neither Verstappen nor Leclerc lost time after leaving the track in Mexico, further illustrating the unpunished gains.
• Hamilton's 'Harsh' Penalty: In contrast, Lewis Hamilton received a 10-second time penalty for cutting Turns 4 and 5 later in the race after battling Verstappen. Herbert deemed this penalty "harsh" given the circumstances, suggesting that while the penalty itself (10 seconds) should be universal, its application to Hamilton felt severe.
  • Herbert posited that if Hamilton had immediately slowed down and allowed Verstappen to regain position, a penalty might have been avoided.
  • He stressed that penalties, once decided upon, should be consistently applied (e.g., always 10 seconds for a specific offense), but questioned the initial decision's severity in Hamilton's case.

Between the Lines:

Herbert's critique goes beyond individual incidents; it points to a systemic issue in stewarding where perceived 'first-lap exemptions' are creating a loophole. His call for change underscores a desire for absolute consistency and fairness, pushing back against the notion that the unique challenges of a race start should absolve drivers of accountability for exceeding track limits or gaining an advantage. The contrast with Hamilton's penalty further highlights this perceived double standard, creating frustration among drivers and fans alike.

What's Next:

While a single former driver's comments may not immediately instigate a rule change, they add to a growing chorus of voices calling for greater clarity and consistency in F1's stewarding. The FIA will likely continue to face pressure to review and potentially refine their guidelines, especially concerning first-lap incidents, to ensure the integrity and fairness of racing.