Steiner Calls Gasly's Monaco Podium Reinstatement a 'Debacle'

Former Haas team principal Guenther Steiner has launched a scathing attack on the FIA's decision to reinstate Pierre Gasly's Monaco Grand Prix podium, calling the post-race ruling a "complete debacle" that exposes serious flaws in Formula 1's penalty system.

Why it matters:

The controversy strikes at the heart of regulatory consistency. Alpine successfully appealed Gasly's pitlane speeding penalty through a right of review, but other drivers who committed similar offenses served their punishments during the race and have no recourse. Steiner warns that the decision creates an uneven playing field and risks undermining trust in the stewarding process.

The details:

• Gasly was originally handed a pitlane speeding penalty at Monaco that dropped him from third to seventh, as the time penalty was applied to the final classification when he did not serve it during the race.
• Alpine lodged a right of review and provided new evidence that was unavailable to stewards at the time, leading the FIA to overturn the penalty and restore Gasly's podium.
• The core problem: Several other drivers also received pitlane speeding penalties but served them during the race, making their sanctions irreversible under current regulations.
• Steiner argued that reinstating Gasly without being able to correct other served penalties breaks the system's integrity: "If you reinstate his podium, you have to change also the other ones, and you cannot do that anymore."
• The former Haas boss traced the issue back to the placement of the speeding line or incorrect information given to teams, but maintained that restoring the podium through regulatory loopholes was the wrong remedy.

What's next:

The Monaco fallout will likely intensify scrutiny on how the FIA manages post-race appeals. Teams will demand clearer guidelines on evidence submission and right of review protocols, particularly when others have already served penalties. Without structural adjustments, similar disputes could continue to erode confidence in the stewarding process.