Formula 1 stewards have issued a rare double statement following the controversy surrounding Lewis Hamilton’s 10-second time penalty at the Mexico City Grand Prix. The move comes after mounting backlash from Ferrari, Hamilton himself, and a wave of criticism from fans who questioned the consistency and fairness of the decision.
Hamilton, who started third, was penalized after an incident on the opening lap when he locked his brakes and ran wide at Turn 4 while battling Max Verstappen. He briefly left the track and rejoined ahead of the Red Bull driver — a move the stewards determined gave him a “lasting advantage.” The decision effectively ended Hamilton’s hopes of a podium finish, dropping him from contention to an eventual eighth place.
In their first statement, the stewards defended their initial call, clarifying that Hamilton “left the track and gained a lasting advantage,” which under Formula 1 regulations carries a standard 10-second penalty. They added that although the British driver was forced wide due to the intensity of the first-lap battle, he failed to return the position he gained, which triggered the sanction.
However, confusion spread after race footage showed Hamilton bypassing the designated escape road — a marked route drivers are expected to use if they run off at that corner. This prompted speculation that Hamilton might have breached two separate rules and should have faced an additional penalty.
In their second statement, the stewards clarified why Hamilton was not punished twice. They explained that while the Ferrari driver did not follow the escape road, his excessive speed made it “impossible to safely rejoin via that path.” They stressed that applying an additional penalty would have constituted “double jeopardy,” and therefore the initial 10-second sanction was deemed sufficient.
Despite the clarification, Ferrari were left fuming. Team principal Fred Vasseur described the ruling as “harsh and inconsistent,” accusing the stewards of lacking uniformity in their decisions. “There have been similar situations this season that didn’t receive the same punishment,” Vasseur said. “We just want consistency — that’s all the teams are asking for.”
Hamilton himself admitted his disappointment, saying the race “started great” but “didn’t end up the way I hoped.” The seven-time world champion added that he felt the penalty was “tough to take,” given the circumstances of the first-lap chaos.
The FIA’s decision to issue two public explanations is a rare move in Formula 1, underscoring the level of scrutiny surrounding the call. While the governing body insists that the penalty followed standard protocol, critics argue that the ambiguity of “lasting advantage” rulings continues to spark confusion among teams and fans alike.
As the dust settles, the debate over stewarding consistency shows no signs of fading. With Ferrari reportedly preparing a formal complaint, and Hamilton’s camp calling for clearer race procedures, the Mexico GP penalty could reignite a larger conversation about fairness and transparency in Formula 1 officiating.
