Up Next
There was only one talking point at the front of the Formula 1 field in the United States Grand Prix - and it wasn't Ferrari's excellent 1-2 finish.
Not one but two flashpoints between F1 title rivals Max Verstappen and Lando Norris shaped Sunday's race at Austin - with Norris ultimately penalised for a late-race overtake on Verstappen for third that was completed while both were off-track.
Is McLaren right that the stewards' intervention was unnecessary? Or was a penalty inevitable and should the team have known better? And what about Red Bull driver Verstappen's lunge at the start?
Here's our team's take:
Guidelines are a mess
Scott Mitchell-Malm
I don't understand the situation F1 racing is in. Verstappen drove so brilliantly in that battle, but I'm not at all convinced that the Norris overtake merited a penalty when Verstappen didn't leave space.
The racing guidelines are a mess, the art of racing has become awfully murky, and it's very hard to explain or understand any decision.
I guess one conclusion from this race for Norris is he needs to not go off track anymore. And just collide with the other car. Hard to know what the decision would be from the stewards in that scenario. But taking evasive action achieves nothing.
I'm not even criticising Verstappen in this. Why drive any differently when your natural approach is to be uncompromising and it pays off more often than not?
Teams could take more responsibility
Gary Anderson
To me the rules are clear: keep your car between the white lines and you are OK, go outside and you risk the wrath of the stewards who, at Austin, were justifiably not shy about handing out penalties.
As for Norris and Verstappen, both drivers went off the track so in effect that should have cancelled out any advantage and Norris should have let Verstappen back through. Any penalty for either driver could just have been down to how many times each driver had exceeded track limits.
A little bit of leeway isn't wrong on the first lap especially for the first few corners - I think that once you get to the end of the first track section then track limits should come into place - unless one driver creates an accident by blatantly making contact with another and ruins their race.
The stewards have a difficult time judging these things but it is not their fault. The rules need to define the penalty allocation more comprehensively.
I also think it should be in the teams' hands to police this type of infringement. If they acted responsibly then there would be no need for the stewards to get involved.
Norris hadn't done enough to demand room
Ben Anderson
The problem with the late-race move by Norris on Verstappen is that Norris wasn't far enough alongside the Red Bull by the time they reached the apex. The rules now say that, if you're overtaking on the outside, being anything less than level with the other car's front axle is not enough to demand to be given space.
The extra complication is that Verstappen clearly knows this and has most likely come off the brakes to make sure the McLaren wouldn't be far enough ahead at the crucial moment.
So he's effectively forced Norris into a position where he has to concede the corner. Norris didn't, hung on around the outside and overtook off track. That was always going to mean a penalty.
Yes, Verstappen ran wide too - but as the defensive car in that scenario he was effectively protected by the current racing guidelines.
Had he been overtaking Norris on the inside there, he would have been the one penalised with that scenario playing out exactly the same way.
Norris should have conceded the place but he also shouldn't have been put in that position by what Verstappen did at the apex.
This is what happens when the art of racing is reduced to driving to guidelines. It's stupid.
F1's rulebook is tied in knots
Glenn Freeman
It's such a shame that after a brilliant battle between the top two drivers in the championship, the main talking point is a penalty that comes from F1's over-engineered attempts to regulate racing.
Norris probably wasn't far enough ahead at the corner to support McLaren's case that he was entitled to stay ahead after going off track.
But the way F1's rules are written right now, it's very easy for any driver being overtaken to force the overtaking driver into a situation that will get them penalised.
If somebody tries to pass you on the outside, as Norris did to Verstappen, then the defending driver on the inside appears to be allowed to run deep into the corner - and even go off himself - and the guy going around the outside still has to give you the place back.
But we also saw examples in that race where a driver who was on the outside and being overtaken just had to hang on around the outside and drive into the run-off, and the guy overtaking them on the inside would get penalised for forcing them off.
This is the problem when something becomes over-regulated. The rulebook has been tied in knots, and is full of contradictions.
McLaren should've acted
Josh Suttill
McLaren is going to regret not asking Norris to give that place back.
Regardless of whether it was right or wrong, based on the race we'd had and the other incidents at Turn 12 that resulted in five-second time penalties, this always felt like it was going to go the same way and McLaren could have stopped that.
You could argue it was worth the risk in case Norris wasn't penalised, but it felt like Norris had the pace to have another go later on in the last five laps.
It's only fine margins but once again McLaren has fallen short of Red Bull with a split-second call and Verstappen's racecraft has gazumped Norris's.
