The FIA hosted its third annual review meeting with the Formula 1 Stewards' Chairs and F1 drivers on Thursday.

The annual meetings are to provide an open forum for drivers and stewards to discuss driving standards and penalty guidelines, share perspectives, and ensure that regulations are applied clearly and consistently. They also allow the FIA to gather feedback and review guidance where appropriate.

A central focus of the discussion was the Driving Standards Guidelines (DSGs), first introduced in 2022 at the request of the drivers to clarify what is and is not permitted when overtaking or defending on track.

The DSGs are intended to be a living document, have been updated twice since their introduction, and are publicly available to improve transparency and help newer fans better understand stewarding decisions. The current F1-specific version has been reviewed and agreed with the GPDA.

The stewards reiterated that the DSGs are guidelines, not regulations. They explain how the rules are interpreted in practice, with the aim of ensuring a level playing field and consistent decision-making. Data from the past three seasons shows that the DSGs have contributed to greater consistency in stewarding decisions, supported by detailed analysis provided by teams.

After 22 races and five Sprints - involving dozens of racing incidents - the discussion focused primarily on a small number of case studies, which formed the basis of most of the debate. These included:

Piastri-Antonelli (Interlagos): overtaking on the inside
Sainz-Bearman (Monza): overtaking on the outside
Sainz-Lawson (Zandvoort): application of the DSGs in long-radius corners
Norris-Leclerc (Austin): track limits and what should or should not count as a strike
Verstappen-Leclerc (Mexico City): leaving the track and gaining a lasting advantage

Key takeaways and general preferences expressed by the drivers covered several areas, including:

A stronger emphasis on respect for yellow flags, and discussion of potential additional concepts to further enhance safety.

A clear preference for hearings to be held after the race when stewards believe not all relevant elements may be available during live running.

A shared view that guidelines cannot cover every scenario, underlining the importance of having an experienced Driver Steward on each panel.

Blue flags, including potential additions to the DSGs to clarify expected behaviour from lapped cars.

According to the FIA, the discussion was frank, open and conducted in a very collegial atmosphere, which was greatly appreciated by the stewards. The points raised will inform any future refinements to the DSGs, in consultation with the GPDA and the FIA Drivers' Commission. No changes will be made for the final two Grands Prix of the 2025 season.

Speaking ahead of the meeting, Carlos Sainz, a director of the GPDA, said: "I think there's been quite a lot of division in opinion between drivers, FIA, Stewards - just different ways to judge different incidents. This year, there's been quite a bit of confusion regarding a few of them.

"We need to sit together and go through them and analyse them calmly, out of the heat of the moment, and try to hopefully come up with a better solution for the future.

"My personal opinion - and here I'm not talking from a GPDA perspective, just as Carlos Sainz - is that there's potential to do better and that the guidelines themselves have created more problems than solutions in a lot of issues that have happened this year in the way we judge incidents.

"There's been barely any room for racing incidents this year. It's always been either white or black because we've been supported by the guidelines, and the guidelines haven't allowed racing incidents to be judged as racing incidents because there was always a tyre in front or behind a mirror or a front or rear tyre - whatever the guidelines say, I don't know them by heart. It's been, in that sense, not a successful implementation of those guidelines. But that's what we need to discuss that's why we need to sit together and see if there's any other solution."

Asked if the sport actually requires such guidelines, the Spaniard said: "Again, I'm going to speak as Carlos Sainz, not as GPDA here. I'm going to give you as honest an answer as possible. I think recently after races I've seen some analysis done of quite a lot of the incidents. Some of them by Karun Chandhok, some of them by Jolyon Palmer, some of them by Anthony Davidson. And every time I see this analysis that they do and the verdict that they give - from racing drivers that have been recently racing - I think they do a very good analysis and they put the blame correctly most of the time on who actually has the blame or if it's actually just a racing incident.

"My future ideal is no guidelines and people that are able to judge these sorts of incidents as well as these three people do after the races. Again, this is just my opinion, but I'm quite impressed at the job some of the broadcasters do after a race with this in-depth analysis of each of the incidents and how they apply blame or no blame into certain scenarios. I think that's a level of analysis and a level of 'stewardness', if you want to call it that way, that I think is very high level. Probably doesn't mean we'll agree 100% on the cases that these three ex-drivers give, but I think a lot of times, they are very close - 90%, let's say, correct. And if I had to go and see Formula 1 in the future on the stewarding level, this is more or less the level that I would appreciate."

Asked if he would change his approach if there were n guidelines, the Williams driver replied: "This is where I get lost. Like, I don't know if we need guidelines or not. I just say that when I see these people taking the time to analyse this sort of incident as a driver - when I see how they do it, the language they speak, how they explain it, and obviously the background they have to make this analysis - I really feel like they understood what happened in that incident, and the judgement they take.

"This doesn't mean that the stewards don't do a good job. It just means that what I see after the race from these people is actually a very high level that I think, without guidelines, they would be able to judge each decision correctly. And there wouldn't be a bias or anything like that."

Bearing in mind what he had just said, the Spaniard was asked if drivers with more recent racing experience should form part of the stewards team.

"I think I need to be very careful with this," he admitted. "I do think there's older generation people that do a very good job with the stewarding. I don't want to name any names. I don't want to be personal with anyone. But I do think there's people out there doing a very decent job. The only thing I say - and I insist that I don't want to get into too much analysis here - is that when I hear these people, these young ex-racing drivers doing analysis, they speak a lot of sense.

"When I read and I say, "If we could have two or three of these judging our racing incidents or our penalties," I think most of the time these people wouldn't need guidelines. They would be very honest and very accurate in taking some of the conclusions that we would need them to take. So, I put it out there as an idea.

"Obviously, nowadays, to come to 24 races, probably you also need a fixed salary. You need the job to be relatively important because it takes a lot of time out of your life. So, we need to look at how to organize that. But again, I don't want to get into too much analysis here. I just want to say that when I take time to see those back - maybe two days after I go home and it comes up in social media, these people making the analysis - I'm like, I see it exactly the same way. And I think most of the drivers see it in a very similar way. So, it's an idea."

"I didn't think this year was too bad," said Kimi Antonelli, the subject of one of the incidents subsequently discussed at the meeting. "The driver guidelines - of course, you can use them in your way, in your favour - but I don't think it needs massive change."

"I think our main concern as drivers is, first of all, that we don't have permanent stewards," added Oliver Bearman, "which is quite challenging because the guidelines are guidelines, and they're interpreted differently by different stewards.

"For the level of our sport, if we compare ourselves to other elite sports, we're one of the only ones with a judging panel that changes race to race, which is challenging for us. And I think just trying to give them a bit of perspective of what it's like to be in the car. There are some penalties given out this year where, if you ask the drivers, the majority - or all of them - would agree that it should or shouldn't be a penalty, and sometimes the result from the stewards is different. That's why we want to create a bit of parity."

"I think it's just trying to create a way that, when these decisions are made, it's taken into account what it's actually like being behind the wheel and driving these cars," agreed Liam Lawson. "The current guidelines were made to try and understand what we were trying to say last year, but they're ever-evolving. We'll try to make things even more clear this evening and try to create a better system for next year."