Why F1 has gone too far on track limits

In the aftermath of last year's Mexican Grand Prix there was, you may remember, quite a bit of dissension in the paddock. Sebastian Vettel, all sweetness and light in 2017 with a highly competitive Ferrari at his disposal, was far from that last season, and proved especially ill-tempered at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez.

Upon being advised by his team that Max Verstappen, with whom he had been battling, was to receive no immediate penalty for cutting across the runoff at Turn 1, his radio response was much to the point: "Well, here's a message for Charlie [Whiting]: fuck off!" This he then repeated, at which point Maurizio Arrivabene told him to calm down, to concentrate on his driving.

Later Verstappen was given a five-second penalty, which cost him a place on the podium, and in turn made him extremely angry. Why, he was keen to understand, had he been penalised, when Lewis Hamilton, having transgressed similarly on the opening lap, had not? You could see his point.

Whiting's response was that Hamilton had escaped a penalty because he had not gained from his short cut across the corner. That may have been the case - but surely more to the point was that neither had his mistake cost him anything. Over the expanse of asphalt and grass he went, and on rejoining the circuit was still in the lead.

This seemed more than a touch absurd. "Is there a rule or not?" commented Alain Prost. "We need clarification from the FIA and Charlie about this - otherwise, anyone who starts from pole position, and is afraid of losing his lead, should just cut the first corner..."

Rather than have stewards endlessly discussing such matters, and perhaps - perhaps not - penalising a driver, the answer surely should be a more instant penalty, imposed by the character of the runoff areas.

Daniel Ricciardo, incensed by the stewards' failure to take action against Hamilton, spoke for many. "It's kindergarten stuff," he said. "Put a wall there, and they won't do it! Actually, I'm a fan of gravel traps because they punish you, in terms of losing places. Even if you don't get stuck, you have stones on the tyres, so there's no way you get an advantage."

Indisputably, had there been a gravel trap at Turn 1 in Mexico, the stewards need not have become involved in discussion about Hamilton or Verstappen, for already they would have punished themselves. Apparently, though, Pirelli is opposed to gravel traps, on the grounds that already their tyres suffer from damage by stones, and during the winter the FIA rejected calls for their reintroduction to replace asphalt and grass runoff areas.

Quite the opposite, in fact. From Montreal last week there came details of changes to the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, albeit not to the actual track layout. Tecpro barriers will replace most of the existing guardrails and tyre barriers, and no-one can reasonably take issue with that, but the FIA has also demanded that the circuit's traditional gravel traps be replaced by asphalt.

As we have seen at places like Abu Dhabi - and on the outside of Monza's Parabolica - nothing has less aesthetic appeal than great swathes of Tarmac beyond the track itself, but quite apart from that there is the question of a driver suffering for his mistakes - not in terms of getting hurt, obviously, but in losing time.

As Stefan Johansson, one of the wise men of motor racing, puts it: "Tracks are now so sanitised that there's absolutely no punishment for going over the limit, and that can't be right."

Even Jackie Stewart, the man who did more than any other to transform attitudes to safety, feels that things have gone too far: "I think it's completely wrong that in this era people can go off the race track, and regain it on almost every occasion with no penalty, in terms of time or position.

"The new culture of building tracks with enormous runoff areas - not gravel now, but hard surfaces that in some cases give even more grip than the track itself - has allowed drivers an unrealistic amount of privilege in terms of using more than the track without penalty.

"OK, there's a system under which you might get penalised for it, but it takes time to make a judgement, and that doesn't help the spectators or the TV audience.

"Of course nobody wants to see drivers seriously injured or killed - but neither can we have them routinely going off the road, and still retaining their position. I think it's gone too far - we can't have it the way it is now, so therefore we've got to think of other ways of controlling it.

"Obviously, ploughing straight on over an asphalt runoff - missing a corner completely - is extreme, but it should also apply to going off the road at the exit of a corner: let's face it, the only reason they do that is because it's faster - if it cost them time they wouldn't do it..."

The changes at Montreal are apparently required to accommodate the new, faster, Formula 1 cars, which - a dozen years on - are only now beginning to shave the lap times of the V10 era.

To that end, too, the exit of the chicane leading on to the pit straight is to be 'reprofiled', in accordance with the FIA's wishes.

Unusually, at this point there is no runoff - and therefore no margin for error - which is why, in a Monaco sort of way, it has always been an exhilarating spot at which to stand and admire the grand prix driver's flair and commitment.

Get it wrong there, and what awaits is a wall - ironically nicknamed 'The Wall of Champions', after Michael Schumacher, Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve all hit it during the 1999 Canadian Grand Prix.

In 39 years of going to Montreal, I never heard anyone complain about it, but the FIA always knows best, right?