The lessons F1 can take from the Masi "souk" deal criticisms

The late, and much missed, former Formula 1 race director Charlie Whiting once told me that the most important rule in grand prix racing was one that you wouldn’t find in any of the published regulations.

Instead, and as he also occasionally reminded the teams, Article 0.0.0 of F1’s rule book was absolute: “Thou shalt not take the piss.”

Of course there was a little bit of humour behind the reference, but it equally said much about the way that Whiting guided F1 for decades.

He knew, as poacher turned gamekeeper, the effort that teams would go to try to explore the grey areas of both the sporting and the technical regs – both for themselves or to get their rivals in troubles.

Whiting needed no reminding that there comes a point where teams are simply trying it on with the governing body – taking the piss if you like. And that, to Whiting, was simply not acceptable.

This common understanding worked. Sure, Whiting may never have pleased all of the teams all the time, and he found himself in the centre of some pretty big controversies, but those on the pitwall knew where the boundaries were.

Charlie Whiting, Race Director, FIA

Photo by: Zak Mauger / Motorsport Images

Whiting’s successor, Michael Masi, was never going to have an easy time stepping into the F1 race director shoes – for there is no fast track route to gain the decades of experience that his predecessor had wearing the FIA shirt.

Furthermore, Masi also has had none of that team-insider knowledge that Whiting gained from his Brabham years of just how devious, cheeky, ruthless, political, two-faced and determined F1 teams can be when it comes to knuckling down for wins and titles.

Yet there are elements where Whiting and Masi are very similar. Both incredibly hard workers, both fastidious when it comes to track safety and both very open about their views on the art of racing – even though they may come at it from a different point of view.

Both too are/were incredibly likeable characters, who when you walked past in the paddock always smile and say hello. Both too boast a great sense of humour, are always up for a bit of Mickey taking, enjoy having fun and don’t take themselves all too seriously.

Whiting was always firm with drivers about where the line of acceptable behaviour was – and this kept them in check

But equally, there are stark differences to the way that they run their grands prix.

Whiting was always firm with drivers about where the line of acceptable behaviour was – and this kept them in check. He was one to ensure there was hard and fast, plus consistent, application of the rules, even if it meant some penalties proved unpopular.

Masi, on the other hand, is someone who prefers to look at things on a case-by-case basis; judging every incident on its own individual merit and not wanting to get too bogged down on precedent.

There are differences too in the way that the F1 race director’s job is broadcast these days: and it is this, more than anything, that has perhaps fuelled much of the cynicism in recent days about the job Masi is doing.

Esteban Ocon, Alpine A521, Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes W12, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing RB16B, and the rest of the field for the restart

Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images

Nothing shows this more than the ‘deal making’ conversation that took place on live television during the second red flag break at the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix between Masi and Red Bull’s sporting director Jonathan Wheatley.

With Red Bull’s Max Verstappen having cut the second corner at the first restart to retake the lead from Lewis Hamilton, there was little doubt that the Dutchman would have to give back the position to lose the lasting advantage he had gained from his manoeuvre.

If the race had proceeded on without a swift stoppage, then normal procedure would have been for Masi to advise the team to give the position back – or risk him escalating the matter to the stewards for a potential penalty.

But the almost immediate red flag meant that Masi’s advice for Verstappen to move back could not come before the track action stopped.

So, in the interests of expediting the inevitable order shuffle, Masi chose to move things on before the restart, rather than waiting, with his offer to Red Bull.

Having that conversation broadcast on the international feed proved to be an eye-opener for fans and rival teams.

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner said it was like something from the ‘souk’, while Alpine’s executive director Marcin Budkowski admitted it was slightly ‘surreal’.

From Masi’s perspective, however, the conversation was ‘normal’. And indeed, you can see why he would think that way: because all he was doing was having the exact same conversation with Red Bull that he would have had later anyway – advising them to give the position up or risk a penalty.

Christian Horner, Team Principal, Red Bull Racing

Photo by: Charles Coates / Motorsport Images

The intention of that conversation was right, but how it played out in front of the eyes of millions of fans worldwide was not good. For there were two key problems here.

First, Masi’s laid-back approach and choice of language made it very much look like a deal was being bandied about (and it was not helped by the initial confusion over it being P2 or P3). Using the word ‘offer’ was almost certainly regrettable because it made it sound like something it wasn’t meant to be.

For the referee of any sport must have complete control of proceedings, and the final say. It is not for the competitor to decide whether or not to accept sanctions, or choose the punishments that are handed out. Imagine in a World Cup final if teams were offered scope of where they could take free kicks from….

The second issue with the ‘offer’ was handing a team the choice of a grid slot at a time they could change tyres and therefore respond with their strategy, strays into the arena of potential performance gains to be had.

In hindsight, it would have made much more sense, from a fairness perspective, to have Verstappen start from the pole slot that the regulations dictate from the red flag order

Knowing in advance you are going to drop down means your tyre choice will inevitably be different: and that foresight can bring with it a tremendous gain.

Plus, moving back on the starting grid would give Verstappen the chance at the start to immediately wipe away the disadvantage of being shuffled down the order: which is exactly what happened as he muscled his way through to the front by the exit of Turn 1.

In hindsight, it would have made much more sense, from a fairness perspective, to have Verstappen start from the pole slot that the regulations dictate from the red flag order. Then, once the race was running, Red Bull could be told that its driver had to drop back behind Hamilton or risk a penalty.

PLUS: The line Verstappen finally crossed in F1's first Jeddah race

That way, the team was not handed a potential strategy foresight advantage, and there was equally no chance of them wiping away the penalty within metres of the start.

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes W12, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing RB16B

Photo by: Simon Galloway / Motorsport Images

Masi certainly fell foul of his conversation being played out on the world feed – something that Whiting never had to endure.

F1’s decision to start broadcasting conversations between race control and the teams is a recent addition to the coverage, and there is an ethical question here about whether or not it is right for the effective running of a grand prix race.

Just as team/driver radio messages can be editorialised to top spin some thrills, so too are the chats between Masi and the teams now being turned into part of the dramatisation of F1 races.

Sure the radio traffic is interesting and entertaining – just look at how the grid ‘offer’ has become such a big talking point – but a referee should be able to deal with competitors in a way that works best for the sport and isn’t about looking good.

As the FIA’s own Sporting Code states, the governing body is the: “sole international sporting authority entitled to make and enforce regulations based on the fundamental principles of safety and sporting fairness, for the encouragement and control of automobile Competitions, and to organise FIA International Championships.”

Running a grand prix is not some X-Factor audition where fans should vote on whether Masi spoke in the right manner. It should be about the clinical enforcement of the rule book in a manner that is fair to all competitors: no matter how unpopular that move is with teams on the losing end.

Making the race control chats a part of the show changes the dynamic. It encourages showboating from the pitwall, and there is an incentive for teams to moan a lot more about potential rule breaches of their rivals – knowing full well that their public comments can change the narrative of the broadcast.

It’s also slightly unfair for F1 to broadcast requests for clarifications from the teams to Masi about events on track, without ever following it up afterwards for the proper responses they got.

Toto Wolff, Team Principal and CEO, Mercedes AMG

Photo by: Simon Galloway / Motorsport Images

As fans switched off after the GP on Sunday, the lack of answers over Valtteri Bottas’s slow pace behind the safety car to build a gap, the reasons for the red flag, Verstappen’s pitlane practice start, the 10-car lengths complaints from Red Bull, Hamilton forcing Verstappen wide at the last turn and numerous other incidents, made it look like race control didn’t know the answers.

Masi also elected not to speak to the media on Sunday night, leaving even more unanswered questions about all that happened – and meaning the voices of complaints from the team got much louder resonance.

As F1 heads to the season finale, the focus on the job that the FIA and Masi do in dealing with the inevitable tensions between Red Bull and Mercedes will be under the spotlight like never before.

If any lesson can be learned from Abu Dhabi, it’s that maybe Masi needs to take a step back from being laid back, polite and reasoned with the teams.

It’s not a time for deals, it’s a time for enforcement. Amid the likely war that is coming, there should be no room for pleasantries

Should the bickering and burst of complaints continue, he needs to swiftly shut them down and assert his authority. It’s not a time for deals, it’s a time for enforcement. Amid the likely war that is coming, there should be no room for pleasantries.

F1 itself also has a duty of care to ensure that the conversations it broadcasts are chosen in a way that is fair to all sides. It cannot just throw out the spiciest comments for the Netflix generation, in the hope of making it more a soap opera, at the risk of upsetting and annoying the hardcore fans who care deeply about the rule book.

And perhaps Masi should remind Hamilton and Verstappen, plus the Red Bull and Mercedes pitwalls, of one important thing…

Article 0.0.0 has not been forgotten, and that it will be enforced with a zero tolerance approach.