Why some F1 team bosses think drivers shouldn't have a say in the rules

The most remarkable aspect of the package of rule changes introduced ahead of the Miami Grand Prix was that they were agreed without the usual protracted stand-offs over pettifogging quibbles.

It took a month, yes, and the events of the Miami race weekend itself suggested the adjustments were a small shuffle in the right direction rather than a definitive solution. But it was, above all, pragmatic.

In the round of various meetings, a select group of drivers were invited to discuss the proposed changes with senior stakeholder representatives including the FIA's Nikolas Tombazis, Jan Monchaux and Tim Malyon.

Lewis Hamilton wasn't among that number but, over the Miami weekend, he hailed the success of the project and emphasised the point that, as the end users of the product, they should be consulted more often in the shaping of the rules.

"All the drivers, we do work together, we all meet – but the fact is we don't have a seat at the table," he said. "We do engage with the FIA and F1 – F1 is more often a little bit more responsive. But being that we're not stakeholders – we don't have a seat at the table currently, which I think needs to change.

"All I say to them, when I was doing the Pirelli test [at Fiorano in April], you guys should come and speak to us and collaborate with us, we don't want to be slagging off the Pirelli tyres, we know you can build a good product.

"But their feedback will be coming from people who have never driven a car before, so speak to us, we'll work hand in hand, we can work together to approach the FIA so we can get a better product. And the same with F1 – we're here to work with you. we don't want to be slating our sport, we want the sport to succeed and so we need to be working together."

Max Verstappen, among the most prominent critics of the current ruleset, was one of the group consulted by the FIA and he was similarly emphatic that drivers should have greater input.

Max Verstappen and FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem would both like to see the back of the current hybrid regulations

Photo by: Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images

"I hope more and more," he said. "I'm sure that we can have really good input about that. I think if we would have had that five, maybe a bit before, like five, six years ago, then we probably wouldn't be in the state that we're in now."

F1 figures further up the food chain are rather more cautious about the prospect, and perhaps rightly so. If you were to ask 22 economists a question about their field you would likely get 22 different answers; inviting 22 racing drivers to a meeting, with their competitive mindsets and infamously short attention spans, might yield only disruption.

As Autosport couched it when pitching a question about driver participation in the team principals' press conference in Miami, if they all have a seat at the table then a bigger table would be required.

"We are still looking for the table," joked Ferrari team boss Frederic Vasseur in response. 

"I think a good example was that drivers, they were part of the discussion on the modification of the engine the last couple of weeks. It went well. 

"For sure, they have different point of view and it's not always easy to find a compromise. But they are part of the discussion and they will be part of the discussion, as we are also on our listening to them and discussing with them and bringing somehow their feedback to the FIA when we are discussing about the regulation.

"They are not excluded at all from the system."

But there is a difference between actively being part of the discussions and merely being canvassed for opinion before the ‘grown-ups' go and have the really important meeting. Without wishing to split semantic hairs, there is a difference here between being included and being not excluded.

Williams team boss James Vowles says there are already enough voices involved in directing policy

Photo by: CHANDAN KHANNA / AFP via Getty Images

"I know Carlos [Sainz] was, for example, consulted [before the Miami changes]," said Williams boss James Vowles. "Nikolas did a good job by bringing him on board, asking the questions before we went through this regulation change to make sure he and others were part of that process.

"I think the fact of the matter is we're already probably too many around the table, because you just end up going around the circles. Adding five more of us isn't going to help. 

"But what is taking place in the background now, for example, there's a form overnight [after Miami sprint qualifying] making sure the drivers can fill in their views on certain aspects of things. And I think having a representative, either pre-meeting with the FIA or in the meeting, is probably somewhat sensible.

"We just need to make sure that we're not driving towards the direction of one PU manufacturer and using bias, that we really do hear the opinion of what's required from the drivers."

So the feeling is that the meetings are already adequately attended with knowledgeable folk, and that adding more voices would simply generate more pointless noise. The point about ‘bias' – the potential for drivers to come in with the aim of furthering their employers' objectives – is sadly reflective of the state of F1 politics.

One of these days it may be possible to debate a point based on its merits, rather than fixating on whether the individual making that point is doing so to further some sinister agenda.

The FIA's engagement with the drivers was structured specifically to minimise political influence, inviting six experienced individuals from teams representing a spread of power unit manufacturers: along with Verstappen, Grand Prix Drivers' Association directors Sainz and George Russell, plus Lando Norris, Charles Leclerc and Nico Hulkenberg.

Watch: 2026 Miami GP: Antonelli Triumphs in Miami

"I think we had a bit of a cross-section of competitivity and with a reasonably experienced background," explained Tombazis.

There were two meetings, held virtually: one relatively early in the process, then a follow-up once the proposed changes had done the rounds. So while the drivers weren't necessarily present at the high-level meetings, they had the opportunity to review the potential outcomes as well as having a say in setting the agenda.

"Personally I felt heard," said Leclerc. "And I think it was really good, because there was a really good cohesion between drivers. We're normally wired to look at performance and performance only, but in those kind of discussions we've had, we really put performance on the side. 

"And we really think about what we wanted as drivers, to drive those F1 cars, and for it to feel a bit more F1-like, especially in qualifying."

Trusting the drivers to set aside their competitive urges seems to have worked in this process. Why not try it again, rather than patting them on the head and promising to bring up their point the next time the grown-ups meet?