---
title: "Seidl: Permanent stewards not needed to fix F1’s inconsistent decisions"
canonical: "https://readmotorsport.com/2021/11/30/seidl-permanent-stewards-not-needed-to-fix-f1s-inconsistent-decisions/"
type: "post"
language: "en-GB"
author: "Hamilton Lyndon-Griffiths"
section: "F1 News"
published: "2021-11-30T11:13:32Z"
modified: "2021-11-30T11:13:34Z"
---

# Seidl: Permanent stewards not needed to fix F1’s inconsistent decisions

McLaren boss Andreas Seidl says he disagrees with the theory that Formula 1 needs a permanent set of stewards to fix its issue of inconsistent decision making.

The lack of consistency from the stewards when deliberating on-track incidents has been a major talking point this season, particularly due to drivers receiving different penalties in similar circumstances to previous cases.

Lando Norris felt his five-second time penalty at the Austrian Grand Prix was unfair given Max Verstappen escaped punishment for pushing Lewis Hamilton wide in Brazil.

Alpine’s Fernando Alonso has been particularly vocal on the stewards’ lack of consistency, believing they have different rules for different drivers especially when it comes to leaving the track and gaining an advantage at the start of races.

There has been a constant call for F1 to have permanent stewards in place for years, but Seidl believes the current system is enough to have better consistency going forward.

“To be honest, my opinion hasn’t changed on this,” Seidl said, as quoted by Motorsport.com.

“I don’t think that not having permanent stewards is the issue, to be honest, because as far as I understand, whenever there’s a case popping up, the first thing that stewards are doing is going back through the history of cases and see racing precedents and check if is it comparable or not, in order to try to be consistent.

“I understand that after each race weekend, there’s a lot of exchange between stewards to make sure everyone is on the same level of information and understand what’s happened in detail.

“That’s why I don’t think that this is the big issue, in my opinion.

“There’s a reason why many people were in favour in the past of a rotating system of drivers stewards to make sure they didn’t build up negativity of, for example, to a certain team or driver and I think it is a good point. I don’t think it is the biggest issue.

“With modern technology there is a permanent exchange from everyone involved. I think this exchange is required to make sure it’s consistent between the stewards involved.”

F1 racing director Michael Masi also felt permanent stewards were not necessary, arguing in an intense championship fight such as this year’s race control will always suffer criticism over their verdicts.

“I think you’ll find and there was some wise words about those that operated under a permanent stewards panel that thought there was perceived bias when there was a permanent steward, and I can see some people nodding their head,” said Masi.

“So I think the stewarding that we have now, with the pool of four chairmen that we share, the pool of driver stewards and all of that, the way all the chairmen meet regularly.

“With every system we need to take a step back and remember it’s a first time in a long time we are in a real championship fight between two amazing drivers, two fantastic teams, and as a regulator, there’s no regulator in the world that’s going to be popular.

“So regardless if you’re a referee, you’re a regulator of any sport, that’s part of the role that we fulfil and from our perspective, there will always be slight differences, but at the end of the day the stewards are there to make those.”