The Dutch Grand Prix didn’t go the way many wanted it to. For one, the Orange Army, though tempered by Max Verstappen’s recent form, still would have held out some hope that he could pull something magical out of the bag. It wasn’t to be. Ferrari, too, would have expected a decent if unspectacular haul of points, but both Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc found premature ends to their respective races. And then there is Lando Norris, who didn’t do much of anything wrong throughout the entire weekend but still leaves the Zandvoort circuit a sizeable 34 points behind his McLaren teammate Oscar Piastri.
Despite his best efforts, Verstappen’s Red Bull was no match for the McLaren’s pace. But, true to his never-say-die approach, the four-time champion ran comfortably in third for the majority of the race without any real pressure from behind. It’s fairly clear that Verstappen has no genuine chance of winning the 2025 driver’s title, but he continues to push, nonetheless.
Up ahead, Oscar Piastri once again underlined his enormous talent and capacity to handle all scenarios and conditions. Second to teammate Norris for the majority of the weekend, the final Q3 session was where Piastri stepped up his game. Granted, there was ultimately a mere twelve-thousandths of a second between the McLaren pair, but it was yet another example of how Piastri can deliver when it matters most. The race, too, he handled with his now trademark calmness. A few safety car appearances, a sprinkling of rain, pressure from his teammate – none of it was enough to knock Piastri off his stride. His win at Zaandvoort was already going to be a statement, but with the unfortunate demise of his teammate, it may well be a defining moment in the fight for the 2025 driver’s crown.
For Norris, try as he might, he was not able to overcome Piastri. But it could always be worse than second place, and it was. On lap 64, Norris ground to a halt with what looked a lot like an engine failure. The disappointment and heartbreak were evident to all. The retirement, in such a close championship battle, was strikingly similar to that of Lewis Hamilton at the 2016 Malaysian Grand Prix. Many point to that moment in 2016 where Hamilton lost the title to his Mercedes teammate, Nico Rosberg. Only time will tell if Norris is due the same fate.
And there were the race stewards. Bizarre decisions ranged from handing Carlos Sainz a ten-second time penalty for a collision caused by Liam Lawson while grossly understating ‘punishment’ for others. The Sainz/Lawson clash was, at best, a racing incident, and left many, including Williams team principal James Vowels, flabbergasted. Still, the show went on. Until Kimi Antonelli decided to use his Mercedes as a bumper car with Charles Leclerc’s Ferrari. The overtake, which was never a possibility, smacked of a grievous error in judgment to which the stewards responded with a, yep, a ten-second time penalty. So egregious was the ‘mistake’ from Antonelli that a ten-second stop/go penalty would have been just adequate. There will be those who point to his young age as a contributing factor. But he’s 19, older than Verstappen was when he started. He’ll definitely need a talking to from Toto Wolff after a diabolical move like that.
The point, however, is that race stewards were wildly inconsistent. Hamilton, too, was given a five-place grid penalty for the Italian Grand Prix after failing to slow sufficiently as he entered the pit lane on his recon lap before the race start. Yes, there are people in the pit lane and that exacerbates the situation, but surely a hefty fine, a reprimand, and even some points on his license would have sufficed. Instead, we have stewards that are applying penalties in a worryingly erratic manner, which does very little to endear the sport to new viewers. What is the solution to such a problem? For some time now, many have been calling for a uniformity of stewards across races – a team of the same people that travel to every race weekend. This way, drivers and teams, and fans, will know the interpretation and application of stewards in a more consistent manner. But at this point, this solution feels like a bit of wishful thinking.
