F1 Fans Angered As FIA Rule Change Brings Back Previous Driver Signing Debate

The FIA has stirred significant controversy within the Formula 1 community with a recent update to its International Sporting Code. The organization has relaxed the age requirements for Formula 1 participation, now allowing drivers as young as 17, given they demonstrate “outstanding ability and maturity” in lower-tier competitions. This decision, partly influenced by an unnamed Formula 1 team’s request, marks a pivotal shift from the previous rule that mandated drivers to be at least 18 and hold a valid road driving license to qualify for a super license.

Critical to this revised regulation is the case of Andrea Kimi Antonelli, the 17-year-old Mercedes protege in Formula 2. Antonelli now stands on the cusp of making history as one of Formula 1’s youngest drivers since Max Verstappen’s debut at age 17 with Toro Rosso in 2015. This rule change effectively positions Antonelli, who has already accumulated the necessary 40 points for a super license, for an earlier start in Formula 1, bypassing the age barrier that would have otherwise sidetracked his ascent.

The rule’s revision has sparked a debate over its fairness, particularly when contrasted with IndyCar driver Colton Herta’s situation. Despite his achievements, Herta was denied entry into Formula 1 due to a shortfall in the requisite super license points. This discrepancy has fueled arguments about potential inconsistencies in evaluating talent across different motorsport disciplines.

A statement in section 13.1 of Appendix L to the International Sporting Code sheds light on the FIA’s rationale:

“The driver must be at least 18 years old at the start of the event of his first F1 competition. At the sole discretion of the FIA, a driver judged to have recently and consistently demonstrated outstanding ability and maturity in single-seater formula car competition may be granted a super licence at the age of 17 years old.”

Herta was trying to join the Formula One grid for the 2023 season with AlphaTauri (now Visa Cash App RB). An FIA spokesperson confirmed his ineligibility based on the points system, as quoted by Formula 1 at the time:

“The FIA confirms that an enquiry was made via the appropriate channels that led to the FIA confirming that the driver Colton Herta does not have the required number of points to be granted an FIA Super Licence.

“The FIA continuously reviews its regulations and procedures, including with respect to Super Licence eligibility, with the main factors being considered with respect to this topic being safety, experience and performance in the context of the pathway.”

F1 journalist Will Buxton addressed this issue on X, stating:

“[I] know there’s a lot of upset over the Colton Herta comparison. The difference between the two cases is that Antonelli has already qualified for a superlicense by amassing enough points (without even racing F3 or F2) but until the reg change wasn’t old enough to use it. Herta has never amassed enough points to gain a superlicense. That’s the simple harsh reality.”

The discrepancy taps into broader discussions about the recognition of achievements in series like IndyCar. Young drivers and their performances in different series are judged by criteria that some fans find inconsistent or unfair, as represented by the vocal fan reactions. One fan responded:

“Indycar drivers are not given the value they deserve in F1 let’s just put it that way.”

Another fan wrote:

“He amassed enough points for a superlicense, he didn’t tick all boxes though and was given an exemption.

“Colton Herta didn’t get the points because the system is flawed in essence and exemption would have been the right approach.

“Just the harsh reality”

Someone else responded:

“Yeah but the reality is that Indycar gives less points (apart for the champion) than F2, and that’s not fair when you have on one side a field of (for most) experienced drivers, and on the other hand rookies and very young drivers.”