The 2026 Mexico City Grand Prix has brought a problem back into focus that Ferrari can no longer afford to ignore: the management of Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc. The SF-26 demonstrated that it had the potential to fight for victory, and even a one-two finish, yet Ferrari once again failed to turn its competitiveness into the result it deserved.
This time, however, it would be too easy to blame everything on strategy or decisions from the pit wall. The battle between the two Ferrari drivers, particularly during the opening stages of the race, exposed a situation that could become increasingly difficult for the team to control.
The question is unavoidable: has Ferrari assembled a pair of champions capable of taking the Scuderia back to the top, or has it brought together two personalities whose ambitions could repeatedly bring them into conflict?
Charles Leclerc vs Lewis Hamilton: when your team-mate becomes your biggest rival
There is an impression worth examining more closely.
Charles Leclerc appears to approach his rivalry with Lewis Hamilton with particular intensity. The Monegasque driver wants to prove that he remains Ferrari’s leading figure, especially following the arrival of a seven-time world champion whose presence has inevitably challenged his position within the team.
That tension was particularly evident in Mexico. Lewis Hamilton had secured a remarkable pole position, his first since joining Ferrari, while Charles Leclerc had been unable to extract everything from his car during qualifying.
In the race, however, the Monegasque immediately gained a position and found himself directly behind his team-mate. Their battle at Turn 4 became a defining moment: both drivers ran wide, Charles Leclerc crossed the run-off area and rejoined ahead of Lewis Hamilton, retaining the position.
The subsequent five-second penalty confirmed the infringement, but by then Max Verstappen had taken advantage of the situation to move between the two Ferraris. Charles Leclerc’s explanation for not returning the position subsequently added another dimension to the controversy.
What had been an enormous opportunity for the Scuderia ultimately turned into a much less satisfying result.
The problem is not simply the incident itself, but what it represents. When two drivers from the same team fight without managing their rivalry in the collective interest, they risk handing opportunities directly to their opponents.
The Verstappen comparison and Charles Leclerc’s mistakes under pressure
Another aspect of the situation deserves closer examination.
At the previous United States Grand Prix, Charles Leclerc had demonstrated that he was perfectly capable of fighting Max Verstappen, even overtaking the Red Bull driver in the closing stages to secure second place. It would therefore be unfair to suggest that the Monegasque had simply surrendered when facing his rival.
Nevertheless, comparing the two races reveals an interesting difference. Against Lewis Hamilton, the internal Ferrari battle appears to carry an even greater personal significance.
Charles Leclerc also made several costly mistakes in Mexico.
During qualifying, he failed to make the most of his final Q3 attempt, acknowledging that he had not done a sufficiently good job. In the race, he then retained his position after leaving the track during his battle with Lewis Hamilton, earning a penalty. Finally, following the restart after the red flag, a lock-up caused a significant flat spot on his front tyre.
These were not identical mistakes, but together they painted a picture of a performance in which composure was lacking at crucial moments.
Charles Leclerc is unquestionably one of the fastest drivers in Formula 1. However, outright speed over a single lap is not enough to become a world champion.
Winning a title also requires the ability to handle pressure, recognise when to attack and, perhaps most importantly, understand when an unnecessary risk should be avoided.
That is one of the qualities separating an exceptional talent from a champion capable of putting together a successful season.
Ferrari team orders: why Fred Vasseur needs to establish clear rules
The most delicate issue, however, concerns Ferrari’s management.
There had already been a controversial incident between the two drivers at Monza, with Charles Leclerc subsequently acknowledging that he could have handled his battle with Lewis Hamilton better.
Following that episode, there was discussion about the need for intervention and clearly defined rules. Yet Mexico brought another confrontation reminiscent of the Monza controversy, once again compromising Ferrari’s result.
Fred Vasseur explained that the drivers had agreed before the race to manage certain situations themselves, including returning positions when necessary. The Ferrari team principal subsequently reminded both drivers of their responsibility to respect the work of approximately 2,000 people involved in the Scuderia’s project.
Those are reasonable words, but they need to be followed by action. Fred Vasseur’s demand for respect after the Mexico clash must now translate into a more consistent approach to managing the drivers.
Team orders are not a tool to be used only when convenient. They are an integral part of the sporting management of a Formula 1 team. Naturally, they must be reasonable, consistent and part of an agreed strategy. No driver can be expected to obey every improvised instruction from the pit wall, particularly when a decision risks compromising the result.
But when agreements and rules have been established, they must be respected. And they must apply equally to both drivers.
Ferrari cannot operate in an environment where Charles Leclerc independently decides when to attack and Lewis Hamilton does the same, leaving the pit wall constantly trying to resolve the resulting conflicts.
What Ferrari needs is authority.
Ross Brawn: the leadership example Ferrari should remember
When considering how to manage two leading drivers, Ross Brawn naturally comes to mind.
His experience in Formula 1 demonstrated the importance of managing not only the technical side of a team, but also the human relationships and sporting dynamics within it. A competitive car is not enough. A team also needs clear direction, well-defined responsibilities and someone prepared to make difficult decisions, even when those decisions are unpopular.
Ferrari must once again become a team in which decisions are made by its sporting management and respected by its drivers.
That does not necessarily mean immediately appointing a number one and number two driver. Instead, it means establishing transparent criteria that prevent individual ambitions from taking precedence over the interests of the Scuderia.
Lewis Hamilton’s Ferrari move: an investment that must deliver
The arrival of Lewis Hamilton at Ferrari, announced in February 2024, was one of the most significant developments in Formula 1 in recent years.
The decision, backed by Ferrari chairman John Elkann, carried enormous sporting and commercial significance. Bringing a seven-time world champion to Maranello represented an extraordinary opportunity.
However, a move of this magnitude also required a clearly defined management strategy.
Signing a champion is not enough. Ferrari also needed to understand how to integrate him into an organisation that already had an established leading driver in Charles Leclerc, whose relationship with the Scuderia had been built around a long-term project. That raises legitimate questions about the overall strategy adopted by Ferrari’s leadership.
Lewis Hamilton’s arrival was not a consequence of the subsequent departure of Enrico Cardile in July 2024. The two developments followed separate timelines. Nevertheless, Ferrari found itself dealing with significant changes to its technical and sporting organisation at precisely a time when continuity would have been particularly valuable.
Such a major investment should have been accompanied by a structure capable of managing every aspect of the relationship between the two drivers.
It is now reasonable to ask whether Ferrari adequately prepared for that challenge.
Charles Leclerc or Lewis Hamilton: who should Ferrari prioritise?
This is probably the most difficult dilemma facing Maranello.
On one side is Charles Leclerc, a younger driver with outstanding single-lap speed and a longer career potentially ahead of him. On the other is Lewis Hamilton, a seven-time world champion with exceptional experience and an ability to read certain racing situations that remains an invaluable asset.
Yet both drivers have limitations of their own.
Charles Leclerc must demonstrate that he can handle the pressure of a genuine world championship battle without turning every confrontation into a personal contest.
Lewis Hamilton, meanwhile, must prove that he can deliver consistent performances and still sustain a championship-winning campaign across an entire season. His record of achievements is extraordinary, but past success cannot guarantee future results.
Ferrari cannot afford to make its decision based solely on the prestige or commercial appeal of either driver. It must assess performance, reliability, teamwork and tangible results. The broader sporting picture can also be examined through the Charles Leclerc vs Lewis Hamilton head-to-head statistics, which provide a comparison of the two Ferrari drivers across the season.
Ultimately, the choice must be driven by what gives Ferrari the strongest chance of winning, rather than by reputation or popularity.
Ferrari’s biggest risk: having a championship-winning car but failing to capitalise
This is the issue that should concern Ferrari supporters most.
Imagine that the work of Ferrari’s engineers finally produces a car capable of fighting consistently for the world championship.
What would happen if Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton continued competing to establish themselves as the team’s leading driver without sufficiently authoritative management? The danger would be that the work of hundreds of people could be undermined, with valuable points and opportunities handed to rival teams.
The Mexico City Grand Prix illustrated precisely this paradox. Ferrari had the potential to achieve considerably more, yet it failed to convert the competitiveness of its car into victory.
Not everything can be blamed on the drivers, because the pit wall must also accept its share of responsibility. Equally, not every problem can be excused by pointing to mistakes made by the team. Lewis Hamilton’s frustration over the lost opportunity in Mexico underlined how costly the situation had become for Ferrari.
A Ferrari driver is a professional who works for the Scuderia, regardless of salary, the number of world championships won or popularity among supporters.
Ferrari must decide what kind of team it wants to become
The impression is that Maranello still lacks a figure capable of exercising unquestioned authority over the entire sporting project.
Someone in the mould of Ross Brawn, capable of establishing order, managing rivalries and ensuring that everyone understands that the common objective comes before individual ambitions.
Charles Leclerc should not be protected unconditionally simply because he represents Ferrari’s future. Lewis Hamilton should not receive preferential treatment merely because he is a seven-time world champion. Both must operate under the same rules. Ferrari comes before its drivers, before contracts and before personal rivalries.
The greatest danger is not having two champions who both want to win. It is having a team that does not know how to make them work together.
And if Ferrari finally builds a car capable of winning the world championship, it cannot afford to lose another title because of problems that have nothing to do with aerodynamics or engine power.
Leave a Reply