How Formula 1 is trying to avoid another rift between FIA and Liberty Media

On July 2nd of this year, just before the red lights went out on the starting grid, it became official: the Austrian Grand Prix would remain on the Formula 1 calendar until 2030. Spielberg, a track owned by Red Bull, has become a cornerstone of the series in recent times. This fact was confirmed when it hosted two races in 2020, a year when the Formula 1 circus had to navigate the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdowns, holding a world championship that, with great effort, took place in Europe.

The circuit in Styria evidently fulfills all the requirements that Liberty Media imposes on event organizers. Beyond the normal certification required by the International Automobile Federation (FIA), which is a basic requirement to be included in the calendar, there are other parameters evaluated by Liberty Media. Among them are organizational capabilities, logistical support, and certainly the ability to open their wallets to meet the financial hunger of the American entity that manages Formula One Management (FOM) and is the only entity authorized to negotiate with race organizers.

The latter clarification is not insignificant and could be at the root of yet another point of friction between the ownership and the FIA. The issue of track limits, which resurfaced during the Qatar Grand Prix, recurred at the Circuit of the Americas but, in practice, had exploded at the Red Bull Ring.

On the 2nd of July mentioned above, the stewards had to work hard to address and penalize drivers who had not respected the established track limits. Penalties, in some cases, were handed out well after the checkered flag. It was extra work for the FIA officials, a factor that obviously doesn’t sit well with Mohammed ben Sulayem, the outspoken leader at Place de la Concorde.

F1, track limits: FIA threatens promoters, but this is not the solution
“The solution is to improve the tracks. We had the same problem in Austria, where there were 1,200 infringements. I know some are reluctant to do so, but honestly, if they don’t improve, there will be no race. It’s very simple: we can’t afford it.” These were the stinging remarks of the Emirati executive who doesn’t mince words and, after the Andretti incident and the unilateral introduction of a driver code of conduct, is simply not interested in appearing conciliatory toward Stefano Domenicali and the group he represents.

Show your support for Scuderia Ferrari with official merchandise collection! Click here to enter the F1 online Store and shop securely! And also get your F1 tickets for every race with VIP hospitality and unparalleled insider access. Click here for the best offers to support Charles and Carlos from the track!

For now, the organizers receive the criticisms and respond without getting carried away: “We are in constructive communication with the FIA and the FIM (International Motorcycling Federation), and we work constantly to meet all the requirements,” explained the organizers of the Austrian race. For now, the FIA has increased the number of officials responsible for monitoring track limits. However, according to Ben Sulayem, this is not the final solution. Structural changes are needed.

But has Liberty Media been made aware of the issue? And, more importantly, what do they think? For now, from the United States, they prefer to remain silent and not fuel the media conflict. There are binding agreements at stake that, if broken, would result in hefty penalties. These issues do not concern the FIA but directly affect the promoters and Liberty Media. The FIA’s involvement could thus be a blatant interference that risks triggering a strong legal response from the group led by John Carl Malone.

The Federation, which claimed to have a say because it is responsible for safety management and evaluating infringements and consequent penalties, risks treading on a minefield of legal traps. The matter of track limits is a current and heated topic. A solution is not only desirable but also mandatory.

However, pursuing a path of unilateral action will not solve the problem. This time, genuine collaboration is needed to prevent events that are influenced by dozens of decisions by the judging panel. For this reason, impulsive actions would be futile and counterproductive.