Lewis Hamilton’s public criticism of Charles Leclerc has come under scrutiny as tensions within Ferrari intensify following the 2026 Mexico City Grand Prix. The seven-time Formula 1 world champion is being accused of going beyond his responsibilities as a driver by publicly questioning his teammate’s mentality and the team’s approach. With the Brazilian Grand Prix approaching, the Scuderia faces calls to introduce stricter rules of engagement between its drivers.
The relationship between Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton appears increasingly strained after the events in Mexico. The British driver’s comments to the media have added to an already tense atmosphere, leaving Ferrari with the difficult task of containing both drivers’ frustration and desire to assert themselves. The situation raises broader questions about how the Maranello team manages internal disagreements and whether its two drivers can put Ferrari’s collective interests ahead of their personal ambitions.
Ferrari urged to establish stricter rules for Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc
Writing in Corriere della Sera, Giuliano Duchessa highlighted several important factors behind the growing tensions between Ferrari’s two drivers. One of the central questions is whether the team will impose clearer instructions on how Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc should race each other at Interlagos, particularly when their battles threaten the interests of both cars.
“Starting with this weekend’s Brazilian Grand Prix, stricter rules of engagement and precise instructions are needed on what to do when an attack puts both cars at risk. The limit cannot simply be avoiding contact: it is necessary to ensure that manoeuvres are completed while staying on the track and without leaving opportunities for opponents. This is even more crucial when there are chances of victory. The second, more delicate point to address is the way Hamilton publicly brings up Ferrari’s difficulties.”
The discussion follows the controversial confrontation between Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc in Mexico, which intensified the debate over how Ferrari should manage its drivers. With both competing for individual success, clearer boundaries could become essential to protecting the team’s results.
Lewis Hamilton accused of going beyond his role at Ferrari
Giuliano Duchessa’s analysis goes beyond the incidents on the circuit, focusing on the way Lewis Hamilton has addressed Ferrari’s internal problems in public. The concern is that the seven-time world champion risks presenting himself as someone responsible for evaluating the team’s behaviour rather than as one of the drivers directly involved in resolving its difficulties.
“Lewis calls for a serious internal discussion and emphasises that working for the team is an integral part of a driver’s duty. This is a principle worth supporting, especially after a race like Mexico. However, this tone risks placing him in the role of the team’s ‘supervisor’, someone who identifies problems and then publicly indicates the necessary measures. This position creates distance, whereas Hamilton is an integral part of the group responsible for solving the problem and must take part in the analysis by bringing his own decisions into it. The most delicate moment comes when criticism of manoeuvres turns into a judgement on Leclerc’s mentality or the team’s attitude. Publicly drawing almost psychological portraits goes far beyond the role of a driver. Lewis can challenge a decision, ask for explanations and demand a discussion.”
The assessment from the AutoRacer.it and Corriere della Sera journalist captures the controversy surrounding Lewis Hamilton’s approach. The seven-time world champion has increasingly adopted a political stance within the team, raising the tone of his criticism and making public accusations without appearing sufficiently concerned about their consequences.
Another interpretation is that Lewis Hamilton is fully aware of those consequences and hopes the situation will strengthen his position within Ferrari. However, criticism directed at Charles Leclerc can be regarded as unfair and lacking objectivity, potentially making it even harder for the British driver to gain greater influence within the team. From this perspective, Lewis Hamilton should concentrate on fulfilling his responsibilities as a driver rather than assuming a broader supervisory role.
The situation has also placed Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur under pressure to restore mutual respect between the drivers and ensure that their public disagreements do not undermine the team’s collective objectives.
Giuliano Duchessa further explained why moving from criticism of a specific incident to an assessment of a teammate’s character creates additional problems.
“Attributing an incorrect way of thinking to others, however, shifts the debate from behaviour on the track to the individual. This is a delicate step in terms of internal relationships, because it risks undermining the legitimacy of his teammate and placing Hamilton in the position of someone judging the maturity and professionalism of others. His experience gives weight to his observations, but it also requires greater caution in how they are expressed. Making these assessments public actually makes the clarification Lewis is asking Ferrari for more difficult.”
Nevertheless, this interpretation does not portray Charles Leclerc as an innocent victim. The Monegasque also bears responsibility for the deterioration in relations, and his own conduct must be examined alongside that of his teammate.
Charles Leclerc also faces criticism over Ferrari’s internal tensions
While Lewis Hamilton’s public statements have attracted particular attention, Charles Leclerc cannot be exempt from criticism for his actions on the circuit. His long association with Ferrari does not automatically justify every decision he makes, even if his experience at Maranello helps explain his reaction to questions about his commitment to the team.
“This does not mean, however, that Leclerc is beyond criticism. Charles can make mistakes, go too far, make questionable decisions and exceed acceptable limits. His journey at Ferrari does not in itself constitute an advantage that justifies any behaviour. Since 2019, Leclerc has spent eight seasons at Ferrari, often struggling to compensate for the limitations of the car, achieving results beyond its potential and suffering repeated disappointments. While Hamilton was winning his final titles with Mercedes, Charles was beginning a long period of development, hope and disappointment. It is understandable that a driver with such a journey would struggle to accept moral lectures about what it means to work for Ferrari.”
For Charles Leclerc, being told what it means to work for the Prancing Horse is particularly difficult to accept after so many seasons of effort and sacrifice. His attacks at Turn 1 and subsequently Turn 4 in Mexico can be interpreted as expressions of frustration and determination to demonstrate to Lewis Hamilton that he will not simply be given a free passage.
The disagreement also extends to the development of Ferrari’s Formula 1 cars. Throughout the season, Lewis Hamilton has repeatedly discussed the need for a car designed around the characteristics and requirements associated with his number 44. Such comments have at times appeared to overlook Charles Leclerc’s contribution, almost suggesting that the Monegasque bore responsibility for the unsuccessful SF-25 project.
From this perspective, neither Ferrari driver is handling the situation correctly. Both are making mistakes, and both risk damaging the interests of the team through their increasingly confrontational relationship.
The wider Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc rivalry has highlighted Ferrari’s need for change, particularly as the team considers how to manage two ambitious drivers with different expectations and experiences.
Ferrari must protect its interests ahead of the Brazilian Grand Prix
The frustration on both sides is understandable. Charles Leclerc has devoted much of his Formula 1 career to pursuing success with Ferrari, while Lewis Hamilton believes the events in Mexico deprived him of a potential victory. However, understanding their respective positions does not mean that either driver’s conduct should be excused.
Giuliano Duchessa concluded by stressing that responsibility must be shared and that Ferrari’s management must establish boundaries that apply equally to both drivers.
“Hamilton’s frustration, as he feels he has lost a potential victory, is equally understandable. Understanding these two points of view does not mean justifying them. This is where the problem lies: two drivers convinced that they have strong arguments, a team demanding greater responsibility and public statements that risk complicating efforts to clarify the situation. The team’s management must be able to establish clear limits for both drivers and ensure they are respected. Neither side is entirely in the right, either at Monza or in Mexico, but the responsibility to protect Ferrari’s interests lies with both drivers.”
With the 2026 Brazilian Grand Prix at Interlagos approaching, Ferrari faces an important test of its ability to manage the relationship between Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc. The challenge is not simply to prevent contact between its cars, but to ensure that both drivers can race competitively without creating unnecessary opportunities for their rivals.
The tensions also form part of the broader season-long relationship between the two Ferrari drivers, whose performances can be explored through the Charles Leclerc versus Lewis Hamilton head-to-head statistics. Ultimately, the responsibility for restoring a more constructive environment rests with both drivers and Ferrari’s management.
Leave a Reply