03 June 2023 , 11:22
1217
0
Guenther Steiner has been hauled in front of the stewards at the Spanish Grand Prix after he called for Formula 1 to do away with "laymen" in the role.
Never one to shy away from speaking his mind, the Haas chief voiced his frustration on Thursday over a penalty handed to Nico Hulkenberg last weekend in Monaco. The German driver was penalised for an incident on the first lap of that race, but Steiner insisted there was "no collision".
He went on to tell reporters in Barcelona: "Every professional sport has got professionals being referees and stuff like this. It's like, F1 is one of the biggest sports in the world and we still have laymen deciding on the fate of people that invest millions in their careers."
It appears that criticism of the stewards has not gone down well with the FIA. During final practice on Saturday lunchtime, an official document was issued calling Steiner and the Haas team manager to the stewards' office at 2.30pm local time (1.30pm UK) to explain himself.
The document read: "The Team Principal and Team Manager of MoneyGram Haas F1 Team are required to report to the Stewards at 14:30, in relation to a report received from the FIA Media Delegate." The given reason was for an "alleged breach of Articles 12.2.1.c, 12.2.1.f and 12.2.1.k of the FIA International Sporting Code during a media conference conducted on June 1, 2023".
Sebastian Vettel warns of looming F1 ban and is "very worried about the future"
Those articles of the ISC refer to acts considered to be "prejudicial to the interests of any competition", words which cause "moral injury" to the FIA and "misconduct" towards officials and members of staff representing the FIA.
In his lengthy rant about Hulkenberg's penalty in Monaco, Steiner said: "I just looked at the picture and Nico comes from the inside and is in front, basically, dives into the corner, but I can't see a collision. A collision is touching, no? That's what the definition is. We're still trying to find out, I'm still arguing it. Not arguing it but trying to get it explained because I think it was completely wrong.
"It's Lap 1, there was no collision, and what should we make, a parade? Because it's Monte Carlo, if you don't do this... [you don't overtake]. There are other people running into each other during the race and they get a black and white flag [not a penalty]. So I think it's very inconsistent.
"I looked at numerous pictures and I cannot see a collision. Somebody wants to tell me there is a collision, they have difficulty showing it. No, there is no collision. How can you be sure of a collision? And if you don't know if it is one or not, what is it then? Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until I prove innocent. That is how a law works in my opinion."