Mercedes’ Kimi Antonelli became Formula 1’s youngest world champion by finishing third at the Mexico City Grand Prix.
Red Bull’s Max Verstappen won the race, with Ferrari’s Lewis Hamilton finishing second.
Hamilton was unhappy with his team-mate Charles Leclerc and said Ferrari “have to have some serious talks behind closed doors” after fighting between their two drivers cost them victory in Mexico.
BBC F1 correspondent Andrew Benson answers your latest questions.
McLaren has its ‘papaya’ rules, is it now time for Ferrari to introduce its ‘Maranello’ rules? – John
The battle between Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc on the opening lap in Mexico, and the fall-out from it, provided a perfect illustration of the problems that can arise when a team has two top drivers of equal status.
Hamilton’s point after the race was that Ferrari would have won the race – probably got a one-two – if the pair had worked together on that first lap.
“When your team-mate works against you and then you lose positions like that, it’s definitely tough,” he said.
Team boss Frederic Vasseur said the same, admitting he was “frustrated”.
Leclerc argued that it takes two to tango. “I could be also unhappy with how much he pushed me off track out of Turn One,” he said, “but it is racing. When you are fighting for a win it is the way it should be.”
Leclerc added: “At the end we both did a mistake going into Turn Four. It’s not like we had contact whatsoever. We both went straight and that gave the opportunity for Max to overtake. So I don’t think it should be that much of a talking point.”
Clearly there is a problem here. It’s not the first time the Ferrari drivers’ competing priorities have caused issues this year, and Vasseur has yet to find a way to manage it effectively, and get the drivers to buy into what he decides.
In this case, the two drivers are expressing two completely different, but valid, points of view.
Hamilton is thinking of the team result – which conveniently also meant a win for him – Leclerc primarily about the fact that they are allowed to race for the win.
The problem is that the team’s result was compromised and a win thrown away.
Had Verstappen not passed Hamilton as a consequence of the incident, Leclerc could have given the place back by Turn 11 as was required by the rules.
But once Verstappen was between them, continuing in the lead was Leclerc’s only realistic option.
This is a really difficult situation for Vasseur to handle.
The team wants to win the race as first priority, but the same applies to each individual driver. Sometimes those two competing priorities clash.
And if Ferrari ever get themselves a car that can compete for the title, it will only get harder, because the stakes for both drivers are then much higher.
McLaren have done better at handling this, and Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri have been more acquiescent, but even their approach has led them into problems, as happened a number of times last year. And sometimes the drivers ignore it, as with the crash between the two drivers in the sprint in Singapore.
Vasseur’s problem is that if he had asked the drivers not to race on the first lap on Sunday, he would have been essentially asking Leclerc to hand Hamilton a win. And how do you keep an ambitious driver happy in that situation?
One also has to ask whether, if the situations were reversed, Hamilton would accept the same request.
Hamilton revealed after the race that Ferrari “don’t have rules of engagement, and whether or not that would change anything from Charles’ side, I don’t know”.
McLaren have rules of engagement. One is not to crash into each other. That’s not what happened here. Another is that the team result comes first. But it’s very hard to come up with specific rules that would deal with a live racing situation such as this.
One could argue all day about the rights and wrongs and who could have done what to engineer a better outcome.
As Hamilton said: “We’ve just got to figure out. But something needs to change for sure.”