The Mexico City Grand Prix delivered exactly the kind of non-stop, championship-altering action that Formula 1 fans crave, culminating in Lando Norris seizing the lead of the Drivers’ Championship. From the first lap’s explosive start to the dramatic, controversial finish, the race was a masterpiece of on-track intensity. Yet, while Norris’s exceptional performance from the front of the grid rightfully secured the headlines, the real story—the one sparking outrage and demanding immediate introspection—was the calamitous handling of the race by the governing body, the FIA.

The paddock is now in a state of rage, with drivers, teams, and fans united in their fury over a series of questionable penalties, ignored infringements, a baffling Virtual Safety Car deployment, and, most alarmingly, a safety lapse that came terrifyingly close to costing a human life. This wasn’t a story of competitive spirit; it was a devastating indictment of race control’s protocols, professionalism, and preparedness. The 71 laps in Mexico did more than just reshuffle the standings; they laid bare a serious crisis of confidence in the organization tasked with maintaining the sport’s safety and integrity.

The Heart-Stopping Moment: A Marshal’s Near-Fatal Dash

In a race defined by high-stakes drama, one incident stood out for its chilling potential to turn sport into tragedy. During the action-packed first lap, debris was scattered across the track after contact between several cars at the Turns 1, 2, and 3 complex. Liam Lawson, whose car sustained damage from contact with Carlos Sainz, was forced to pit at the end of the lap. When he emerged from the pit lane, he was met with a sight that instantly sent fear through the cockpit: two marshals running across the live track, directly in front of him, cleaning debris.

The marshals, appearing “completely unaware” that Lawson was rejoining the race, casually jogged across the exit of Turn 1. Fortunately for all involved, Lawson had been warned about double-waved yellow flags, instructing him to slow down. His reduced speed prevented a catastrophe. A shaken Lawson immediately took to the team radio to vent his absolute terror and disbelief.

“Wait the f—, oh my god, are you kidding me? Did you see that?” he exclaimed. A few moments later, the gravity of the situation hit him, and he delivered a chilling verdict: “I could have effing killed them mate,” he told his race engineer.

The incident is an unwelcome, horrifying echo of the 2023 Azerbaijan Grand Prix, where Esteban Ocon narrowly missed a string of photographers in the pit lane. Once again, it thrusts the FIA’s safety protocols into the harsh spotlight. Lawson was rightly outraged that the marshals had been placed in such danger, seemingly without being informed that he was out of sequence with the rest of the field after pitting early. “It was so dangerous… it’s pretty unacceptable we can’t understand how on a live track marshals can be allowed to just run across the track like that,” he later stated.

The FIA responded by clarifying the timeline, noting that marshals were placed on standby to recover debris once the main pack had passed. Crucially, the internal message that Lawson had pitted took too long to reach the marshall’s post. The marshals entered the track believing they had a safe, one-minute window, unaware that a car was already hurtling toward their sector. While the FIA is investigating, the fact remains: a communication breakdown nearly led to a fatality. When human lives are at risk, the margin for error must be zero, and this incident proved the system failed spectacularly.

The Race-Spoiling VSC: Baffling Decisions at the Climax

If the safety lapse was terrifying, the handling of the race finish was simply infuriating. The Mexican Grand Prix was building toward an incredible final two laps. Max Verstappen and Oscar Piastri, locked in a fierce battle for championship points, were hunting down Charles Leclerc and Ollie Bearman, respectively. Both were within DRS range, setting the stage for a spectacular wheel-to-wheel conclusion—the exact sort of climax fans had waited for.

Then, on the penultimate lap of the 71-lap race, the Virtual Safety Car (VSC) was deployed. The reason? Carlos Sainz’s Williams, which he had parked in the Foro Sol stadium section. The decision baffled commentators and fans alike. Sainz’s car was clearly well off the racing line, parked behind a barrier and seemingly posing “absolutely no risk to any drivers still on track”. The deployment immediately froze the field, eliminating the potential for any final overtaking moves and, in the eyes of many, completely spoiling the end of an incredible race.

The immediate public outcry on social media forced the FIA to explain its reasoning. The spokesperson stated that the problem wasn’t the car’s position, but the fact that it had begun smoking and race control had received notifications of a fire. With the risk of fire and the need for marshall intervention, the VSC, according to the governing body, was the “only option.” While a fire risk certainly mandates caution, the timing—deployed on the penultimate lap and effectively neutering the end of the Grand Prix—led many to question why the incident hadn’t been managed under yellow flags, or simply waited until the final moments of the race, or if the car could not have been recovered quicker to avoid ending the action prematurely. The VSC gifted the drivers ahead a stress-free finish, prompting many to feel cheated out of a true spectacle. Even Verstappen, who benefited from the freeze, was nonplussed: “Sometimes a safety car has been very nice to me as well in my career, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, it’s how it goes in racing.” His pragmatic view, however, did little to soothe the outrage of the fans and the teams who were robbed of a chance to fight.

The Track Limits Farce: Punishing the People Driving Properly

The controversial stewarding was not limited to safety and the finish line; it began with the very first corner of the race. During a frantic, congested run down to Turn 1 on the opening lap, five drivers—Charles Leclerc, Max Verstappen, Andrea Kimiyelli, Carlos Sainz, and Liam Lawson—all left the track and rejoined after Turn 2 without receiving a single punishment.

This blatant cutting of the corner immediately drew the ire of drivers who had managed to keep their cars on the racing surface, most notably Fernando Alonso and George Russell.

Alonso was among the first to voice his fury. He had made a strong start and was aggressive into Turn 1, believing everything was “looking good.” However, he saw a number of cars simply bypass the corner entirely. “I think a couple of cars went just straight in Turn Two and Three and then they rejoined like three or four cars in front of me, so it’s a little bit unfair,” he told the official F1 channel. The Aston Martin driver noted that this was the second race in a row where the FIA seemed to be “looking the other side” on the first lap, prompting him to ironically declare, “lesson learned” about cutting the corner himself for the rest of the season.

George Russell was equally exasperated, watching cars ahead of him in the top five simply cut the track. His frustration boiled over, targeting the core issue of integrity and fairness: “I struggle to understand how three drivers can cut the track and just continue with no penalty in life. If you can risk everything with no consequence, you’ll do this but it ends up punishing the people who are driving properly,” he argued.

The drivers were clear that the issue lies not just with their rivals’ aggression, but with the circuit design itself. Russell correctly pointed out that the asphalt run-off area acts as a “get out of jail free card”. He reiterated the long-standing solution: “If it were gravel, nobody would be there.” The lack of a consequence for such a blatant advantage is what infuriated the field, forcing drivers like Russell to ponder whether driving cleanly is simply a losing strategy at certain tracks. He cited a history of similar incidents at the circuit, emphasizing that the lack of repercussions has allowed the abuse of track limits to become a persistent problem that the FIA refuses to solve.

A Crisis of Confidence

The Mexican Grand Prix will be remembered for Lando Norris’s championship-leading drive and a trio of catastrophic failures from the Formula 1 governing body. From the near-fatal safety breach involving Liam Lawson and the marshals—a chilling reminder of the ultimate cost of poor communication—to the baffling deployment of a Virtual Safety Car that robbed fans of a hard-fought climax, and the failure to enforce basic fairness by penalizing drivers who openly cut the track, the FIA was firmly in the crosshairs.

The core message from the paddock is unified and damning: the safety and integrity of the sport were compromised. When drivers are forced to narrowly avoid killing race officials, and when those who play by the rules are punished by the inaction of the stewards, F1 has a fundamental problem that transcends mere sporting rivalry. The remaining four races of the season will be defined not just by the championship fight, but by how the FIA responds to this barrage of criticism and whether it can reestablish the trust that this explosive weekend has severely damaged.