F1 Q&A: Lando Norris, Max Verstappen, Oscar Piastri, Liam Lawson and Canadian Grand Prix

I understand drivers swearing in a race when emotions are high, but do Max Verstappen and others not think it's wrong in a press conference? â€" Tom

Everyone will have their own opinion on this topic. And it would be wrong to presume where the drivers stand on this - collectively or individually.

However, Verstappen has said what he thinks , and said many of the drivers share his views.

Verstappen feels the punishment he was given for swearing in a news conference was "ridiculous" and the whole situation is "silly".

"If you canâ€TMt really be yourself to the fullest, then itâ€TMs better not to speak," he said. "But thatâ€TMs what no one wants because then you become a robot and thatâ€TMs not how you should be going about it in the sport. You should be able to show emotions in a way. Thatâ€TMs what racing is about. Any sport."

Verstappen made it clear that his decision to give the shortest possible answers in news conferences after qualifying and the race in Singapore was a direct consequence of being given a community service penalty for using a swear word on the Thursday.

"There is of course no desire to then give long answers there when you get treated like that," he said, when speaking to journalists in a separate session away from the official press conference room.

This is a complex topic.

Some will believe that swearing in any circumstance in a news conference is wrong.

Others might feel that dropping in the odd fruity word now and then if the context is right and it feels natural is authentic, and that F1 drivers should be able to behave in that manner.

Itâ€TMs only what many people would do in normal speech, it could be argued, after all.

For many years, F1 drivers have been accused of lacking personality and being boring.

So itâ€TMs understandable if they find it ironic and confusing that these actions are now being taken. Especially in the context of the successful Netflix Drive to Survive series, in which swearing is normalised, even celebrated, in the case of former Haas team principal Guenther Steiner.

The problem for Verstappen in particular and the drivers in general is that FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem has made this another one of his hobby horses - just as with jewellery and underwear and other things in the past.

Ben Sulayem wants less swearing over team radio, never mind less in news conferences.

There are senior figures, inevitably, who behind the scenes have quietly pointed out the issues with some of Ben Sulayem's own public utterances .

The interesting question now is how the drivers will respond when they arrive for media day on 17 October at the United States Grand Prix in Austin, Texas.

The drivers collectively will need to come up with a position, because you can be sure it will be one of the first items on the list of questions for most members of the media, especially to Verstappen.

Would you agree, realistically, with six races left, Lando Norris needs Max Verstappen to have a DNF to stand any chance of winning the championship? â€" Grev

Lando Norris is 52 points behind Max Verstappen with six races to go. There are a maximum of 180 points available.

The maths say that Norris needs to close on Verstappen by an average of 8.7 points a race to win the title at the final race of the season in Abu Dhabi.

The problem for the McLaren driver is that, although he has reduced Verstappenâ€TMs advantage at every one of the past four races since the summer break, he has not done so enough.

So the average of points Norris needs to claw back each race has been creeping up, even as the gap between the two drivers has been coming down.

That average is more than the gap between first and second places, even with the point for fastest lap added in. So, Verstappen can afford to finish second behind Norris even if the Briton wins all remaining races and the Red Bull driver would still be champion.

Itâ€TMs self-evident that Norris needs to start pulling back more points at each race from now on. So, realistically, he has to keep winning, and hope that other drivers get between him and Verstappen.

Itâ€TMs also self-evident that Verstappen is very much the man in control of the championship, and that Norris remains an outside bet.

A Verstappen retirement would change the picture significantly, as long as Norris maximised his result on that day.

Norris doesnâ€TMt need it to happen, but he certainly needs outside forces to help him out in some way. He is not in control of his own destiny. All he can do is try to keep winning and hope other events play into his hands.

Why haven't McLaren prioritised Lando Norris over Oscar Piastri. If Norris misses out on the championship by a few points, it will be of their own making. â€" Wayne

They have - they have just not had a chance to put that policy into action yet.

McLaren made it clear before the Azerbaijan Grand Prix that they had asked Piastri to help out Norris if the circumstances arose.

But in Baku Norris was caught out by a yellow flag in qualifying and ended up starting way down the grid, and Piastri won. In Singapore, Norris dominated from pole, and Piastri started three places behind Verstappen, and was unable to challenge the Red Bull driver for second.

Clearly, this policy will continue until such a point that Norris is out of contention.

The question, really, is why McLaren didnâ€TMt put this policy in place a little sooner.

They could, for example, have left Norris in the lead to win in Hungary after their controversial strategy calls there.

They could also have imposed team orders on their drivers in Monza so Piastri did not challenge Norris on the first lap.

It was the Australianâ€TMs overtaking move at the second chicane that allowed Charles Leclerc to nip ahead of Norris and started the sequence of events that led to the Ferrari driver winning.

They didnâ€TMt do so, because it took until Monza for McLaren to really believe that a tilt at the driversâ€TM title was properly on. Until then, they were not convinced that their car was consistently fast enough or that Verstappen was truly vulnerable.

It can be argued that they should have come to that conclusion earlier. And it can be pointed out that between the team and Norris they have left a few too many points on the table in various ways.

But it is also fair to point out how far McLaren have come, and that they have been a little surprised to find themselves in the position they do. Both in terms of their own competitiveness, and the problems that have arisen at Red Bull.

All they can do now is work from where they are.

If Liam Lawson excels in his performances, starting from Austin, does that mean he might even get a promotion to Red Bull? â€" Devon

Itâ€TMs clear that uncertainty over Sergio Perezâ€TMs position in the main Red Bull team is behind the decision to drop Daniel Ricciardo and replace him with Liam Lawson for the remaining six races of the season.

If not, and Lawson was just the next driver on the conveyor belt, they might as well have waited until the end of the season and drafted the New Zealander in at RB in 2025.

Itâ€TMs not by accident that Red Bullâ€TMs RB team made no mention of 2025 in the statement last week that announced their decision.

Seeing how Lawson does for the remaining six races of this season gives Red Bull a chance to judge whether they think he might be ready for a promotion to the main team for 2025 if Perezâ€TMs form does not recover.

Perez was given a new contract to the end of 2026 in May this year, but his performances since then have raised questions in Red Bull minds about his future.

They considered dropping him during the summer break but in the end decided to stick with him into the second part of the season.

But his performances remain inconsistent - a very strong showing in Baku, where he could have won, was followed in Singapore by qualifying 11 places and finishing eight positions behind Verstappen.

So his future remains in doubt.

Is not pole position â€" generally the fastest racing of the weekend â€" worthier of a point than fastest race lap, which is purely tactical? - Lingard

This question arises from the controversy in Singapore, where RB driver Daniel Ricciardo pitted for fresh tyres at the end of the race to enable him to take fastest lap - and in doing so deprived Lando Norris of the point for it.

It was controversial because that advantaged Max Verstappen in his title fight with Norris, and teams are supposed to operate independently from each other.

The merits of the point for fastest lap have always been debatable since it was introduced a few years ago. It was always open for manipulation and has often been used tactically by teams in one way or another.

One can argue this is unfair, and even random. Equally, one can argue that itâ€TMs the rules and the teamsâ€TM jobs are to operate to their advantage within the rules in whatever way they see fit.