Juan Pablo Montoya has never been one to hold back—and now he’s taking aim at the FIA’s controversial crackdown on driver language. The former Formula 1 star is questioning whether the sport itself supports the governing body’s move and warns that inconsistent penalties could backfire spectacularly.
The Colombian legend argues that Formula 1 thrives on raw emotion, intense rivalries, and real personalities, yet the FIA’s strict new stance on swearing and driver conduct could end up sanitizing the sport to the point of absurdity.
Montoya calls out FIA’s double standards: “FOM profits from the drama”
Montoya finds it hypocritical that the FIA is now policing driver language when Formula One Management (FOM) actively promotes heated radio messages to boost entertainment value.
“If swearing was ‘so bad for F1,’ why do they put it on air anyway?” Montoya questioned. “They could prevent it. There are a thousand conversations going on in a race, and they only pick five or ten—80% of which are drivers losing their minds. It’s good for TV.”
He then raised the million-dollar question:
“Is FOM in line with the FIA on this? That’s what we need to know.”
Montoya likened the FIA’s rule enforcement to political power moves, hinting at inconsistency and selective application:
“I understand what the FIA is trying to do, but you need to be careful. It’s like signing executive orders. You can’t have one set of rules for some and different ones for others.”
“Do you want real racers or ‘little princesses’?”
Montoya fears the FIA is draining the passion out of F1 with these overreaching restrictions.
“Do you want to see real drivers—guys who are angry, fighting, and putting everything on the line? Or do you want little princesses who just take it and say, ‘Oh my gosh, they pushed me off’ like nothing happened?”
His biggest concern? The drivers will still swear—they just won’t use the official radio anymore.
“They’ll still swear the same way, they just won’t open a communication channel. That’s not solving anything.”
FIA’s bias? Verstappen vs. the rest
Montoya also suggested F1’s response to swearing varies depending on who does it—especially when comparing Max Verstappen to other drivers.
“If it was George Russell, the reaction would’ve been different. But because it’s Max, suddenly he’s treated like a terrible person.”
He pointed out that Charles Leclerc has been caught swearing on the radio too, yet the backlash was minimal:
“When Charles did it, people just shrugged. When Max did it, suddenly it was a big scandal.”
Montoya’s takeaway? There’s an inconsistency in how F1 punishes drivers, and it’s something the FIA needs to address.
Could banning drivers for swearing ruin a title race?
Montoya issued a dire warning about the unintended consequences of penalizing drivers for language—especially if it impacts a championship battle.
“Imagine if the leader of the world championship is banned from an event for swearing. How does a race organizer react? How does a sponsor react?”
He predicted that F1 would bend the rules if a top driver—like Lewis Hamilton—faced such a penalty.
“If it was Kevin Magnussen, people wouldn’t care. But if Lewis Hamilton was banned from driving his Ferrari at the British Grand Prix because he swore? F1 would do everything in its power to let him race anyway.”
Montoya’s solution: Ditch fines, enforce community service
Rather than blanket penalties, Montoya proposed a fairer and more impactful approach—community service instead of fines or race bans.
“Drivers value their time more than anything. Losing a day to community service sucks. Believe me, I had to travel all the way to Costa Rica because of it once.”
He also pointed out the financial disparity in F1:
“Imagine if the driver was a rookie like Antonelli. A big fine would be a huge burden. But for Lewis or Max, it’s nothing. The penalty isn’t equal.”
By introducing community service penalties, the FIA could keep drivers in check without ruining races or unfairly punishing younger talents.
Final message: Drivers must challenge the FIA—but smartly
Montoya urged F1 drivers to push back against the FIA’s restrictions but emphasized they must offer alternative solutions rather than outright rejecting the rules.
“If you come back with a proposal based on community service days instead of just saying ‘No, we don’t accept this,’ then that would make more sense.”
The verdict? The FIA is playing with fire
If the FIA continues cracking down on emotion and personality, it risks making F1 feel robotic and staged. Fans don’t want corporate-scripted drivers—they want fire, passion, and real human reactions.
Montoya’s message is clear: F1 must be careful not to regulate the sport into soullessness.
(Quotes supplied by CasinoApps Media Team)