The driver handling lessons Ferrari can take from two big rivals

There is little doubt that Ferrari needs to make a call now about how best to handle its Formula 1 drivers going forward.

The lost opportunity of what happened at the first chicane at Monza, plus Lewis Hamilton's frustrations at a lack of racing rules and team work, means boss Fred Vasseur is not blind to the need for action.

As Vasseur confirmed on Sunday night at the Italian Grand Prix, a response is coming.

"By reason, you have to take a decision at one stage," he said. "Each team is different. But you have to make a decision, and we [will] decide."

What path Vasseur chooses to go down is unclear – because the options on the table are plenty.

At one extreme is throwing everything behind Hamilton as the lead driver in the standings to try to maximise Ferrari's fading title chances.

This is the most unlikely option because it's not something Hamilton has explicitly called for.

Imposing it would also be a bitter pill for Charles Leclerc to swallow at a time when he is not mathematically out of title contention.

Other choices include agreeing clear rules of engagement, or even electing simply to let things carry on as they are and trusting the drivers to get on with it themselves.

But if there is one thing that is crystal clear from how Ferrari's rivals have dealt with similar situations themselves, there is no easy solution here that will keep everyone happy.

As McLaren chief Andrea Stella has referenced many, many times about the handling of drivers, it is impossible to come up with a framework that fits both their own personal interests and that of the team.

"I always discuss with the drivers that this is the most difficult thing we are going to face in our career," he told me several years ago.

"This is the only thing that we cannot face by having our interests exactly matching."

'Papaya Rules' complexities

McLaren has faced plenty of headaches in the management of Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri over recent years, with the famed 'Papaya Rules' being tested to the limit on many occasions.

The simple stance of allowing both drivers to race but with a strict no contact mandate seemed straightforward enough but still was not enough to avoid all controversy.

Troubled afternoons like Hungary and Monza in 2024, and last year's Italian Grand Prix, exposed the scale of challenges that come when what the pitwall wants and expects from the drivers never lines up perfectly with their own individual desires.

Plus, agreements get tested to the max and the team then has a duty to impose responses to breaches – as happened after the Singapore GP wheel banging last year when Norris briefly faced repercussions.

While McLaren faced criticisms at times – especially after Monza 2024 – for keeping 'Papaya Rules' in place on occasions when it could have been better to throw everything behind one driver, Vasseur noted after Monza that equality proved better for his rival's title aspirations than having swooped early to choose a number one.

"Last year, Piastri was leading McLaren at this stage of the season," said Vasseur after Monza about going down a route that would back one of his drivers.

"If McLaren put everything on Piastri, Max Verstappen would have been champion."

Vasseur's point about not backing Piastri being key to McLaren winning the title (with Norris) is debatable though, as subsequent events would have played out differently had it done so.

Throwing its weight behind Piastri would likely have changed results at other races, and in particular avoided the upset that caused Piastri's Baku troubles, and collisions in Singapore and the Austin sprint that impacted the final points tally.

'Papaya Rules' has done one thing though in acting as an anchor point in keeping some unity in play. 

Even after an intense title fight like last year, there have been no lingering tensions from either driver over how things were handled – which has allowed McLaren to roll into 2026 without any festering troubles.

But this does not mean that even a solid framework like that is a dream ticket to avoid tension on track.

In Italy last weekend, the freedom to race opened the door for some Norris radio complaints late on after he felt he had been pushed onto the grass as he battled with Piastri.

Stella said even after many years of an agreed framework, circumstances throw up the need for constant review.

"Even if in 2025 we achieved both championships with an approach to racing which was based on some important principles of equality, let them race, fairness, in reality, it's always difficult to translate these principles into real racing," he said.

"Like if you see [in Italy], we took again an approach which is on the risky side. We let them race, and we ended up with one car having the wheels on the grass. Something that we will have to review.

"If you ask them not to race each other, then Lando finishes fifth, and he may say, 'But for fairness, I would have liked to have my opportunities.' So, it's a tricky matter."

What seems central to best managing the conflict between team interest and what each driver wants is at least everyone buying into what is agreed.

"It's important that we go united with the drivers," added Stella. "I think it's difficult for a team to say 'this is what we impose, now you guys adapt'.

"You always want to make sure that you get a contribution from all the parties.

"But as soon as you see that the team interest is under attack or is in danger, then you might have to elevate the game and start to be strict from a team point of view. These are the foundation of how we approach it."

'Racing intent' at Mercedes

One of Hamilton's most striking remarks after the Italian GP was about there being 'no rules' in play at all between himself and Leclerc when it came to racing.

"I think it comes down to rules of engagement," he said when asked about what he wanted to see.

"When I was at Mercedes, we had a written rule of engagement… here there are no rules. I think that's something that needs to be addressed to try and fix that."

The Mercedes framework was a response to the intense rivalry between Hamilton and former team-mate Nico Rosberg that boiled over at times when they collided on track.

Team boss Toto Wolff has since refined the framework to be more about 'racing intent', where the desire is like McLaren's rules in that both drivers can battle hard as long as they don't make contact.

There is also an element of the pitwall not being afraid to intervene if it feels that the team interests are being hurt.

The need for this has intensified this season because the lap-time from yo-yo racing is so big that battling exclusively for the lead risks drivers falling back into the pack.

This is why Mercedes has opted at times, like at Monza last weekend, to dictate that positions are held – even if that does bring frustration for the driver in second.

The end result of Mercedes' racing intent agreement is that at least both drivers can see why there is a bigger interest in what they are being asked to do.

Trust then manifests itself in abiding by whatever they are told to do, even if sometimes it does not totally suit their own interests.

The contrast between Kimi Antonelli helping out title rival George Russell with a slipstream in Monza qualifying, and how Ferrari duo Leclerc and Hamilton handled things, says a lot about faith in the system.

But the rules in play at Mercedes have not prevented flash points like it faced in Canada, or even Antonelli's annoyance in Italy about being told to hold fire at one point.

From the team's side, even letting them race comes with risks as was shown with Antonelli's late off at the first chicane as he fought Russell.

As Wolff said: "It could have ended up in a disaster when it comes to the race result, and we would have looked like idiots.

"We will be talking about that situation as another building block of how we want to race in the future, but I think it was worth showing the racing spirit in the team and having them go at each other."

No easy answer for Ferrari

As Vasseur now weighs up what approach to take, he acknowledged in Italy that there is no more ideal scenario for a boss than simply letting drivers get on with it and trusting they do the right thing.

"For sure, it's never good to lose points," he said in reference to what happened on the opening lap in Italy.

"At the beginning of the season, I think every single team principal in the world would love to let them race, but to freeze positions when you are the team principal, don't imagine that it's an easy choice.

"You do it for the team. You do it for the results at the end, but it's never an easy call. By definition, I would love to let them race for the weekend."

Monza has exposed that Ferrari can no longer let that happen.

But, as McLaren and Mercedes have experienced, the solutions on offer all come with their own failings. The choice is which headache Ferrari is willing to live with.