Lewis Hamilton is increasingly unhappy with how Ferrari are operating and is unafraid to show it. Two weeks after shouting at his team over the radio at Zandvoort – for which he later apologised – the seven-time champion called out Ferrari’s operations and communication. He was particularly upset about the team’s lack of rules of engagement, having clashed with team-mate Charles Leclerc on the opening lap at Monza.
Leclerc crashed out in spectacular fashion soon after and the incident with Hamilton was not even investigated by the stewards – having been noted but taken no further – so it became irrelevant to the result. It was not so inconsequential for Hamilton after the race, though, as he criticised his team-mate and Ferrari’s team principal, Frédéric Vasseur.
“When I was at Mercedes we had written rules of engagement. And we never really had it too bad. Here there are no rules. And I think that’s something that needs to probably change,” Hamilton said.
Hamilton also said that it was “far too late” for Ferrari to make decisions on the team’s racing rules and also whether they give preference to one driver. That would presumably be the one ahead in the championship: Hamilton. “It’s many, many weeks too late. So, all I can do is just try and turn up,” he said. That almost sounds disengaged.
Does he have a point? In practical terms he is correct. Hamilton appears to be in the championship fight only mathematically, trailing by 76 points. Two races ago the gap was 50 points, with Leclerc a further 31 behind.
Ferrari’s car was perhaps not quick enough for Hamilton to have reduced the deficit to Kimi Antonelli at Zandvoort and Monza – he has only beaten him when Antonelli has suffered a mechanical issue – but with better execution and decision-making he would almost certainly be closer. That is surely the root of his frustration. During last year’s despondent period he pointed the finger at himself, but this year, when he is performing better in a faster car, he is pointing it at the team because there is something at stake.
The incident at the first corner was at the heart of Hamilton’s annoyance on Sunday. Was he right to criticise Leclerc for this? Leclerc said both he and his team-mate were at fault by claiming “we went too far”, but Hamilton was having none of it: “I was ahead into turn two. By the apex I was ahead. So there’s no ‘we’ in it.”
In this case it is difficult to back Hamilton’s version of events fully. After all, he was the one who put in a bold move up the inside heading into the first part of the chicane. This may have led to Leclerc being equally, if not more, combative on the exit of the corner, forcing Hamilton wide, dropping him down to ninth. Leclerc was perhaps more to blame here, though we never received the stewards’ verdict.
Remember that this was Ferrari’s most important race of the season – and by a long way. If they cannot enforce rules of engagement at Monza, then a broader re-assessment is needed. Even at his closest point, Hamilton was an outsider to challenge Antonelli for the title, but Ferrari have not given themselves the best chance of success.
Vasseur, for what it is worth, says that favouring a driver at this stage has its risks, citing Oscar Piastri’s championship lead at this point last year. The Australian led by 31 points after Monza, but fell apart in the autumn and finished 13 points behind Norris and 11 behind Max Verstappen. A McLaren comparison is a pertinent one. The team dominated Formula One in the 1980s and had success in the 1990s too. Yet it took them 25 years to end their title drought – Ferrari are now approaching 18 years without one. McLaren had to learn how to be winners again, Ferrari must do the same.
There was also the decision not to pit Hamilton for a cheap stop under the virtual safety car, a move by Mercedes that put Antonelli on the path to victory. Hamilton, however, seemed less bothered about this.
Hamilton said that he did not want to criticise the team’s culture in the post-race press conference. “I know what you guys are trying to do. I don’t want to get into arguing and fighting about my team,” he said. Yet earlier he had done exactly that. His words about the culture of the Scuderia were significant. They were a level beyond bemoaning team orders that did not go his way, or racing too close for comfort with his team-mate.
“Ultimately it comes from the top. It trickles down. So it starts with Fred [Vasseur]. And there’s only so much you can say, and push, and shout from the mountaintop. Yesterday I said we had to look at how we communicate. Because if we continue to travel the same path, we’ll get the same result. We’ve got to change things because it’s not helping us move forwards,” he said.
Hamilton and Vasseur worked together in junior series and have remained close. You can look at this criticism in one of two ways. Either Hamilton is comfortable enough in his relationship with Vasseur that public criticism in this manner is fine, or he is trying to give the Ferrari management a kick up the rear end.
Clearly, Ferrari are coming up short in his estimation and certainly in comparison to his time at Mercedes. The difference in how the two teams operate is not exactly a novel observation. Vasseur is not Toto Wolff. It is hard to imagine the phlegmatic Frenchman thumping a monitor when one of his drivers misses out on pole position, as Wolff did on Saturday at Monza.
Some of this is understandable. There is, after all, more influence (or interference) above Vasseur at Maranello. After a double retirement in Brazil last year, Ferrari chairman John Elkann said Leclerc and Hamilton needed to “focus more and talk less”.
Mercedes have plenty of experience of managing duelling drivers before this year, notably when Hamilton and Nico Rosberg went head-to-head for the title between 2014 and 2016. Ferrari have generally had a clear No 1 and No 2 driver: Michael Schumacher and Rubens Barrichello, Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa, Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen and so on. Leclerc vs Hamilton was not an issue to be managed by Ferrari in 2025 because of how far adrift Hamilton was. In his criticism of Ferrari, Hamilton even cited how few problems there were when he was racing Rosberg. This shows that memories fade and time maybe heals all wounds.
Ferrari are better than they once were – the days of the “grande casino” are gone – but they are still coming up short in creating a championship-winning car and then getting the most from the machine they have created.
This year they are closer to a championship than they have been since 2022. Vasseur should take credit for the improvement and responsibility for the areas that are lacking. Hamilton’s concerns, which are becoming stronger and more regular, are a sign that he knows a first genuine chance at a championship since 2021 is slipping away, but they are still valid.