The roar of the crowd, the blinding glare of the setting sun over the Yas Marina Circuit, and the suffocating tension of a three-way title decider—this was the scene for the 2025 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix. When Lando Norris crossed the finish line in third place, he didn’t just win a race; he cemented his name in history as the Formula 1 World Champion. Yet, in a season defined by dramatic twists, blistering pace, and high-stakes strategy, the final act of this epic drama was nearly undone by a moment of controversial on-track action and, more pointedly, the capricious nature of F1’s governing body.

The victory, the triumph, the emotional breakdown of Norris in parc fermé—all were absolutely deserved and hard-fought. However, the shadow of a potentially championship-threatening penalty looms large over the narrative, specifically concerning a crucial overtake on Yuki Tsunoda. The stewards’ ultimate decision to penalize only Tsunoda for weaving, while clearing Norris of gaining an unfair advantage after going off track, remains the subject of intense debate, a perfect encapsulation of the regulatory inconsistencies that often define the modern era of Formula 1.

The Defining Moment: Norris vs. Tsunoda

The race itself was a masterful exercise in strategy and pressure management. Norris, who needed a strong finish to hold off a charging Max Verstappen, found himself having to fight back through the field after his pit stop. It was during this phase, a moment of razor-thin margins and immense pressure, that the defining incident occurred.

Norris launched a decisive move on Yuki Tsunoda. The McLaren, undeniably faster, was going to pass the Visa Cash App RB eventually. The inevitable nature of the overtake, however, does not erase the specifics of how it transpired. As Norris attempted the pass, he was forced wide, leaving the track entirely to complete the maneuver. The complicating factor was Tsunoda’s defense—the Japanese driver weaved down the straight, a tactic clearly designed to break the tow and disrupt the attacking car.

In the subsequent investigation, both drivers were scrutinized. Norris was investigated for leaving the track to gain an advantage. Tsunoda was investigated for weaving. The verdict that emerged was staggering for its one-sided nature: Tsunoda received a five-second penalty, while Norris walked away penalty-free.

To observers, the incident was a clear-cut case of both drivers sharing responsibility for a move that bent the rules to their breaking point. Tsunoda’s weaving, a breach of the sporting regulations designed to ensure safety and fairness during high-speed moves, was correctly punished. But the decision to absolve Norris of responsibility for leaving the track—a move that certainly helped him complete an inevitable pass more quickly—ignited a firestorm of discussion. Had Norris received a five-second penalty, the analysis shows he would have still secured the title, but the margin would have been tighter, forcing Charles Leclerc and the Ferrari team to push even harder, adding an unbearable layer of psychological tension to the final laps.

The question then becomes: Why the leniency?

The Inconsistency of Justice: A Steward’s Coin Toss

The heart of the controversy isn’t the specific outcome but the glaring lack of consistency from the FIA Stewards, a theme that has plagued the sport for years. In the pressure-cooker environment of a title decider, every decision is magnified, yet the precedent for this specific type of offense is a tangled mess of varying punishments.

This very same scenario—a driver forced off track during an aggressive defense—has been judged differently countless times. The transcript recalls a similar high-stakes incident involving Sebastian Vettel and Romain Grosjean in 2012, where Vettel was initially told to give the position back. Furthermore, penalties for leaving the track to gain an advantage have varied wildly, ranging from the easily manageable five-second time penalty to ten seconds, and even a crippling twenty-second penalty, as seen with Vettel back in Germany in a separate incident.

This wild fluctuation in punishment—where the severity of the sanction seems to depend less on the rulebook and more on the context of the race or, perhaps, who is involved—is what truly frustrates teams and fans alike. In this case, the stewards essentially conceded that the pass was “inevitable,” choosing to prioritize the eventual outcome over a rigid adherence to the track limit rules. While perhaps a more pragmatic, quicker solution for the championship, it further eroded confidence in the consistency of officiating. For Norris, it was a reprieve; for the sport, it was another instance of the rules feeling less like fixed law and more like a subjective narrative tool.

The Price of Victory: Piastri, the Guinea Pig

While Norris was battling the ghosts of regulation, his teammate, Oscar Piastri, was quietly playing the thankless role of the ultimate wingman—or, as some call it, the “guinea pig.”

Piastri had been an incredible contender, leading the championship for much of the year until a late-season surge from Norris and Verstappen tightened the field. Coming into the final race, McLaren chose to split the strategy: Piastri was put on a one-stop strategy, running the durable Hard tyres early. Lando Norris opted for the more aggressive two-stop.

This decision, which arguably left Piastri in “no-man’s land” on the track, served a crucial purpose. By having Piastri run the hard compound tires, McLaren gained invaluable data on tire degradation, grip, and how to effectively defend against rivals like Charles Leclerc who were on a similar one-stop plan. This data provided Norris’s pit wall with a significant advantage, allowing them to optimize his two-stop strategy and ensuring he had the pace advantage when it mattered most.

It was a cold, calculated, and ultimately brilliant tactical move. While it sacrificed Piastri’s already diminishing chance at the victory—a sacrifice no true racer wants to make—it gave Norris the perfect blueprint to secure the required third-place finish. It was a stark reminder that in F1, a championship is not just won by the driver, but by a thousand strategic decisions made by the team, even if it means using one driver to gather intelligence for another.

A Champion Finds His Clutch

Despite the external factors and strategic machinations, Lando Norris’s title is unequivocally deserved. The criticism levelled against him earlier in the year regarding inconsistency evaporated in the face of his spectacular second half of the season. When Max Verstappen and Red Bull finally found their groove and delivered the fastest car, Norris responded with a sequence of “clutch” drives and crucial victories. He drove like a veteran champion, extracting the absolute maximum from the McLaren when the pressure was at its absolute peak.

Seeing the usually jovial and light-hearted Norris overcome with emotion at the end of the race provided a raw, humanizing moment that captivated fans globally. It was the weight of years of expectation, near-misses, and self-doubt lifted in a single, tearful moment.

Verstappen: The Uncrowned MVP

It would be a disservice to the 2025 season not to acknowledge the astonishing performance of Max Verstappen. Despite falling short of the title, the Dutch driver delivered an “insane comeback” that cemented his legacy as a driver who can perform miracles regardless of the machinery beneath him.

Verstappen’s ferocious consistency and ability to wring every ounce of speed from his Red Bull meant that he constantly pushed the McLaren pair, preventing the championship from ever becoming a boring affair. His relentless pursuit provided the constant high-stakes drama that kept millions glued to their screens. In the eyes of many, including those commenting on the action, Verstappen was the “real MVP” of the year—the driver who made the season entertaining and fun, turning a potential McLaren cruise into a year-long, nail-biting spectacle.

Lando Norris’s 2025 World Championship will be remembered for the glorious triumph, the emotional release, and the satisfying conclusion to a generational talent’s journey to the top. But it will also forever be synonymous with the controversial stewards’ decision and the strategic sacrifice of his teammate. It was a championship won in the heat of battle, aided by a crucial administrative dodge, and earned through the grit of a driver who finally found his champion’s edge. The paddock is already buzzing for 2026, but the debate over Abu Dhabi will likely rage on until the next controversial flag drops.