Rosberg was right not to get a qualifying penalty, but that's the problem

For the second consecutive race weekend the interpretation of Formula One’s multitude of regulations stole the show, temporarily forcing the racing into the back seat.

The Hungarian Grand Prix weekend was characterised by debate about yellow flags and the newly updated unauthorised radio messages directive.

The most contentious was the investigation into Nico Rosberg’s pole lap, which was set while part of the track was being cautioned by double waved yellow flags.

Though not initially scrutinised by the stewards, ‘new information’ reached race control hours after qualifying. This was curious in itself given the only data the FIA doesn’t have access to is internal team data, but even then the four-man panel sided with Rosberg after lengthy deliberations.

Rosberg explained away the matter by saying that the corners in question turned from yellow to green as he reached them and that in any case his telemetry showed he slowed “significantly”, which is the term used in the sporting code.

His teammate, Lewis Hamilton – who admitted to appealing to the FIA over Rosberg’s pole lap, though he does not believe his comments had any influence in the opening of the investigation – spoke out against the not-guilty ruling.

“I have spoken to Charlie [Whiting, FIA race director] for clarification, because in the next scenario, if I’m in the same position, all I have to do now is lose a tenth [of a second].

“It’s just important to know if that’s the case. The precedent was set yesterday.”

Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel also objected.

“The worst thing about this is that we are an example,” he said.

“Next week there will be a go karting race and there will be a yellow waved flag somewhere because somebody went off. Marshals will probably go out and help him, and then the way the kids think is that, ‘Well, I don’t need to lift much, because in Formula One it’s OK. That’s the pinnacle and that’s how we have to behave’. That’s what I don’t like about it.”

Debate spilled into the race, too, with the stewards making a ruling using the freshly strengthened radio ban.

Jenson Button suffered a hydraulics issue that resulted in near terminal brake problems just five laps into the race. He was given instructions on how to regain control of his brake pedal by his team, but within five more laps he was given a penalty.

“It’s a stupid regulation,” Button said after retiring from the race. “When it’s a safety concern with the brake pedal going to the floor, you shouldn’t be penalised for stopping an accident.”

The FIA, however, remains firmly beside its decision to outlaw particular radio messages, believing drivers should have a better understanding of their cars in the first place.

None of the protagonists will conclude on the issue amicably, but in truth all of them are correct, because formula One, despite its reams of complex regulation and multimillion-dollar business base, is regulated vaguely and inconsistently.

This is no criticism of the FIA itself; the problem is the way the FIA’s regulations are applied.

Writing regulations for an uber-competitive sport like Formula One is incredibly difficult, and loopholes are inevitable.

The same is true for legislation – governments around the world regularly draft patchy laws, but an established judiciary applies them in the context of centuries of precedent, creating a broadly consistent law framework.

This isn’t the case in Formula One, because the regulations are administered by an irregularly rotating list of stewards, all of whom have wildly varied backgrounds informing their opinions.

The result is that decisions made relating the same rules are liable to be dramatically different from race to race, and when stewards are asked to rule on something as ambiguous as the sentence “reduce your speed significantly”, the possible outcomes are limitless.

Interpretation of and behaviour under double waved yellow flags is a serious safety issue. Indeed it was a central element in the investigation into the horrific events of the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix. In a sport comprising teams and drivers seeking any advantage, adjudication is simply too important to be left to a rotating panel of miscellaneous motorsport figures, respected though they may be.

Rosberg knew the letter of the law and followed it precisely, losing the minimum amount of time in the process. Without a string of coherent decision behind them, stewards Gerd Ennser, Baham Lekhal, Alan Jones, and Lajos Herczag had no choice but to accept his position.

For this reason a permanent panel of stewards must be appointed immediately. Consistent stewards will return consistent results that, over time, will lead to consistent regulations. With consistent regulations the opportunity for drivers and teams to shortcut safety and other rules based on minimalist interpretations will be greatly reduced.

The stewards were well placed to correctly identify that Rosberg didn’t ignore the yellow flags and that Button received an unapproved radio communication, but they were unable to guide the regulations based on the context in which they were written. This is arguably the sport’s most significant shortcoming, and it must be addressed.

Follow @MichaelLamonato on Twitter