Former NASCAR star and Sky Sports F1 pundit Danica Patrick has ignited a firestorm in the Formula 1 community with explosive claims about the sport’s governing body, the FIA. In a recent interview,

Patrick alleged that the FIA has been deliberately undermining Red Bull and their star driver, Max Verstappen, while showing favoritism toward British drivers.

Her comments have sparked intense debate, with fans, analysts, and insiders dissecting the implications of such a serious accusation.

Patrick’s claims center on the 2025 season, particularly incidents involving Verstappen and British drivers like George Russell and Lando Norris. She pointed to the Miami Grand Prix, where Red Bull protested a decision involving Russell, alleging he failed to lift off the throttle under a yellow flag. The FIA rejected Red Bull’s appeal, prompting Patrick to question the consistency of the stewards’ rulings. “It’s no coincidence that decisions seem to favor British drivers,” she stated, suggesting a pattern of bias within the FIA’s decision-making process. She also referenced Verstappen’s penalties, such as a five-second time penalty in Saudi Arabia for gaining an advantage over Oscar Piastri, as evidence of overly harsh treatment toward the Dutch driver.

The backdrop to Patrick’s allegations is Red Bull’s struggles in 2025. Despite Verstappen’s pole position in Miami, McLaren’s dominance, led by Norris and Piastri, saw Red Bull fail to secure a podium. Patrick argued that the FIA’s regulations, including strict guidelines on driver conduct and car modifications, have disproportionately affected Red Bull. For instance, Red Bull faced scrutiny over Verstappen’s brakes in Bahrain, requiring FIA approval for changes to avoid a pit lane start. Patrick claimed such rulings hinder Red Bull’s ability to compete, while British-led teams like McLaren and Mercedes face fewer obstacles.

Patrick’s comments have drawn mixed reactions. Some fans support her, citing Verstappen’s vocal frustration with the FIA’s 2025 regulations, which include fines and potential suspensions for criticizing the body. Verstappen’s restrained comments after Saudi Arabia, where he hinted at being unable to speak freely, lend credence to claims of an overly controlling FIA. Social media posts from fans echo Patrick’s sentiments, with one stating, “Max is right—the FIA’s rules silence drivers and favor certain teams.” Others, however, dismiss her allegations as baseless, accusing her of stirring controversy to stay relevant. Critics note that Patrick’s tenure as a pundit has been polarizing, with some fans questioning her expertise in F1 despite her racing background.

The FIA has not officially responded to Patrick’s claims, but the organization has faced criticism throughout 2025. Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has called for fewer regulations on wheel-to-wheel racing, arguing that current rules make combat “unnatural.” Jos Verstappen, Max’s father, labeled an FIA decision in Miami as “stupid,” suggesting it could jeopardize his son’s title hopes. These sentiments align with Patrick’s narrative but lack concrete evidence of deliberate bias toward British drivers.

Patrick’s allegations raise broader questions about impartiality in F1. The sport has long grappled with accusations of favoritism, whether toward specific teams or drivers. While Patrick’s claims may lack definitive proof, they amplify existing tensions between Red Bull, the FIA, and rival teams. As the 2025 season progresses, her remarks will likely fuel further scrutiny of the FIA’s decisions, especially in high-stakes races involving Verstappen and his British counterparts. Whether her allegations hold water or fade as mere speculation, Patrick has undeniably thrust the issue of fairness in F1 into the spotlight, ensuring heated discussions for races to come.