Max Verstappen criticized Red Bull driver swap involving Liam Lawson and Yuki Tsunoda after ‘liking’ a social media post that blasted the ‘panic’ move which he claims “speaks for itself.”
The reigning four-time Formula 1 world champion has openly expressed dissatisfaction with the decision which saw Lawson demoted to Racing Bulls while Tsunoda was promoted to the main Red Bull team ahead of the Japanese Grand Prix.
Max Verstappen criticized Red Bull driver swap by his endorsement of a social media post that labeled the team’s mid-season replacement as “bullying” and a “panic move,” drawing attention to the often ruthless nature of Formula 1 team management.
The move, which has sparked controversy across the F1 community, happened after Liam Lawson struggled in his first two races of the season. The New Zealander failed to score points, crashed out of the Australian Grand Prix, and qualified last for both the Chinese Grand Prix and its sprint race.
Red Bull’s decision to replace him with Yuki Tsunoda—a driver with more experience—was framed as a strategic move aimed at bolstering the team’s chances in both the drivers’ and constructors’ championships.
However, the reigning four-time F1 world champion’s reaction suggests deeper concerns about how the Milton Keynes based outfit handled the situation.
Verstappen’s discontent became public when he “liked” an Instagram post from former F1 driver Giedo van der Garde who criticized Red Bull for giving Lawson only two races before demoting him back to their junior team, Racing Bulls.
Van der Garde described the decision as overly harsh, arguing that it undermined Lawson’s confidence and disregarded his dedication and hard work.
Verstappen later confirmed to SKY Sports F1 that his endorsement of the post was intentional stating: “I liked the comment, the text, so I guess it speaks for itself.”
The Dutchman refused to expand in public on his feelings about the decision, but added: “My reaction was shared with the team but in general, about not only the swap, but about everything.
“We discussed that already during last weekend and back at the factory. Everything has been shared with the team, how I think about everything.
“Sometimes, it’s not necessary to always share everything in public. I think it’s better.”
The Dutch driver’s stance highlights an ongoing debate within Formula 1 about balancing performance expectations with fair treatment of drivers.
While F1 is known for its high-pressure environment and cut-throat competition, critics argue that Red Bull’s handling of Lawson was unnecessarily abrupt.
Van der Garde’s comments resonated with many fans and industry insiders who believe that young drivers deserve more time to adapt to the challenges of competing at the highest level.
RELATED:
- Horner: Red Bull driver swap came after engineers ‘concern’
- Red Bull demotion ‘shocked’ Liam Lawson, aims to prove Christian Horner wrong
- Yuki Tsunoda’s Red Bull promotion: Embracing “intense pressure” ahead of debut at Japanese GP
- Red Bull’s white livery returns for Japanese Grand Prix
- F1 Japanese Grand Prix 2025 schedule and start times
Helmut Marko acknowledged Max Verstappen criticized Red Bull driver swap, but defended the brutal decision claiming it was necessary for achieving strategic goals.
Marko stated that Tsunoda’s experience and current form would provide better support for Verstappen in his pursuit of a fifth world title.
“We know Max is not happy. But we need two cars at the front—not only for the constructors’ championship but also to help Max to his fifth world title,” Marko explained.
Despite these justifications, Verstappen’s reaction underscores a broader concern about Red Bull’s approach to driver management.
The team has faced similar criticism in the past for its treatment of young drivers, including Pierre Gasly and Alex Albon, both of whom were demoted after struggling in their initial stints with the main team.
This pattern raises questions about whether Red Bull provides adequate support and development opportunities for its drivers or prioritizes immediate results at their expense.
