David Coulthard said he was surprised the FIA did not issue any statement or reprimand after Max Verstappen ejected Guardian journalist Giles Richards from a Red Bull media session at Suzuka. The incident happened during the Japanese GP weekend after a question about Verstappen’s Barcelona contact with George Russell.
At Red Bull’s hospitality in Suzuka, Richards asked Verstappen if he regretted the Barcelona clash with Russell. That contact cost Verstappen nine points. Verstappen told the reporter to leave. He said he would not start the session until the journalist left.
Coulthard called the ejection unusual. He said he was surprised the FIA took no public stance or reprimand. He also said Verstappen was arguably within his rights not to answer a question he did not want to take.
The question carried weight because it linked back to a late-2025 Abu Dhabi exchange and a nine-point swing. That swing contributed to Verstappen losing the World Championship by two points. The line of questioning was sensitive, given the title outcome and the public debate around the Barcelona contact with Russell.
Coulthard offered a broader view on how drivers handle the media. He said he understands that repeated criticism can feel personal. He drew on his own experience of facing hard questions during his Formula 1 career. He said drivers often need a moment to reset after a tense exchange, but the show goes on and interviews continue.
He also pointed to how language affects outcomes. He noted that if Verstappen had used stronger or insulting language, a fine could have followed under existing rules. Refusing to answer and asking someone to leave sits in a different space than swearing at or abusing a reporter. In his view, that difference may explain why there was no formal action, even if the silence from the FIA stood out.
Coulthard said the moment was noteworthy because of what it combined. A team-run media session in Red Bull’s space. A direct question about a contact that cost nine points. The backdrop of a title that was lost by two points. And a governing body that, in this case, chose not to comment in public.