Carlos Sainz believes Formula 1 could get rid of its controversial racing guidelines if it were to apply the same logic as certain ex-F1 drivers, currently working as TV pundits, to stewarding decisions.
The racing guidelines, agreed upon by drivers and the FIA at last year's Qatar Grand Prix, have led to a series of controversial decisions as stewards have applied the letter of those rules to on-track incidents.
Sainz was the subject of one such decision at the Dutch Grand Prix only for his Williams team to call for a review of the decision and successfully get his penalty points overturned.
Another example, which Sainz was also outspoken about, was Oscar Piastri's controversial penalty for a collision with Andrea Kimi Antonelli at the Brazilian Grand Prix -- a decision that could still prove pivotal to the outcome this year's championship.
Both decisions, as well as several others this year, stuck strictly to the wording of the driving guidelines, but Sainz believes more freedom could be given to stewards who have the experience to make the correct calls on racing incidents.
Speaking ahead of this year's Qatar Grand Prix -- where the FIA will review the racing guidelines with drivers -- Sainz cited Sky Sports pundits Karun Chandhok and Anthony Davidson as well as F1 TV's Jolyon Palmer as ex-drivers capable of reaching the correct conclusions without guidelines.
"I'm going to give you as honest an answer as possible," Sainz said when asked about the racing guidelines. "I think recently, after the races, I've seen some [TV] analysis done of quite a lot of the incidents.
"In some of them it was Karun Chandhok [as the analyst], in some of them, Jolyon Palmer, some of them, I think was Anthony Davidson. Every time I see this analysis that they do and the verdict that they give from racing drivers that have been recently racing, I think they do a very good analysis, and they put the blame correctly, most of the time, on who actually has the blame, or if it's actually just a racing incident.
"My future ideal is no guidelines and people that are able to judge these sort of incidents as well as these three people that I just mentioned do, after races.
"This is just my opinion, but I'm quite impressed at the job that some of the broadcasters do after a race with this in-depth analysis of each of the incidents and how they apply blame or no blame, into certain scenarios.
"I think that's a level of analysis and a level of stewardness, if you want to call it that way, that I think is very high level.
"And that probably doesn't mean that we will agree 100% on the cases of what these three people, three ex-drivers, give, but I think they are a lot of times very close to being 90%, let's say, correct.
"If I would have to go and see Formula 1 in the future, and the stewarding level, this is more or less a level that I would appreciate."
Sainz, who is a director of the Grand Prix Drivers Association (GPDA), believes the current racing guidelines, which rely heavily on how far the overtaking car is alongside the defending car, are not applicable to all situations.
"My personal opinion on here -- I'm not talking from a GPDA perspective, I'm just talking as Carlos Sainz -- is that there is potential to do better," he said. "And I think the guidelines themselves have created more problems than solutions to a lot of issues that have happened this year in the ways we judge incidents.
"There's been barely any room for racing incidents this year. There's always been either white or black because we've been supported by the guidelines, and the guidelines haven't allowed racing incidents to be judged as racing incidents, because there was always a tyre in front, or behind a mirror ... whatever the guidelines say, I don't know them by heart!
"It's been in that sense a bit of not successful implementation of those guidelines."