Two points. That’s the margin between world champion Lando Norris and the driver who won more races than anyone else this season. Max Verstappen dominated Abu Dhabi whilst Norris carefully managed his way to third place. And now Italian media outlets are falling over themselves to explain why the bloke who didn’t win the championship is actually the real winner.
Because nothing says “objective sports coverage” quite like inventing imaginary titles for drivers who came second, does it?
When “Alien” Status Doesn’t Include Actual Championships
Corriere della Sera delivered the most spectacular bit of mental gymnastics. They crowned Verstappen “the moral champion of 2025” whilst giving him a “fat 10” for his season. Brilliant logic, that. He’s an “alien being” who demonstrated he’s “the real extraterrestrial.” Just not quite extraterrestrial enough to actually win the championship.
“The alien being remains Verstappen. Once again a fat 10 for him. He was magnificent this season and won more races than Norris. Halfway through the season, Red Bull relied on the cannibal Verstappen and that paid off well. Max showed his team, but also the entire F1, that he is the real alien being. Let’s say he is the moral champion of 2025.” – Corriere della Sera
The moral champion. What a delightfully meaningless concept. Shall we start handing out participation trophies to drivers who lose championships? Perhaps Ferrari can finally win something if we invent enough imaginary categories?
Verstappen won eight races. More than both Norris and Oscar Piastri, who each managed seven. He took more pole positions. He delivered that spectacular comeback from 104 points down. All utterly irrelevant when you finish second in the actual championship that actually matters.
The “Price” Verstappen Paid for Horner’s Uncertainty
Gazzetta dello Sport offered their sympathetic assessment of Verstappen’s near-miss. He “pays the price of an uncertain Horner phase” but then “conquered an insane amount of points and delivered spectacle.” How tragic for him that Red Bull’s internal drama cost him the title he definitely would’ve won otherwise.
Except that’s complete nonsense, isn’t it? Every team faces challenges. Every driver navigates difficult periods. Norris spent the first half of the season making mistakes whilst everyone questioned whether he had the mentality for championships. Then he found another gear precisely when it mattered most.
Verstappen’s “uncertain Horner phase” doesn’t excuse finishing second. It explains why he trailed by 104 points in the first place. The comeback was spectacular. The deficit that required the comeback was Red Bull’s own creation.
When Being “The Best” Doesn’t Mean Winning
Corriere dello Sport declared that “yes he deserved a title, but F1 is hard, just like life. The best doesn’t always win.” What profound insight. The sport where championships are decided by points totals sometimes crowns someone other than the driver Italian journalists personally prefer.
Shocking development in motorsport. Driver who scores fewer championship points doesn’t win championship. More at eleven.
The publication did manage to deliver one genuinely fair assessment: Tsunoda’s weaving during his battle with Norris was particularly unfortunate “in his last F1 race, especially against someone who drives as cleanly as Norris.” Fair enough. The Japanese driver’s farewell tour included getting penalised for dangerous defending that nearly ruined the championship battle.
Norris the “Normal Guy” Who Beat the Alien
Perhaps the most patronising coverage came from outlets praising Norris for being “one of us” and a “normal guy” who openly discussed his mental health struggles. Because apparently admitting vulnerability means you’re less talented than drivers who project invincibility?
Corriere della Sera gushed about Norris being “a champion like us, someone who also accepts his weaknesses.” How wonderfully condescending. The seven-time race winner who just claimed the world championship is celebrated for being relatable rather than brilliant.
Gazzetta dello Sport noted that “for years he made mistakes here and there and was a normal boy, but this year he kept getting better.” Translation? He used to be rubbish. Now he’s slightly less rubbish. Definitely not as good as the “alien” who lost to him.
When Moral Victories Replace Actual Trophies
The “moral champion” narrative represents everything wrong with modern F1 coverage. Verstappen doesn’t need consolation prizes. He’s won four world championships. He’ll probably win more. His 2025 comeback was genuinely spectacular, particularly that dominant pole position and victory in Abu Dhabi.
But he lost. Norris won. Those are the facts that matter. Everything else is just media outlets trying to reconcile their pre-season predictions with uncomfortable reality.
Spanish publication Marca got it right: “The best doesn’t always win. Sport teaches us that the most talented and determined driver doesn’t always get his way.” Exactly. That’s what makes championships interesting. If the “best” driver always won, we could just hand trophies out based on subjective media assessments and skip the actual racing.
Verstappen remains one of the greatest drivers in F1 history. His 2025 season showcased remarkable skill, determination, and racecraft. He delivered when Red Bull needed him most. He mounted one of the great championship comebacks.
And Lando Norris still beat him. By two points. Which is all that actually matters when they hand out the real trophy, not the imaginary moral one Italian journalists just invented.
