Red Bull RB10 launch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roo
  • 162 comments
  • 10,765 views
Oh, we'll get that this year. That's for sure.
So far, all I have seen from him is a neutral, diplomatic stance. It's the kind of thing Christian Horner does, which makes him look like an idiot because he doesn't address the issue.

But the universally accepted legend won't be applied till after he's done with the sport.
His reputation is almost irrevocably damaged by the perception that the team unfairly favoured him in the past. Whether or not that is true is beside the point; the fact that so many people think it should have them wondering what they did, since the idea did not simply form out of nowhere, and yet they deny any wrongdoing.

Tell me, if Vettel has not received any unfair treatment, why hasn't he ever supported his team-mates? When he and Webber collided in Istanbul, it was clearly Vettel's fault. The team blamed Webber, but Vettel never said a word in support of him.
 
His reputation is almost irrevocably damaged by the perception that the team unfairly favoured him in the past. Whether or not that is true is beside the point; the fact that so many people think it should have them wondering what they did, since the idea did not simply form out of nowhere, and yet they deny any wrongdoing.

Tell me, if Vettel has not received any unfair treatment, why hasn't he ever supported his team-mates? When he and Webber collided in Istanbul, it was clearly Vettel's fault. The team blamed Webber, but Vettel never said a word in support of him.
Vettel has become a spoiled brat, simply because he thinks it's his team and he can do no wrong in it. The unfortunate thing is, that's not far from the truth with Red Bull.
 
Good thing Alonso was never favored by his team and always supported his teammate!
Alonso has matured considerably since then. 2008-2009 was really a turning point for him. Bad seasons tend to do that to drivers: it forces them to rise to the occasion, and mature to become a leader.

It's what Vettel needs to be doing now, but what I have seen from him so far is nowhere near enough. He needs to inspire and motivate, but he is trying to be diplomatic.
 
It's what Vettel needs to be doing now, but what I have seen from him so far is nowhere near enough. He needs to inspire and motivate, but he is trying to be diplomatic.
Hit the nail on the head. He thinks it's his team, because they make it his team, which is wrong.
 
I think it's more a case of his seeing the team the way he has always seen them - not necessarily as *his* team, but as one giant machine, with everyone performing their own individual role, and if they continue to perform it the way they always have, then they will pull through. But the problem is that the RB10 is not a great car, and so the team's usual efforts will not be enough. To complicate things, divisions are starting to show: Helmut Marko, Christian Horner and Adrian Newey have all contradicted each other on the RB10's issues. Marko says that serious work is needed, Horner claims the issues will be resolved when Renault sort themselves out, and Newey believes that he knows what the root cause is, but that it is too soon to commit to a solution. The three most-senior and best-known personalities in the garage cannot even agree on the problem and possible solutions, which is not a good sign. Vettel needs to stand up and say "we all need to step up and give 110%", which he has not done.
 
Alonso has matured considerably since then. 2008-2009 was really a turning point for him. Bad seasons tend to do that to drivers: it forces them to rise to the occasion, and mature to become a leader.

It's what Vettel needs to be doing now, but what I have seen from him so far is nowhere near enough. He needs to inspire and motivate, but he is trying to be diplomatic.
While I agree with your view on what he needs to do, I disagree with your judgement of the situation. I'm not aware what sources you have concerning the relations within the team, I doubt much of anything relating the progress within the team gets out towards the public. Judging the "scripted" (PR managers are a thing these days) outward appearance is a bit of a quick shot in my opinion. If Vettel fails to motivate the team it will become apparent throughout the season, but this second test is a bit of an early call. Putting the blame on a single source is not productive for team climate, spouting empty nonsense like "we need to give 110%" does not solve any problems either.
 
While I agree with your view on what he needs to do, I disagree with your judgement of the situation. I'm not aware what sources you have concerning the relations within the team, I doubt much of anything relating the progress within the team gets out towards the public. Judging the "scripted" (PR managers are a thing these days) outward appearance is a bit of a quick shot in my opinion. If Vettel fails to motivate the team it will become apparent throughout the season, but this second test is a bit of an early call.
We've been able to tell he's a diplomat and not a team player for a good number of years now.
 
He gets it from Horner. Horner has always been keen to avoid conflict when and where he can, even when it is in his interests to let it play out in public. A perfect example of this was Malaysia last year; Webber was upset with Vettel and claimed Vettel would enjoy the protection of the team. Horner immediately moved the entire episode behind closed doors and said that Vettel had been on the receiving end of an internal reprimand. In doing so, he unwittingly reinforced Webber's claim and appeared more interested in protecting the team rather than deal with the breakdown in the relationship with his drivers.

Vettel's lack of leadership over the team's current situation puts him in a similar position: calling for the team to redouble their efforts and motivate them would require him to commit to a position. But the diplomatic solution gives the appearance that he is doing something, when in reality, he is not asking them to do anything new.
 
I think it's more a case of his seeing the team the way he has always seen them - not necessarily as *his* team, but as one giant machine, with everyone performing their own individual role, and if they continue to perform it the way they always have, then they will pull through. But the problem is that the RB10 is not a great car, and so the team's usual efforts will not be enough. To complicate things, divisions are starting to show: Helmut Marko, Christian Horner and Adrian Newey have all contradicted each other on the RB10's issues. Marko says that serious work is needed, Horner claims the issues will be resolved when Renault sort themselves out, and Newey believes that he knows what the root cause is, but that it is too soon to commit to a solution. The three most-senior and best-known personalities in the garage cannot even agree on the problem and possible solutions, which is not a good sign. Vettel needs to stand up and say "we all need to step up and give 110%", which he has not done.

I think the idea of the driver's providing leadership is grossly overrrated. The driver is just an employee, albeit a high-profile, highly-paid one. The leadership in a team starts with the team principal, though arguably in Red Bull's case it's really Newey who makes the big decisions with Horner working to keep the administrivia and politics off his shoulders.

Edit: spelling fix. Eyes aren't what they used to be.
 
Last edited:
Vettel has become a spoiled brat, simply because he thinks it's his team and he can do no wrong in it. The unfortunate thing is, that's not far from the truth with Red Bull.
I'm now very curious on your post, as not only do I read this on random F1 site comments. Are you inside the team, and communicated with other team members to reach such a harsh post towards a young professional racing driver?

Or is the media generating such opinion?

I'm going to dig up something not long ago to remind when he won the USGP in 2013 on the radio of this "selfish spoiled brat."
"I'm speechless. We have to remember these days. We have to remember these days. There is no guarantee they will last forever. We have to enjoy them. I love you guys, we have an incredible team. Incredible. I'm so proud of you."
 
I think the idea of the driver's providing leadership is grossly overrrated. The driver is just an employee, albeit a high-profile, highly-paid one. The leadership in a team starts with the team principal, though arguably in Red Bull's case it's really Newey who makes the big decisions with Horner working to keep the administrivia and politics off his shoulders.

Edit: spelling fix. Eyes aren't what they used to be.

The driver is really the face the of organization. Schumacher was for Ferrari, not Todt. Hakkinen was for Mclaren, not Dennis. Yes a driver is an employee, but he is the one that is actually out there scrapping it out for wins and points. He is the one that signs autographs and gets tabloids following them everywhere.

Leadership does start with the team principle but it is ultimately the driver that must gel everyone together and inspire them to form a truly competitive package. Vettel for some reason just does not have that charisma as the two men mentioned nor does he seem to look like he cares much to do so. True, Hakkinen says as many words as a tree would in an interview but whenever he spoke it was rather humble and to the point. Of course we only know one side of the story and that is usually whatever the media feeds us. Maybe the media is indeed just feeding popular opinion.

Furthermore, people like Newey may make big decisions, but he ultimately needs the driver's input before making the big decisions. An engineer cannot know what to build until he knows what is wanted/needed.
 
I'm now very curious on your post, as not only do I read this on random F1 site comments. Are you inside the team, and communicated with other team members to reach such a harsh post towards a young professional racing driver?

Or is the media generating such opinion?

I'm going to dig up something not long ago to remind when he won the USGP in 2013 on the radio of this "selfish spoiled brat."
"I'm speechless. We have to remember these days. We have to remember these days. There is no guarantee they will last forever. We have to enjoy them. I love you guys, we have an incredible team. Incredible. I'm so proud of you."
That says nothing about his attitude within the team, it has no connection to what we're talking about. The most telling thing was after Malaysia last year, when Vettel said something along the lines of "It's good that a person who deserves it won". I don't need to work for Red Bull to see that Vettel is their nurtured baby who has a stupid amount of control within the team. His relationship with Webber said it all.
 
That says nothing about his attitude within the team, it has no connection to what we're talking about. The most telling thing was after Malaysia last year, when Vettel said something along the lines of "It's good that a person who deserves it won". I don't need to work for Red Bull to see that Vettel is their nurtured baby who has a stupid amount of control within the team. His relationship with Webber said it all.
Ah, dangle that one. Slightly aggressive wording, but i'll go with it. It's part of the drama of Formula1. Webber turned down his car and didn't want to fight for it back, Vettel reminded us that competition in F1 still exists. Simple as that. Seems you like the team order aspect of F1... or is it more entertaining as a viewer to see drivers defy it?

You pull that one, but forgot that Ferrari told Barrichello years ago to slow it down to let Micheal win? Micheal took it, passed the ordered Barrichello. And decided to be a human-being afterwards.
 
Ah, dangle that one. Slightly aggressive wording, but i'll go with it. It's part of the drama of Formula1. Webber turned down his car and didn't want to fight for it back, Vettel reminded us that competition in F1 still exists. Simple as that. Seems you like the team order aspect of F1... or is it more entertaining as a viewer to see drivers defy it?

You pull that one, but forgot that Ferrari told Barrichello years ago to slow it down to let Micheal win? Micheal took it, passed the ordered Barrichello. And decided to be a human-being afterwards.
I like respect, equality and the ability to support teammates. Vettel lacks those things. This explains it well:
So far, all I have seen from him is a neutral, diplomatic stance. It's the kind of thing Christian Horner does, which makes him look like an idiot because he doesn't address the issue.


His reputation is almost irrevocably damaged by the perception that the team unfairly favoured him in the past. Whether or not that is true is beside the point; the fact that so many people think it should have them wondering what they did, since the idea did not simply form out of nowhere, and yet they deny any wrongdoing.

Tell me, if Vettel has not received any unfair treatment, why hasn't he ever supported his team-mates? When he and Webber collided in Istanbul, it was clearly Vettel's fault. The team blamed Webber, but Vettel never said a word in support of him.
 
I think Vettel's fairly odious, he's probably my least favourite of the F1 drivers... but that said I'm a lover of the sport as a whole and I see it as being what-it-is.

The cars reach a formula and race to those regulations. Outside those regulations its nobody's business except the teams' how the championship is won providing that the sponsors are happy.

Red Bull very visibly use the #1 driver policy after the team orders rule was (rightly, in my opinion) scrapped to restore F1 to its team roots. That means that they do concentrate their efforts on a single driver when required whether that's in terms of equipment, support or even public allegiance.

Other teams have done that too of course, possibly the most famous team orders are Eddy Jordan refusing to allow Ralf to race Damon. Differing circumstances but overall the same principle.

Faster-gate was also very public but this time the hero was plucky Felipe, underdog battling back from personal crisis who was being trumped by the ruthless point-hungry Matador.

Still, F1 is a game of two halves with jumpers for goalposts and it's up to the teams how to get the maximum race-day return from their investment. Its not up to the fans to dictate that any more than I can ask for Pacer mints to come back.

It sucks but it's a sport worth billions of pounds where you take either a result or nothing. As if people get in the way of that ;)
 
Oh, we'll get that this year. That's for sure.


Unfortunately, as far as stats go. He's an absolute legend. But the universally accepted legend won't be applied till after he's done with the sport. Schumacher received the same if not more negative, besides the tifosi, in the 6 years are pure domination of the sport.
Schumacher was nowhere near as disliked as Vettel. He proved himself countless times to be the best driver on the grid and virtually on his own level before earning himself a dominant car and era by rallying the team behind him and working extremely hard.
 
Schumacher was nowhere near as disliked as Vettel. He proved himself countless times to be the best driver on the grid and virtually on his own level before earning himself a dominant car and era by rallying the team behind him and working extremely hard.

Having said I'm a fan of noone in particular, I AM a huge Schumacher fan and I have to say that I utterly disagree with you.

Schumacher was an extremely divisive figure, I don't think it would be unrealistic to guess that more than half of the world's F1 fans actively disliked him at best.

The periods of dominance for him and Ferrari were genuinely bad for the sport. They were unavoidable because that's how the technical cycle of sports like this works, and personally I enjoyed Ferrari's success immensely... but they were bad for how the sport (and ultimately Schumacher) were perceived as a whole.
 
Having said I'm a fan of noone in particular, I AM a huge Schumacher fan and I have to say that I utterly disagree with you.

Schumacher was an extremely divisive figure, I don't think it would be unrealistic to guess that more than half of the world's F1 fans actively disliked him at best.

The periods of dominance for him and Ferrari were genuinely bad for the sport. They were unavoidable because that's how the technical cycle of sports like this works, and personally I enjoyed Ferrari's success immensely... but they were bad for how the sport (and ultimately Schumacher) were perceived as a whole.

The difference between Vettel and Schumacher was that while and after Schumacher dominated the sport, his 'haters' didn't have much of a leg to stand on. They couldn't criticize him for his success being the car and not the driver, or for being unable to perform in a position where he didn't have the best car, because he had already proved those points wrong. He didn't even have an unlikeable character, unless you were those people who only think of Adelaide 1994 or Jerez 1997, or that he deserved hate for the team orders incidents with Rubens.

His dominance turned people off of the sport, no doubt, but he wasn't as disliked as Vettel because the only real reason to hate him was for making the sport boring, by being that good.
 
His dominance turned people off of the sport, no doubt, but he wasn't as disliked as Vettel because the only real reason to hate him was for making the sport boring, by being that good.

Oh gosh, I'm going to disagree again and I think you really should look more into Schumacher's career. Like all successful drivers he was extremely focused and determined but sometimes he went beyond the edge of sporting decency.

It was not only his dominance that dulled the fervour for many, it was a number of questionable actions (and some beyond question) on the racetrack.

I'm glad you're such a fan, looking back over his career is a fascinating exercise...but really look into it some more. I'm sure plenty of threads in this section will turn up some reasons why people dislike Schumacher other than his dominance. They're even open to objective debate on the subject! :)
 
The driver is really the face the of organization. Schumacher was for Ferrari, not Todt. Hakkinen was for Mclaren, not Dennis. Yes a driver is an employee, but he is the one that is actually out there scrapping it out for wins and points. He is the one that signs autographs and gets tabloids following them everywhere.

Sure, but that's all PR. Has nothing to do with engineering, which is Red Bull's current problem.

And the idea that Mika drew more water at McLaren than Dennis ... I mean, come on, be serious. The last McLaren driver in that frame was Senna, and at the end of the day Dennis was decidedly still the boss.

I see the rest of the thread is becoming an exercise in Vettel hate. Have fun with that. Personally, I don't go with that either because I came to view Webber as a bit of a wanker and not-very-talented politician. Malaysia? The strategy brought Vettel out of the pits on Webber's gearbox after the final pit stop. Let them race.
 
Sure, but that's all PR. Has nothing to do with engineering, which is Red Bull's current problem.
But the driver needs to inspire, encourage and motivate. Do you think Red Bull will stand a better chance of solving its engineering problems if Vettel's attitude is "the car is garbage and we can't compete with anyone", or if his attitude is "okay, we know the car isn't great, so let's figure out what we need to do to make it great"?

Let them race.
You have completely misinterpreted that scenario. Webber believed that they were racing to the final pit stop, at which point they would hold position. He believed that because Vettel agreed to it from the start. But when the final pit stops came, Vettel decided he wanted to win the race. He pleaded with the team, who said no, and then decided to pass Webber anyway. People hailed it as a fantastic duel at the time, but it was only possible because Vettel caught Webber unawares. The main defence of Vettel has been that he saw an opportunity, and he went for it; he's a racing driver. But to do it, he had to break his word. He agreed to hold his position at the final stop. Webber believed he would. But then Vettel went back on his word to make the pass. He did not need to - there was no championship on the line, only his own selfish gain. And if the positions had been reversed, he would have expected Webber to hold his position. So why is it okay for Vettel to break his word if it means winning the race?

There was a lot of controversy in the middle of the season when people were booing Vettel on the podium. A lot of commentators pointed out that this was extremely disrespectful and that we should celebrate whoever wins. And they are right. But at the same time, how can you respect someone's achievements if you cannot respect them? What Vettel did in Malaysia was unsportsmanlike, to say the least - it was dishonest, underhanded and devious. In any other circumstance, breaking your word to someone means losing their respect and their trust. Why should it be any different here? If Vettel is being booed on the podium, it is because people do not respect him, and if they do not respect him, it is because he lost that respect. I know a lot of people who were very upset with Vettel when it happened, because he is an elite athlete. He is a role model, and a very public personality in the sport. And he broke his word for his own personal gain.

To complicate matters, Red Bull insist that they have done nothing wrong, and that they will continue to compete the same way they always have. But tens of thousands of fans did not suddenly start disliking them overnight for no good reason. The idea had to come from somewhere, and whether or not it is an accurate reflection of reality is beside the point - the fact that so many people came to that conclusion means Red Bull had to have done something to set it in their mind's eye. Even if it was something seemingly innocuous, like Marko tearing Alguersuari a new one for not letting Vettel by in a free practice session.

2014 is going to tell us a *lot* about the character of Vettel and the team. I don't believe in karma, but if I did, I would say that the RB10 is the result of years of bad vibes. I think that being forced to drive lap after lap, race after race, knowing that they cannot compete for race wins, much less World Chamiopnships, is going to be a very humbling - and very deserved - experience for Red Bull.
 
But the driver needs to inspire, encourage and motivate. Do you think Red Bull will stand a better chance of solving its engineering problems if Vettel's attitude is "the car is garbage and we can't compete with anyone", or if his attitude is "okay, we know the car isn't great, so let's figure out what we need to do to make it great"?

Nowhere have I seen any suggestion that Vettel's attitude is anything but the more positive of the two possible sentiments you offer. His comments following each of the test sessions to day stand in contrast to, say, picking a not-random example, Alonso's attitude toward his Ferrari at mid-season of last year. And weren't you arguing up-thread that "let's figure out what we need to do to make it great" was insufficiently inspiring?

You have completely misinterpreted that scenario. Webber believed that they were racing to the final pit stop, at which point they would hold position. He believed that because Vettel agreed to it from the start. But when the final pit stops came, Vettel decided he wanted to win the race. He pleaded with the team, who said no, and then decided to pass Webber anyway.

If you look back at the initial Malaysia thread of last year, you'll see I said I thought Vettel's move showed genuine ruthlessness, and I think it was on this site where I voiced the sentiment that RBR should've disciplined him by sitting him out of a race. That was my reaction initially, and since then I've had a rethink. Watching the race at the time, I thought it obvious before it happened that Red Bull's pit strategy was going to put the two cars in very close proximity to each other after the last stop. It's one thing to tell one to follow the other home when there's a margin between them of seconds; it's quite another to say it when the margin is a tenth or two, if that. In the latter situation you need a supremely deferential driver in the second position for team orders to hold. And I find myself unable to come up with reasons why a three-time defending WDC should be put into that position, relative to a slower teammate who the season before had openly flirted with going to another team. The upshot is, we agree RBR mismanaged the situation. Where we differ is that I no longer fault Vettel for what he did.

People hailed it as a fantastic duel at the time, but it was only possible because Vettel caught Webber unawares.

Webber could always have turned up the wick and fought to hold the position. And I've no doubt he knew exactly where Vettel was going to be on-track after leaving the pits from the last stop. His cries of "ambush" ring false.

And if the positions had been reversed, he would have expected Webber to hold his position. So why is it okay for Vettel to break his word if it means winning the race?

We mainly have Webber's side of the story to suggest there was any breaking of word, and I suspect his side is quite self-serving. And again, Vettel's the three-time defending champ. Webber isn't.

There was a lot of controversy in the middle of the season when people were booing Vettel on the podium. A lot of commentators pointed out that this was extremely disrespectful and that we should celebrate whoever wins. And they are right. But at the same time, how can you respect someone's achievements if you cannot respect them?

You cannot discount the role of the press in ginning up the booing, and the F1 press is predominantly UK-based. In that quarter, Webber was always a favorite for reasons the valedictory articles in publication like F1 Racing should by now have made apparent: He played to and catered to the press. And I think nationalism also plays a huge role. Webber is a child of the Commonwealth. Vettel is German -- and even the mighty BBC in its non-F1 programming feels free in these supposedly enlightened times to gin up British resentment of Germany. One shudders to think about how much worse that is in the tabloids and the Murdoch papers. So I'm less inclined than most here to read the booing as any sort of character judgment.

2014 is going to tell us a *lot* about the character of Vettel and the team.

On this, we agree. And it will probably work out as badly as many here hope. But I think RBR was already deep into its plotting of the post-Vettel era. They have no intention of giving him a big contract should he ask for one, and Kvyat's being set up as the next big thing.
 
Nowhere have I seen any suggestion that Vettel's attitude is anything but the more positive of the two possible sentiments you offer. His comments following each of the test sessions to day stand in contrast to, say, picking a not-random example, Alonso's attitude toward his Ferrari at mid-season of last year. And weren't you arguing up-thread that "let's figure out what we need to do to make it great" was insufficiently inspiring?
I am arguing that what Vettel is doing is not enough. His comments amount to "we keep doing what we have always been doing, and we will overcome it", but the problem is that this is how the RB10 got made in the first place.

And I find myself unable to come up with reasons why a three-time defending WDC should be put into that position, relative to a slower teammate who the season before had openly flirted with going to another team.
The agreement was that whoever was in front after the second stop would go on to win the race. It was not specifically calling for Webber to win until he emerged ahead after the second stop. Vettel had every opportunity to get ahead before then, and failed. That he came out so close to Webber demonstrated that he could have done it with a few extra tenths up his sleeve.

As for why he should be put into that position, the answer is simple: he is a child. He might be a four-time champion now, but as he demonstrated that day, he lacks certain mature qualities, and without them, he will not be accepted as a legend of the sport.

And again, Vettel's the three-time defending champ. Webber isn't.
That is no excuse for unsportsmanlike behaviour.

Webber could always have turned up the wick and fought to hold the position. And I've no doubt he knew exactly where Vettel was going to be on-track after leaving the pits from the last stop. His cries of "ambush" ring false.
Webber knew exactly where Vettel was, but it does not matter whether he was in front by an inch or in front by a lap - he still expected Vettel to hold his position, as per the agreement, and he drove accordingly. Communications between Vettel and the pits made it quite clear that the team expected him to hold station. The first Webber knew of Vettel's intention to ignore the agreement came when Vettel made his move. Had he been informed in advance that Vettel was going to ignore the agreement, he would have had a chance to fight for his position. And that is why it was an ambush: not only did Vettel break his word, but he took advantage of the way Webber expected him to keep it.
 
You have completely misinterpreted that scenario. Webber believed that they were racing to the final pit stop, at which point they would hold position. He believed that because Vettel agreed to it from the start. But when the final pit stops came, Vettel decided he wanted to win the race. He pleaded with the team, who said no, and then decided to pass Webber anyway. People hailed it as a fantastic duel at the time, but it was only possible because Vettel caught Webber unawares.
Considering the amount of radio discussion, data, and information that floods a F1 race. It's hard to "catch someone unaware." Especially in the same team where such information is easily exchanged. The team sees sector gaps closing in, the team will relay that message. Vettel pleading over the radio, there's no way Webber's director didn't return some kind of message. I don't think "unaware" is a proper word for it.

Webber turned his motor down to conserve, and hope that the victory would be his. Vettel closed that gap, lap after lap, but this is racing.. it's not over till' the flag. Racing isn't an set agreement of "If you're in the lead i'll let you win." Webber could've avoided the "ambush" if he would've fought back to hold the gap rather than submitting to the challenge. But Red Bull higher-ups wanted a smooth 1-2 finish. It's as simple as that.

Team-mate drama happens. Especially if they don't click. Hamilton & Alonso at McLaren anyone?
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but there is no justification for what Vettel did - then, now, or ever. At all. What he did might make him a racing driver, but it also made him a pretty poor human being. And everybody else who was ever being a racing driver managed to do it without breaking their word or resorting to such underhanded tactics as he did.
 
Sorry, but there is no justification for what Vettel did - then, now, or ever. At all. What he did might make him a racing driver, but it also made him a pretty poor human being. And everybody else who was ever being a racing driver managed to do it without breaking their word or resorting to such underhanded tactics as he did.

I agree with the first part, for me that showed a side to Vettel that, to a grumpy Tyke like me, just wasn't reet.

I can't agree that every other racing driver has had a career free of broken words or underhanded tactics. I can think of at least two other world champions, neither of whom are Michael Schumacher...

A driver like that would say "To be the best, you have to be the best". To someone like Vettel being the best means winning. They don't consider that "best" might include personal attributes. But people who DO often don't win.
 
If you're an Australian fan with no real knowledge of Formula 1, but your interest has been piqued of late, you're going to be disappointed. Channel Ten, who broadcast the races, have put together a massive ad campaign, which they broadcast during the coverage of the Olympics. And, just as in the Olympics, they are ready to award the Australian first place before the race has been run. Even in the middle of Red Bull's difficult testing, the big selling point of the ad has been Ricciardo having a race-winning car ...
 
Hahaha, I wondered how their ads would go considering Red Bull's testing performance. I couldn't imagine it any other way. :lol:
 
If you're an Australian fan with no real knowledge of Formula 1, but your interest has been piqued of late, you're going to be disappointed. Channel Ten, who broadcast the races, have put together a massive ad campaign, which they broadcast during the coverage of the Olympics. And, just as in the Olympics, they are ready to award the Australian first place before the race has been run. Even in the middle of Red Bull's difficult testing, the big selling point of the ad has been Ricciardo having a race-winning car ...

Yes, he's going to have to work on that grin. 32 laps and a dismantled car.

From Aunty; ""I've been down to Red Bull, where I was given the impression that their problem is to do with the energy-recovery system, which we know is at the root of engine partner Renault's problems this winter. No official word on that, yet, though. What is for certain is that the car is in bits in the garage and not going anywhere soon".

We need an English word for schadenfreude.
 
Back