planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:58 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1302
So from the various articles I'm reading Alonso wants to return to F1 but would clearly only do so in a top car.

Question is, does F1 want/need him back? The future's bright with Leclerc and Verstappen and for a while at least Hamilton. The top teams barring a real change in the order have their top drivers under contract (LEC and VER, HAM to follow) .

So I don't see that the top teams need him, and any lesser teams aren't of interest to him.

Anyone see it different?

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 1:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
DOLOMITE wrote:
So from the various articles I'm reading Alonso wants to return to F1 but would clearly only do so in a top car.

Question is, does F1 want/need him back? The future's bright with Leclerc and Verstappen and for a while at least Hamilton. The top teams barring a real change in the order have their top drivers under contract (LEC and VER, HAM to follow) .

So I don't see that the top teams need him, and any lesser teams aren't of interest to him.

Anyone see it different?

That's how I see it as well, if Alonso is only going to come back to F1 if he can get a top seat then he's not coming back unless Liberty Media can negotiate something for Alonso but I think they tried before without success?

Certainly the likes of Ferrari and Mercedes are a no, no, Red Bull I would say have a driver problem with all their juniors seemingly half a second slower than Verstappen, can Albon step up next season, if not then can Gasly further impress at Alpha Tauri to warrant another chance?

If as rumored Alonso does the Indy 500 with Andretti Honda then that stops any barrier for Alonso going to Red Bull in respect of Honda but still the reputation proceeds him of a driver that needs the focus of a team to be on him, would Red Bull want to take that kind of a risk on a driver that could potential implode against a driver of Verstappen's talent, this is basically what precludes Alonso going to the likes of Ferrari and Mercedes as well.

Certainly these are the only teams we can consider as being top teams.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 1:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.

That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.

That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.


I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.

That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.


I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.

Ricciardo had an offer from Red Bull.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.

That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.


I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.

Ricciardo had an offer from Red Bull.


Where he had been a junior driver and was already the incumbent.

These are arguments proving me right not wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I think when he left he was still the best driver in the sport but history shows time out at a more advanced age generally slows a driver. I can only see him coming back now if a team has an absolute emergency.

I think we will see more situations like this in the future as teams get more and more reluctant to take risks with their driver line up. Big teams will only promote from within.

That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.


I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.

Ricciardo had an offer from Red Bull.


Where he had been a junior driver and was already the incumbent.

These are arguments proving me right not wrong.

Not really when was Ricciardo judged as the best driver in F1, certainly not after having got beat by Verstappen, your claims of Alonso being the best driver in F1 are either not shared by the top teams or something else prevents them from signing him?

If you want to judge Ricciardo as being the same as Alonso then Alonso can't be seen as being the best driver in F1, it's not really incumbent on a team to sign a driver they consider to be no better than what they already have and that's how I would view Ricciardo after the beating he got from Verstappen, as Hamilton ventured if he wanted to take on himself at Mercedes he needs to be beating his teammate first.

With regards to Ferrari I don't see them believing that Ricciardo was faster than Vettel after getting beat by Verstappen and it's not really their wish to run two #1 drivers, that's why they kept Kimi for so long.

However if they could get someone faster than Vettel then that might be something different, like the potential in a young Leclerc or a Hamilton but seemingly not an Alonso who after reading various things I'm lead to believe they think he's a faster driver than Vettel but they have zero interest.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
That's not really true though with Ferrari showing some interest in Hamilton but zero interest in Alonso, Mercedes have also shown some interest in Verstappen but zero interest in Alonso, if we take your mantra as Alonso being the best driver in F1 when he was there then I think the top teams having zero interest in Alonso goes beyond simply not wanting to put two top drivers together.


I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.

Ricciardo had an offer from Red Bull.


Where he had been a junior driver and was already the incumbent.

These are arguments proving me right not wrong.

Not really when was Ricciardo judged as the best driver in F1, certainly not after having got beat by Verstappen, your claims of Alonso being the best driver in F1 are either not shared by the top teams or something else prevents them from signing him?

If you want to judge Ricciardo as being the same as Alonso then Alonso can't be seen as being the best driver in F1, it's not really incumbent on a team to sign a driver they consider to be no better than what they already have and that's how I would view Ricciardo after the beating he got from Verstappen, as Hamilton ventured if he wanted to take on himself at Mercedes he needs to be beating his teammate first.

With regards to Ferrari I don't see them believing that Ricciardo was faster than Vettel after getting beat by Verstappen and it's not really their wish to run two #1 drivers, that's why they kept Kimi for so long.

However if they could get someone faster than Vettel then that might be something different, like the potential in a young Leclerc or a Hamilton but seemingly not an Alonso who after reading various things I'm lead to believe they think he's a faster driver than Vettel but they have zero interest.


Sorry, but what are you on about? I said teams won't take a risk with their driver line up. You seemed to suggest there was another reason teams wouldn't sign Alonso. I said there was no evidence of that and used Ricciardo as an example.

I don't see how anything you have written relates to that.

Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

Mercedes could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to continue with a number 2 for Hamilton.

Ricciardo would have been an upgrade on both Raikkonen and Bottas but got passed over. Just like Alonso. He doesn't need to be as good as Alonso for that to be the case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7604
Location: Michigan, USA
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 8:07 am
Posts: 1302
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.


Well that's open to intepretation - what they said was that if they had to make calls in one drivers favour, Vettel would be the priority. I don't see that as an outright number 2. My take on Ferraris stance was that the drivers were equal in terms of treatment and were allowed to race, but if a situation arose where one driver may be compromised, it would go in Vettels favour.

Binotto in Mar '19

“If there are particular situations our priority will be Sebastian”

“Obviously the two will be free to will be free to fight, we will not ask Charles to be slow, or Sebastian to be fast. I need both of them to run to the maximum, try to do their best."

“But certainly, if there is any ambiguous situation at the start of the season, Sebastian is the one who's got today more experience, many years he's with us, he's already won championships, so he's our champion.”

_________________
"I'd rather lose a race going fast enough to win it, than win one going slow enough to lose it".
-Stirling Moss


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
DOLOMITE wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.


Well that's open to intepretation - what they said was that if they had to make calls in one drivers favour, Vettel would be the priority. I don't see that as an outright number 2. My take on Ferraris stance was that the drivers were equal in terms of treatment and were allowed to race, but if a situation arose where one driver may be compromised, it would go in Vettels favour.

Binotto in Mar '19

“If there are particular situations our priority will be Sebastian”

“Obviously the two will be free to will be free to fight, we will not ask Charles to be slow, or Sebastian to be fast. I need both of them to run to the maximum, try to do their best."

“But certainly, if there is any ambiguous situation at the start of the season, Sebastian is the one who's got today more experience, many years he's with us, he's already won championships, so he's our champion.”


I might be misrembering as I can't quite recall it exactly but wasn't there a situation across the first few races where they were giving Vettel preferential treatment. Something like not letting Leclerc try and attack Vettel in Australlia but then ordering Leclerc to move over when he was in front in similar circumstances a few races later?

I remember something of that nature being discussed by us at the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
I don't think there is any evidence that's true.

We had Ricciardo available last year as well remember. He got as many offers fro Ferrari and Mercedes as Alonso.

Ricciardo had an offer from Red Bull.


Where he had been a junior driver and was already the incumbent.

These are arguments proving me right not wrong.

Not really when was Ricciardo judged as the best driver in F1, certainly not after having got beat by Verstappen, your claims of Alonso being the best driver in F1 are either not shared by the top teams or something else prevents them from signing him?

If you want to judge Ricciardo as being the same as Alonso then Alonso can't be seen as being the best driver in F1, it's not really incumbent on a team to sign a driver they consider to be no better than what they already have and that's how I would view Ricciardo after the beating he got from Verstappen, as Hamilton ventured if he wanted to take on himself at Mercedes he needs to be beating his teammate first.

With regards to Ferrari I don't see them believing that Ricciardo was faster than Vettel after getting beat by Verstappen and it's not really their wish to run two #1 drivers, that's why they kept Kimi for so long.

However if they could get someone faster than Vettel then that might be something different, like the potential in a young Leclerc or a Hamilton but seemingly not an Alonso who after reading various things I'm lead to believe they think he's a faster driver than Vettel but they have zero interest.


Sorry, but what are you on about? I said teams won't take a risk with their driver line up. You seemed to suggest there was another reason teams wouldn't sign Alonso. I said there was no evidence of that and used Ricciardo as an example.

I don't see how anything you have written relates to that.

Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

Mercedes could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to continue with a number 2 for Hamilton.

Ricciardo would have been an upgrade on both Raikkonen and Bottas but got passed over. Just like Alonso. He doesn't need to be as good as Alonso for that to be the case.

Yet Ferrari have held talks with Hamilton.

Leclerc wasn't signed up as a #2 for Ferrari, yes he was put in that position initially but that's not the long term plan for him, his signing was clearly a vote of no confidence in Vettel.

Mercedes don't need to sign anyone whilst they are winning everything however Ferrari are clearly on the market for improving their driver line up, they've shown interest in Hamilton but no interest in Alonso, also hold the page in respect to Ricciardo if Vettel has a poor season this year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.

This, especially after Ricciardo got beat by Verstappen.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.

No they specifically said they would favour Vettel in the early races and that's how it turned out, team orders didn't last that long.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.

No they specifically said they would favour Vettel in the early races and that's how it turned out, team orders didn't last that long.


Yes, that's what I'm saying really.

I'm not saying Ferrari's approach were wrong. Just that Ferrari or Merc weren't hiring a driver from outside the system for 2019 whoever they were. Alonso was unfortunate and made some poor but understandable positions that put him out of the big 3 teams at the only time in history that a few teams lock on all race wins continued for so long. It also coincided with a time that such teams started to only hire from within the system.

Similar reasons as to why Hulkenberg never got a podium let alone a win. I was watching races from 2003-2006 the other day and while races at that time had their problem one good thing was that you had a lot of teams running close to the front that could be considered top teams with a fair bit of ebb and flow between them. We don't have that now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Ferrari could have signed Alonso or Ricciardo. They chose to sign a number 2 for Vettel.

They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.

No they specifically said they would favour Vettel in the early races and that's how it turned out, team orders didn't last that long.


Yes, that's what I'm saying really.

I'm not saying Ferrari's approach were wrong. Just that Ferrari or Merc weren't hiring a driver from outside the system for 2019 whoever they were. Alonso was unfortunate and made some poor but understandable positions that put him out of the big 3 teams at the only time in history that a few teams lock on all race wins continued for so long. It also coincided with a time that such teams started to only hire from within the system.

Similar reasons as to why Hulkenberg never got a podium let alone a win. I was watching races from 2003-2006 the other day and while races at that time had their problem one good thing was that you had a lot of teams running close to the front that could be considered top teams with a fair bit of ebb and flow between them. We don't have that now.

Well you said they signed him as a #2 driver which I think is the opposite to why they signed him otherwise they could have carried on with Kimi.

He was signed because Vettel wasn't getting the job done despite basically having a #2 driver teammate to help him at times, they're giving Leclerc a chance to prove himself capable of leading the team and I don't think he was signed just because he was their junior driver, he was signed on the results he had the season before.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Exediron wrote:
They signed Leclerc, so I wouldn't agree with that. Sure, they expected him to be #2 in his first year, but they also expected him to be the future of Ferrari. That's a little different from signing a subservient #2 driver. I think Ferrari believes that Leclerc has more long term potential than Ricciardo.


They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.

No they specifically said they would favour Vettel in the early races and that's how it turned out, team orders didn't last that long.


Yes, that's what I'm saying really.

I'm not saying Ferrari's approach were wrong. Just that Ferrari or Merc weren't hiring a driver from outside the system for 2019 whoever they were. Alonso was unfortunate and made some poor but understandable positions that put him out of the big 3 teams at the only time in history that a few teams lock on all race wins continued for so long. It also coincided with a time that such teams started to only hire from within the system.

Similar reasons as to why Hulkenberg never got a podium let alone a win. I was watching races from 2003-2006 the other day and while races at that time had their problem one good thing was that you had a lot of teams running close to the front that could be considered top teams with a fair bit of ebb and flow between them. We don't have that now.

Well you said they signed him as a #2 driver which I think is the opposite to why they signed him otherwise they could have carried on with Kimi.

He was signed because Vettel wasn't getting the job done despite basically having a #2 driver teammate to help him at times, they're giving Leclerc a chance to prove himself capable of leading the team and I don't think he was signed just because he was their junior driver, he was signed on the results he had the season before.


Had he not been a Ferrari junior he would not have been signed. No top team has signed a driver from outside their system who wasn't already a world champion since Mclaren signed Perez in 2013 unless you count Bottas who was managed by the boss. It just isn't done anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
They signed him to be number 2. They literally said that at the start of the season. Your second sentence may well be true as well of course.

No they specifically said they would favour Vettel in the early races and that's how it turned out, team orders didn't last that long.


Yes, that's what I'm saying really.

I'm not saying Ferrari's approach were wrong. Just that Ferrari or Merc weren't hiring a driver from outside the system for 2019 whoever they were. Alonso was unfortunate and made some poor but understandable positions that put him out of the big 3 teams at the only time in history that a few teams lock on all race wins continued for so long. It also coincided with a time that such teams started to only hire from within the system.

Similar reasons as to why Hulkenberg never got a podium let alone a win. I was watching races from 2003-2006 the other day and while races at that time had their problem one good thing was that you had a lot of teams running close to the front that could be considered top teams with a fair bit of ebb and flow between them. We don't have that now.

Well you said they signed him as a #2 driver which I think is the opposite to why they signed him otherwise they could have carried on with Kimi.

He was signed because Vettel wasn't getting the job done despite basically having a #2 driver teammate to help him at times, they're giving Leclerc a chance to prove himself capable of leading the team and I don't think he was signed just because he was their junior driver, he was signed on the results he had the season before.


Had he not been a Ferrari junior he would not have been signed. No top team has signed a driver from outside their system who wasn't already a world champion since Mclaren signed Perez in 2013 unless you count Bottas who was managed by the boss. It just isn't done anymore.

Actually I believe the first choice was the Hulk but Renault would not release him from his contract, Bottas himself had to be bought out of his contract in preference to promoting Wehrlein the Mercedes junior driver. I think Bottas' ties with Wolff merely helped with getting the deal done, Mercedes wanted the best driver available and that wasn't their junior driver.

Having said that I understand were you're coming from, Red Bull in particular are presently putting their junior drivers into the main team even though they look to be inferior to some other choices they could make outside of their junior program.

With Ferrari Leclerc I would say kind of forced his way into the team on the back of his performances, I doubt we will see the likes of Giovinazzi in the Ferrari just because he happens to be the next Ferrari junior in line.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 7:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 8:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 8:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 8:42 pm
Posts: 377
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.


I’d say yes his criticisms were totally justified but it should have been done in private instead of being in the public. I mean criticising the engine at Honda’s home race very blatantly in the public was a mistake they’ve never forgotten. He can claim it was a private conversation but every driver knows those sort of radio messages get airtime.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
Pest44 wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.


I’d say yes his criticisms were totally justified but it should have been done in private instead of being in the public. I mean criticising the engine at Honda’s home race very blatantly in the public was a mistake they’ve never forgotten. He can claim it was a private conversation but every driver knows those sort of radio messages get airtime.


Fair point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.

Was Button as vocal, apparently Button is now a Honda ambassador?

Both Renault and McLaren were midfield teams when they rehired him, also it was never said he burnt his bridge with Renault.

Regarding McLaren it was very much part of the deal with Honda that they approached Alonso and let's not kid ourselves that they were in any kind of strong position like we see presently with the likes of Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16668
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.

Was Button as vocal, apparently Button is now a Honda ambassador?

Both Renault and McLaren were midfield teams when they rehired him, also it was never said he burnt his bridge with Renault.

Regarding McLaren it was very much part of the deal with Honda that they approached Alonso and let's not kid ourselves that they were in any kind of strong position like we see presently with the likes of Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull.


When Alonso signed for Mclaren they were two years out of having the quickest csr on the grid. They weren't viewed as a midfield team at that time.

Button on Honda after an early retirement - Engineering an engine to do 3 laps is not hard. How are we going to complete a race? Compared to last year we've made a huge step back. It's just not good enough because the cars quick. Very disappointing. It's got to change but I don't think it's going to change very quickly, that's the worry. I'm very angry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33704
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Some people don't want to believe the burned bridge theory of why Alonso can't get a top seat in F1 and put it down to the lack of desire of the top teams to have two #1 drivers, however it looks like it's cost him a top seat for this years Indy 500.

https://racer.com/2020/02/02/honda-veto ... -500-deal/

With Roger Penske now being the owner of Indianapolis maybe he might see the merit of putting Alonso in one of his Chevrolet engined cars?


Really though, weren't his criticisms of Honda totally justified at the time? Wouldn't any other top driver have said the same? Bottom line, Alonso drove for 3 serious F1 teams. Two of them were happy to rehire him. It's hardly a long history of burning bridges.

Was Button as vocal, apparently Button is now a Honda ambassador?

Both Renault and McLaren were midfield teams when they rehired him, also it was never said he burnt his bridge with Renault.

Regarding McLaren it was very much part of the deal with Honda that they approached Alonso and let's not kid ourselves that they were in any kind of strong position like we see presently with the likes of Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull.


When Alonso signed for Mclaren they were two years out of having the quickest csr on the grid. They weren't viewed as a midfield team at that time.

Button on Honda after an early retirement - Engineering an engine to do 3 laps is not hard. How are we going to complete a race? Compared to last year we've made a huge step back. It's just not good enough because the cars quick. Very disappointing. It's got to change but I don't think it's going to change very quickly, that's the worry. I'm very angry.

Fair enough they performed as a midfield team but like you say still were still seen as a top team, and that's why for instance Honda teamed up with them, but who targeted Alonso was it McLaren or Honda?

McLaren were in talks with Alonso in 2013 and half of his salary was paid for by Honda, that seems to me to be Honda that were after a top line driver to lead the team, Alonso was in the mix very early in the proceedings with McLaren and Honda and wasn't a late consideration after leaving Ferrari in 2014.

With regards to Button we might consider that to be a normal level of criticism when things are going wrong which was acceptable by Honda, however Alonso's criticism was on a different level and didn't he demand that McLaren drop Honda?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FormulaFun and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group