Daniel Ricciardo, Toro Rosso, Spa-Francorchamps, 2012

Ricciardo: ‘I need to be aggressive like Grosjean’

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Daniel Ricciardo, Toro Rosso, Spa-Francorchamps, 2012In the round-up: Daniel Ricciardo says he needs to take a leaf out of Romain Grosjean’s book.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Ricciardo braced for crucial season (Autosport)

“My Achilles heel is that this year, in the first part of the season, I wasn’t aggressive enough in the races. In some aspects I was the opposite of [Romain] Grosjean. Now, however, I think I’ve found the right balance in showing my capabilities.”

50 not-so-famous personalities from sport’s greatest ever year (The Guardian)

The inclusion of Ricciardo on this list is rather odd but it’s good to see Jimmy Vasser get a mention (via Alex Zanardi).

Comment of the day

Can F1 survive without Bernie Ecclestone? @Joao-Pedro-CQ isn’t sure:

When Ecclestone drops down, because he eventually will someday, I truly believe Formula One will make a mess out of it self. Bernie is the glue that keeps teams, FIA and FOM together, and the one who makes the relation work. When he goes, it will be hard to have stability. At least, that?s what I think.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to AlvinK!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Having limped to sixth in the 2007 constructors’ championship, Toyota team principal Tadashi Yamashima said he had until 2010 to produce results.

Two years later the team left F1 having failed to score a victory in eight seasons.

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty images

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 52 comments on “Ricciardo: ‘I need to be aggressive like Grosjean’”

    1. Erm, I think you’ve picked the wrong sort of aggressive Dan…

    2. Please for the love of god don’t be as aggressive as Grosjean! There is a fine line between aggressiveness and stupidity, a line with which Grosjean fell off before he even stepped on. If I were Ricciardo I’d take inspiration from Alonso or Räikkönen – aggressive but know when not to fight.

      1. I think you’re being harsh to Grosjean, You would be treating Kobayashi the same if his passes hadn’t worked.

        Many of Grosjean crashes had nothing to do with being aggressive.

        1. You would be treating Kobayashi the same if his passes hadn’t worked

          Yes.. I think if Kobayashi pulled failed bansai moves on a regular basis, we would be criticising him as well.

          I agree that Grosjean’s mistaked were not due to over aggressiveness.. they were due to a lack of awareness or just plain stupidity at times.

        2. @mike – I acknowledge that perhaps Grosjean’s aggressiveness was only part of his faults in wheel-to-wheel combat (particularly during the opening laps) and that his lack of spacial awareness and apparent inability to focus on more than one car were major contributors to him gaining legendary status as a “first lap nutcase”.

          I would very much be treating Kobayashi the same if his passing manoeuvres resulted in multiple collisions; I don’t discriminate between drivers, it just so happens Kobayashi is much more aware than Grosjean and so hasn’t crashed anywhere near as frequently. It is no coincidence that he hasn’t been involved in anywhere near as many first-lap collisions.

          I still maintain though that there is a fine line between product aggressiveness and stupidity, which is a line Grosjean has crossed.

      2. Maybe Ricciardo was the opposite of Grosjean – whilst Daniel was almost silent during the races, Romain was making a name for himself. I honestly can’t think of a driver that made less of an impact in the races than Ricciardo, whereas Grosjean potentially cost Alonso the title..

      3. @vettel1 If you read the article you’d see he said nothing along the lines of being as aggressive as Grosjean. He merely said at times he was the opposite of Grosjean, and he hopes to find the right balance.

        I always chuckle when I read rash comments based on the two or three line quotes on the round up page. Keith posts the links to full articles for a reason!

        1. @timi – what I was saying is he shouldn’t be comparing himself to Grosjean: of all people to draw comparisons to I think Romain is probably the worst for Ricciardo’s image. What I was suggesting is he should be conspiring to be like Alonso or Raikkonen in close combat, not Grosjean.

          1. @vettel1 Again, you’re just reading what he said in the wrong context. He isn’t aspiring to be like Grosjean, he just said he was the opposite (i.e. never taking risks, too timid) and he thinks he’s now found the right balance. There isn’t a talking point here at all, you’re just jumping on the fact he said Grosjean.

    3. Take a rest, Keith ! :P

    4. Everything about Ricciardo’s spot on that list is weird; the comment somehow makes him sound bad but at the same time almost giving him credit for Vettel’s win.

      I’d say they were just told to include ‘something’ about F1 but if that was the case they found something very obscure and irrelevant! Nothing about that incident was particularly significant in the grand scheme of things!

      1. @jennikate

        I’d say they were just told to include ‘something’ about F1

        It struck me that way too. I’d’ve picked the mechanics who helped put out the fire in Spain.

      2. It’s bizarre, they write as if he consciously chose to brake hard, damage Vettel’s wing further, cause him to pit for tyres, predict two safety cars and know that Vettel would benefit from all of that.

    5. And true to form, the grauniad spells “brake” incorrectly…

      (Talking of which, the number of drivers that say “He broke late for the corner” etc. drives me mad.)

    6. @craig-o @vettel1 Ricciardo didn’t actually say that he needed to be aggressive like Grosjean. It’s just a misleading headline to the roundup – see the quote, or better still the full article.

      1. @tdog – still, of all the people to be comparing yourself to I wouldn’t have selected Grosjean.

      2. @tdog You only need to look at the direct quote in the round-up to see the paraphrasing used in the headline is an entirely fair reflection of what he said.

        1. @keithcollantine I love your blog and have the utmost respect for the amount of work you put into it. On this one, we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

          1. I agree. paraphrasing was rather misleading.

        2. Have really appreciated all your efforts in running this site, producing articles and responding to posts this year @keithcollantine. I like your calm, reasoned thinking, even if I don’t always agree with your opinions or conclusions. However, like @tdog, I can’t see how one could derive a headline such as this from what Ricciardo is quoted as saying in the Autosport article – have you read something else that Ricciardo said that we haven’t?

          1. @pjrwallis Ricciardo said he wasn’t aggressive enough and he compared himself directly to Grosjean. The headline paraphrases what he says and does not change the meaning.

            1. @keithcollantine He states that being not aggressive enough is a bit like being the opposite of Grosjean. He then states he need to change his own driving.

              That does not stretch as far as meaning that he indends to copy, emulate, or otherwise “take a leaf” from Grosjean’s driving.

              He doesn’t call out any driver specifically as one he intends to emulate. So I’m afraid, that yes, you have changed the meaning of what Ricciardo said. Furthermore, you’ve enclosed it in quote marks, giving weight to the idea that it is a direct quote. It is not.

            2. Sorry Keith, he said no such thing.

      3. I have to agree here!

    7. My sentiments exactly, @tdog. Not only is the headline of this round-up misleading at best, it attributes a quote to ricciardo that he simply does not make in the linked article. This is the sort of dishonest, agenda driven reporting I’d expect to see from the likes of the sun, and frankly it damages @keithcollantine to do it.

      At no point in the article does Daniel say those words, or an approximation of them. At best, he implies that he was not aggressive enough, and that Grosjean was “the opposite” i.e. too aggressive. He does not suggest at any point that he intends to “take a leaf out of Grosjean’s book” or be “more like” Grosjean. He states he knows what he has to change *within himself*. I think it’s fairly obvious at this point that racecraft is not something that anyone would look to grosjean to learn.

      The whole setup of this article leaves a bad taste in the mouth. For once, an allegation of reporting bias may be valid, it saddens me to say.

      1. @hairs That’s a massive overreaction, as I’ve just explained above.

        1. Nope. “aggressive like Grosjean” conjours up all kinds of negative connotations. What better way to write an attention-grabbing headline?

          A blog isn’t like a newspaper, you don’t have to write headlines to grab attention. Either people were going to read it anyway (because they visit the site) or they weren’t (because they don’t visit the site) – there’s no need to editorialise headings just to ‘grab’ eyeballs.

          1. Whatever you think about the headline, they are massively important for a blog! The very reason I came here is headlines, which I read on newsnow.co.uk – and then there’s that search thingie, Google I believe they call it…

        2. @keithcollantine I don’t believe that it is an overreaction.

          One of the main reasons that I no longer waste time reading the printed press, or a lot of blog sources, is that those writers, organs and editors often are more interested in “framing” a story within an editorial perspective that suits them (either to pander to a specific audience, or provoke a specific reaction), than they are in reporting honestly or accurately.

          In this case, you have framed a headline which attributes a statement in quotes to Ricciardo which he simply did not make. Nor, contrary to your assertions, did he make a similar statement, which you have simply “paraphrased”. Paraphrasing would imply that a genuine statement has been shortened, or mildly altered, so that the essence of its meaning is distilled into a shorter format for distribution.

          At no point did Ricciardo, in the article you linked, name or indicate any driver whom he intends to copy, emulate, or learn from.

          Yet twice you have clearly stated in this article not only that he did so, but that he named Grosjean as that driver. That is patently false.

      2. I’m with you on this one @hairs , if anything Ricciardo was saying Grosjean was too aggressive (as he himself was too passive), he doesn’t imply he should be driving like Grosjean at all.

        1. exactly@george.

          love you, keith@keithcollantine , but poor judgement in this case.

      3. I’ve got to agree with @hairs as well on this. Ricciardo was highlighting the fact that his driving style was too conservative / tame in the first part of the season

        By stating that he was the opposite of Romain further illustrates his point. Now he effectively knows to what degree he should be raising the aggressiveness of his driving

    8. If Ricciardo wants to stay in F1 and one day get to Red Bull he does need to be more aggressive in order to get the points, results and make a good impression. He says I need to be more like Grosjean because he is the crash king of the year, while Ricciardo obviously needs to take a leaf out of his book in order to get the results by being more aggressive, otherwise as he knows he probably wont be around in F1 for much longer.

    9. Bob (@bobthevulcan)
      31st December 2012, 9:52

      For an F1 driver, I feel the best form of aggression, is aggression in moderation. Not to the extent that Grosjean has shown on a few occasions, nor too much to the other extreme of submissiveness – just enough aggression, that is, firm but fair driving, to make progress up the running order.

    10. Talking about Grosjean.. He must be the driver in F1 who have got the most chances to prove his worth. In 2009 he got a chance and he blew it, in 2012 he got a chance and he blew it and now he gets another chance in 2013?? I believe a new more talenter driver should have a go. :)

      1. I think it’s too harsh to say he “blew it” this year. Sure, he could have done a lot better had it not been for some misjudgments, but he’s shown some raw pace, and 3 podiums is a respectable performance.

        1. I would agree that he didn’t quite “Blow it” this year, although he came very close.

          2009 was a bad year. Almost half of 2012 was good. Then, he went off the rails again. He started to calm down again in the last few races, but at best the jury is still out. The clash with DeLaRosa in Brazil quali was just plain stupid, I think.

          Personally, I would have banned him for more than one race for his hideous attempt to force Hamilton into the wall. His failure to comprehend what was going on around him in the next few races didn’t bode well either.

          He outqualified Kimi many times, so you can’t take that away from him. Whether he has the capability to actually manage as an F1 racer is another matter. I don’t believe any other team principal would have taken him on in 2012. Even with the good performances, I think that without Bouiller, he wouldn’t have a seat in 2013 either.

    11. Well in all the time I’ve been visiting this site (multiple times every day for at least the last 3 years) I’ve never heard so much critisism of keith! I mean calm down guys its just a round up in the middle of the off season its hardly the most important article of the year, I must admit when I read the headline my eyebrows were raised but let’s got get stressed about it guys!

    12. I think Ricciardo’s statement is pretty fair. As a mid-field driver, you HAVE TO take the opportunity when you get it. One podium is worth alot, even if you crash 3 times out of 4 to get it. For a driver to get attention from the big teams, they have to be in the mix with their current drivers. Maldonado has overdone it, and done stupid things this year and hasn’t been consistent. But that win sure put him in the spotlight, and would he have been more consistent this year, maybe he would have gotten that Mclaren seat…

      1. Actually Maldonado was a serious option for McLaren for sometime, and I’m sure next year the top teams will watch his performances very closely, after all, his a very capable driver… when he wants to be.

    13. these random stories are killing me…suffering from major formula one withdrawal. happy new year to all f1 fanatics

    14. WOW, talking about twisting someone’s words!

      He said he wasn’t aggressive enough and that it was complete opposite of Grosjean. Then he proceeds to say that he thinks he has found the right balance now.

      Only thing I can read from this is that he thinks he was too cautious, while Grosjean was too aggressive and that he thinks the right balance is somewhere in between those two.

    15. One more first lap nutcase next year !!

    16. Wow, obviously some people have nothing to discuss in the off season so they’ll pick on some paraphrasing! From my summation of the heading and the article, he is saying he needs to raise his aggressiveness to a level where it’s similar to more aggressive drivers (like Grosjean) but obviously without the stupid mistakes.
      I actually think he played it fairly smart in 2012- he kept out of trouble, he demonstrated he had race smarts and pace, and he got himself into more well scoring positions than his team mate (only to have his car let him down).
      Now that he’s proved he’s quick and reliable in quali & the race he can concentrate on focussing that aggression better.
      If he can be aggressive at the right times, more so than he has been, combined with his skill and speed, I think Daniel will be a formidable driver in the future.
      I think the elements are there.

      1. @nackavich: ‘F1 Fanatic readers have questionable reading comprehension skills, should get a life’

        1. @aka_robyn Ha! Very good! :)
          But seriously, compare that Guardian “article” to Keith’s headline. I think people forget that the Guardian sucks ALL of the time, whereas Keith’s journalistic abilities are very very rarely questionable.

          1. I definitely agree that this headline was the exception rather than the rule on this site. I think the fact that so many people have commented on it is a good illustration of how unusual it is!

    17. Joey Zyla (@)
      1st January 2013, 3:00

      Tabloid headline…

    Comments are closed.