Mercedes baffled by Rosberg ‘conspiracy theory’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Mercedes dismiss suggestions that Nico Rosberg feigned his mistakes during the Italian Grand Prix to hand victory to his team mate.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Mercedes: claims Nico Rosberg made mistakes deliberately are ‘paranoid’ (The Guardian)

“Only a paranoid mind could have come up with such an idea. We told the drivers not to flat spot the tyres, because they would need to pit. So maybe that’s why [Nico] didn’t try to brake too hard.”

Deliberate? I just made a mistake, says Rosberg (Reuters)

“What would be the reason for me to do something like that deliberately? There is no possible reason. There is no reason why the team would ask me to change position, or something like that.”

2014 Italian GP report (MotorSport)

Toto Wolff: “Nico was trying to protect his rear tyres and put the brake balance forwards and then simply stood too hard on the pedal.”

Rosberg kicking himself for errors (Autosport)

“I hope that with time [the people who booed him] forgive and forget – that will be great. And I have apologised, I cannot do anything more than that.”

Horner dampens Ricciardo’s slim title hopes (The Telegraph)

Christian Horner: “We are so far back at the moment that it is not worth getting involved. We will let the drivers race.”

Hamilton and Rosberg feud back on track as Lewis takes pole in Monza (Daily Express)

Bernie Ecclestone: “[Hamilton and Rosberg] should be allowed to race. That’s what they are there for. They are called racing drivers. We will have to find another name for them if not.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

A realistic view on the ‘conspiracy theories’ from @Craig-o:

Rosberg simply made a mistake under pressure, and we could see that he was under pressure, and let his main championship rival into the lead of the grand prix.

I’m beginning to believe that the pendulum is swinging in Hamilton’s favour once again, as he has delivered a massively important result today heading into the final flyaways.
@Craig-o

From the forum

Happy birthday!

No F1 Fanatic birthdays today

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ferrari’s Clay Regazzoni failed to score at the team’s home race at Monza 40 years ago today but he retained the lead of the championship by one point from Jody Scheckter. The Tyrrell driver crossed the line third behind Emerson Fittipaldi (who moved up to third in the championship), who in turn was pipped to the line by Ronnie Peterson.

Niki Lauda led the early laps before suffering engine trouble which did serious damage to his championship hopes.

Here’s some brief footage from the race:

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

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.

106 comments on “Mercedes baffled by Rosberg ‘conspiracy theory’”

  1. So a few weeks ago Mercedes were deliberately tampering with Hamilton’s brakes and setting his car on fire to allow their Rosberg to win the championship – but now they’re requesting Rosberg to deliberately throw races to bring Hamilton back in contention. Geez. Who comes up with these theories? If you’re going to be a moron at least be consistent about it.

    1. @jackysteeg I had this down as a far fetched conspiracy theory until I heard these responses.
      Wolffs response comes across as a well thought through excuse, the talks would go something like this, Nico in a one two situation you will let Hamilton by, Monza is the perfect spot to out brake yourself and have a clear run through the chicanes, we will say it was a brake bias change you were trying to handle.
      Nicos response is even more suspect, he asks “What would be the reason for me to do something like that deliberately?” that’s actually part of the question Nico, were you ordered to hand over the position by the team?
      It reminds me of this ad from 20 years ago for cadburys dairy milk, “What Fridge???!!” (man I’m getting old!)
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USzhHmBWJTo

      Also he’s a little bit too gracious in defeat, uncharacteristically so, admitting that Hamilton was juust faster with such an intense rivalry going on, it all smells a bit fishy to me…

      1. it all smells a bit fishy to me

        So does fish. Doesn’t mean you can twist people’s words to breaking point.

        1. @raceprouk I don’t think I’m twisting anything, in fact, as I said, I was of the opinion that it was unlikely that Mercedes would orchestrate an elaborate strategy to punish Nico. But their comments after the race do ring alarm bells and then when you think about it, it wasn’t a very elaborate plan and was very easy to make work.
          I’m not saying it’s definitely a conspiracy or definitely not, I guess I’ve gone from thinking it was 0% possible to 50%.. We’ll probably only find out when Nico quits racing and writes a book..

          1. It’s not even 1% possible. It’s a ridiculous conspiracy theory that is only believed by those who see subterfuge even when there is none.

            Tell me, do you really think Rosberg would agree to throw away a chance to extend his championship lead by 7 points, just to make up for a clumsy error the press blew way out of proportion? I know if I was Rosberg, and Wolff/Lauda asked me to do that, I’d laugh in their faces.

          2. @raceprouk
            So the question is why would Rosberg do it?:
            Mercedes having all the telemetry data from each race may have cautioned him following the Monaco incident where Hamiilton claimed he saw something in Nico’s data. Then having viewed the data from Belgium they actually announced that Nico would be punished. Nico appologized but that’s hardly a sufficient punishment if they had reason to believe there was foul play.
            Mercedes are the dominant team in F1 and are Nicos employer, if the give a warning and follow through with a punishment you wouldn’t laugh in their faces you comply like any employee in any job.
            Also the last thing Nico needs is for the team to be on Hamilton’s side for the rest of the season, accepting this punishment will ensure he has the full backing of the team.
            Look there are no hard facts, but I think it’s also hard to prove he wasn’t ordered to give up the 7 points in that scenario.

          3. How about this as an alternative theory?
            Rosberg messed up. End of.

          4. @raceprouk No more true than, Rosberg gave up 7 points under orders, end of ;)

          5. No-one fighting for a championship would just hand points to their closest rival, no matter who ordered it.

          6. I’ve already stated two reasons above (at 11:13) why he would be obliged to concede the 7 points @raceprouk
            This argument is going around in circles, without evidence it’s impossible to settle. We have seen elaborate schemes employed by teams in the past ( crashgate for example) and that’s part of the off track interest in F1. Spying, cheating, conspiracies and scandal.
            One thing is for sure, there’s a huge disparity between the story we get when drivers and bosses are interviewed and what actually goes on within and between teams.

        2. No. It is fishy. Even Sir Jackie thinks so. Borh drivers should be disqualified feom the world championship.

          1. Bit dramatic @Nic . Sometimes a a valid view point is, I don’t know. There is a percentage chance that this was set up as a punishment.

  2. This “team orders” theory is even more stupid than the “Rosberg intentionally causing pucture” theory. I don’t know why it’s even made the news. I’m dissapointed by Kevin Eason for taking this “joke” created by narrow minded fans as an excuse for Nico’s slower pace, and turning it into a story on the Times. Now Times readers who didn’t watch the race will never know what a good race they missed out on and will be dissuaded to watch the next.

    1. You should know by now Kevin Eason’s preference for Rosberg to win the title. The fact you actually have to subscribe to the times online is the funniest thing. Murdoch was right in the end, people will pay for shoddy online content.

    2. In my opinion it’s irresponsible to perpetuate this hypothesis without any evidence, but I don’t think it’s that stupid and I can understand why people are suspicious. Personally I don’t think it’s true, but we had the mysterious “disciplinary measures” against Rosberg, we know of Nico’s tendency of making mistakes work to his advantage and we’ve seen both driver’s behaviour immediately after the race.

      However, and that’s the important bit, even if it’s true we won’t see any evidence. Even if it’s true I don’t see any of the drivers or team officials spilling the beans. Ever. So it’s best to treat Nico’s mistakes in Italy as mistakes. It’s better for our own credibility and it’s better for the sport. I don’t think we, as fans, should drag F1 through the mud.

      1. If F1 has come to this farcical point then it must be dragged through the mud.

      2. I think you accidentally hit the nail on the head: Mercedes management going public in criticizing Rosberg, then announcing ‘punitive measures’ and the contradicting Hamilton’s remark that these measures would amount to just a good telling off, created the expectation of some mysterious punishment. So in a way Mercedes generated this story themselves by doing two things teams usually don’t do: criticize one of their drivers so robustly in public, and announce a punishment without specifying what until some time later (and then a punishment with no bearing on the championship race).

        What I don’t understand is the inability of sports journalists and regular fans to note that Rosberg has made the same mistake several times and shown to be erratic under pressure. As well as the obvious fact that if this was supposed to be compensation for Spa, it’s still only a fraction of the points lost there. AND – the biggest factor – Hamilton would never accept being given points in this way. If you don’t understand that, you know nothing about him. He’s repeated since the start of the season who wants to prove he can win on his own merit on track. The difference is between being respected as a driver and being jeered as a cheat. For most drivers the former matters more.

        1. Unfortunately Hamilton has blind bigots as haters that can’t understand even the slightest bit about him and will never understand that he is not the kind of guy that likes winning by getting points gifted.

  3. Christian Horner: “We are so far back at the moment that it is not worth getting involved. We will let the drivers race.”

    Specially if it’s so clear cut between the two :P

    1. Seb’s strategy of early pit was risky, he was very vulnerable towards the end and Dan’s pass was very easy.

      1. It wasn’t the first RIC had made a sensational overtake on VET.

        1. *first time

    2. petebaldwin (@)
      8th September 2014, 10:53

      Frankly, it doesn’t appear Ricciardo needs any help from team orders to beat Vettel.

  4. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
    8th September 2014, 0:43

    It never even crossed my mind until Eddie mentioned it in an interview and I thought he was just mad. Surprised that’s gained in the press.
    Not happy about 3 car teams, at least JB may keep his seat though.

  5. Maybe three car teams would be a blessing in disguise?

    In all likelihood, having three car teams would mean we have a generally faster grid: The top teams (Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, Williams probably) would continue to produce fast cars (at least relative to the current back of the grid), and then whatever three teams are left over could end up with more resources: Say Caterham and Marussia merged, they’d have twice the resources available to them.

    Maybe it wouldn’t work that simply, but to be honest I don’t care whether we have 8 three car teams or 12 two car teams. 24 cars is 24 cars!

    1. Y’know I’m kinda warming to it, too. I watch a lot of Indy Car and they have teams with more than two cars. The racing is extremely good over there and very exciting. Granted, they make much less use of team orders. It’s more like every man for himself, but they share resources within a team. If only F1 could see the value in that, the 3 car teams could help the series regain some fans.

    2. If some teams run three cars and others run two isn’t it an advantage in WCC for the three cars teams?

      Plus, if big teams are allowed to field three cars in lieu of two, how bad would it be for smaller outfits? Top 10 finishes could be easily locked up by top four teams entering three cars…

      That’s an awful idea. They have tried to do many “solutions” to save the sport but one: better distribution of funds.

      1. maarten.f1 (@)
        8th September 2014, 7:34

        That’s an awful idea. They have tried to do many “solutions” to save the sport but one: better distribution of funds.

        Depends on who you ask of course :)

        I don’t think anything good can come out of three car teams. I really hope that Parr is incorrect on this one, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he isn’t. Formula One is, in my opinion, a huge bubble, and it has been for many, many years, which is about to burst.

        I can’t blame the FOM for the current fund distribution, they’re in the business to make as much money as they can. But I do blame the teams who cannot seem to agree on anything, let alone the distribution of funds. It’s too bad the FOTA never worked out, guess Bernie’s divide-and-conquer technique worked too well on them.

      2. @jcost – My first thought on hearing the revival of this idea was how the faster 3 car teams could theoretically structure their drivers. One or two top notch drivers and one roadblock driver to ensure maximizing points.

        This is a bad idea overall, 3 car teams. It would only be fair if all teams ran 3 cars. Otherwise, the back of the grid 2 car teams would never have a chance to score points. Unless, of course, the points structure was altered again. That is not a good idea either.

        Looking at the likely 3 car/2 car teams, if all teams are allowed to run 3 cars by choice.
        3 Car Teams:
        Ferrari
        McLaren
        Red Bull
        Mercedes
        Torro Rosso

        Maybe 3 cars:
        Williams
        Force India

        2 car teams (pick one to survive the supposed 8 teams cut)
        Sauber (most likely survivor if rumors are correct about new buyer)
        Lotus (may not survive with 2 or 3 cars)
        Marussia (may not survive with 2 or 3 cars)
        Caterham (maybe least likely to survive with 2 or 3 cars)

        Who knows? Could just be rumors that go nowhere.

  6. 3 cars? You got to be kidding. Does this has happened before?

    1. The first race had 4 Alfa Romeos, several races in 1950 had 3 Alfas, Ferraris and Talbo-Lagos, the last race of that season had 5 Alfas. Consistently not more than 2 cars per team came up in the 70s, I believe, and there were still some one-car-entries until the early 90s.

      1. There were 6 ferraris at Monza in 1961.

  7. Can we at least expect Sauber to have the best dressed team and best painted cars next year.

    1. Only if Williams screws it up with their livery and team gear, now they are pretty much perfect.
      But I wouldn’t mind another good looking team.

      1. @marik

        +1. Williams team gear is very good.

        1. I was thinking about buying their shirt but it’s so expensive, especially in polish money.

  8. Would 3 cars per team mean Vergne suddenly changing grom nearly out of F1 to driving a Red Bull next year? How would the grid look like? I guess that would be some major reshuffling on the drivers market, and probably less pay-drivers, too.

    1. and probably less pay-drivers, too.

      Given how several teams are currently struggling to run 2 cars without a driver bringing some funding, I can only see a 3rd car resulting in teams needing more pay drivers to fund the 3rd car.

      1. There would be fewer teams so you’d hope they’d each get a bigger share of money from FOM (though I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t).
        One more car means 50% more advertising space for sponsors.
        Economies of scale would mean each car would cost less to build and run.
        If done properly 3 car teams would be more cost effective for the remaining teams which could and should reduce the need for pay drivers.

    2. I don’t think it would save Vergne. It would more likely enable Sainz Jr to enter F1.

    3. Surely every team has a spare third car anyway for the race? They certainly used to.

      I don’t necessarily mind having 3 car teams, but I do mind only having 8 teams. A return to pre qualifying and having the current 10 teams would be cool. I don’t want to see Marussia and Caterham disappear and was looking forward to seeng Haas join. I like the back of the grid.

      1. The teams usually have enough spare components to build up a third car over a race weekend if required, but it is something that the teams cannot normally do.

        For a start, the requirement to nominate a race engine in advance means that the car cannot be completely assembled – because the engines are tied to a particular race seat, you cannot pre-assemble a car with a spare engine.
        Given it takes several hours to carry out an engine change, that effectively means that a third car is only really used when a team has a major fault that means they cannot use the normal race car. For example, Alonso had to have a third car built up on Saturday afternoon when his crash in the final practise session of the 2010 Monaco GP wrote off his chassis.

  9. Actually I find it interesting that Parr doesn’t say all eight teams will enter three cars. He only says “several”.

  10. How would the pits be handled with 3 cars per team? Assign each team two adjacent garages and allow stops in front of either one, or …

  11. I’ve always been against F1 running 3 cars.

    Reason been that the mid/back of grid teams can’t afford to run a 3rd car & the top teams running 3 cars just pushes the mid-field cars further down which makes it harder for them to get towards the front & harder for them to score points.

    There’s also the danger of a dominant team having even more dominance with a 3rd car running a decent driver. Imagine 3 Mercedes this year, Potentially podium lock-outs most races & they would likely have already have won the constructors title.

    You could say the 3rd car isn’t eligible for points you still risk the 3rd car been used strategically for the championship, Holding a title rival of a team mates back or dropping him into traffic behind to hinder his pit strategy.

    1. Sounds like another Bernie Brainwave that collapses under about 10 seconds’ scrutiny.

      Next up:

      Double points for the first car in each team, to encourage more competition between teammates!

      Special ‘short cut’ laps in which drivers are permitted to cut chicanes!

      ‘Track reversals’: after a safety car period, line up on the grid facing the opposite way to the original start, proceed to lap in the reverse direction!

      ‘3-abreast grids’: A front row of 3 is more exciting than a front row of 2, so let’s fit another car in between!

      ‘No helmets Sunday’: everyone likes to see the drivers’ faces, so let’s make them race without helmets for one race each year!

      1. Well they’ve used 3-abreast grids before, there’s nothing wrong with them

        1. The three by two grid layout was quite popular for a number of years – it wasn’t until the mid 1970’s that we finally had the modern system of using two by two grid slots, mainly because the older system of 3 x 2 was thought to cause too many start line crashes.

      2. @jonathan189 – I like those ideas. Maybe we can have some VR, with random powerups bouncing up and down on the track. Drive through them for a boost – the kids (new viewers) would really get it. Adds a tactical element; “should I go off line for a powerup or defend into the corner?”, “should I choose the overboost or the guided missiles?”
        That kind of stuff. Bernie would love it too.

  12. And that’s just The times, I cant wait to see what the Daily Mail makes of these theory’s.

    1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      8th September 2014, 2:08

      I’m more interested in things like:
      – “Kate’s Baby JOY!”
      – “Why Kim hates Kanye”
      – “Angelina runs out on Brad, wedding shock!

      These are the real critical stories.

      1. And top stories they were too!

        Of course backed up by fact which makes for a more fascinating read,

        Lol @tophercheese21

  13. Personally, I’ve heard all the 8/7 teams fielding 3 (or more) cars several times before, including 10 years ago when Jordan and Minardi were on the brink of bankruptcy and you had both Eddie Jordan and Paul Stoddart spewing these theories weekly.

    Every now and again Force India is ‘in trouble’ because Roy Sahara or Vijay Mallya is trouble with the Indian court. Sauber has been rumored to be close to a breakdown on and off again ever since Peter Sauber bought it back from BMW. Then there’s the saga of Lotus, which has been facing imminent doom for the past 4 years as well. Not even going into Marussia and Caterham. Worth mentioning it was only two or three years ago STR was looking unlikely to be around for much longer too.

    Meanwhile, Jordan and Minardi live on as Force India and Toro Rosso. Honestly, I’ll believe 3 car teams when I see them.

    1. I heard Nike are going to buy a country so it can make its own laws about children working in factories !

      Can i have a job at the Times now please ?

  14. I wonder where the F1 pundits got the news that 2015 will see 8 teams fielding 3 cars each? Even though we’ve heard such discussions before, this seems to be a bit out of the blue.

  15. People that watched the practice saw Rosberg using the chicane exit when he overshot his braking point. Then during the race, while defending from a williams, he made the same mistake again. It seems simply that, under pressure, Rosberg tends to be unable to brake at this point. Before it happened, I expected him to crack again at the same spot and he did.

    If we look back at Nico’s racing during this past year, it has happened several time on other circuits and always under pressure.

    1. I think its rather what Hamilton mentioned (badly flatspotting meaning you have to go for a 2 stopper – which badly compromises your race) combined with having done exactly that (ruining a set of tires) in Spa, and it certainly contributed to not being able to push for the win.

      I would say that Rosberg knew that Hamilton was faster, and while he was no doubt happy to see Lewis make a bad start, and would have liked to keep the advantage, he was more focussed on not messing up his own race and getting a solid load of points than in fighting the point when he would most likely lose that fight on track this weekend anyway.

    2. Practice makes perfect :)

  16. Are there even eight teams who can afford to field three cars each? Just because Bernie brought it up once doesn’t mean it is fact. I sincerely hope so.

    1. It would certainly make it easier if there was better distribution of funds…

      I’d love to see full grids with each team fielding three cars, but I think it’s pointless if they’re going to be fielding more Chiltons rather than Ricciardos.

  17. OmarR-Pepper (@)
    8th September 2014, 1:48

    3 teams would mean the WCC to be over faster than now (if there’s a dominant team as it is the case now).
    On the positive side, we could see a “dream team” getting 3 world champions maybe (Alonso-Kimi-Vettel) or an All-star team (Ricciardo, Hulk, Bottas would make my year!).
    Having 24 cars could not necessarily mean 8 teams:
    Merc, RBR, Ferrari, McL, Williams, SFI, STR, Saub,
    But maybe the return of “who can classify to the race”. The problem is, with the current cost of F1, the usual dropped-out teams could finally disappear. Who knows, maybe FIA could change that rule obliging teams to be in all the races. It would be better to see Catherham or Marussia absent 3 races and having them in the 4th race with a better car and ready to take Q2.
    My 5 minutes of daydreaming, don’t kick me so hard later.

    1. @omarr-pepper, ha-ha
      – Dream Team: Alonso-Kimi-Vettel
      – All stars: Ricciardo, Hulk, Bottas

      and also
      – Rich Kids: Chilton, Maldonado, Ericsson
      – Golden Oldies: Massa, Button, and Bernie
      – Crashtest Dummies: 3x Maldonado

      1. Formula Indonesia (@)
        8th September 2014, 10:54

        @coldfly Golden oldies should be Kimi, Jenson and Felipe, one for the future : Kvyat, Magnussen, and Verstappen, dream team should be Lewis, Fernando and Seb. but anyway its pretty funny :D

        1. @f1indofans
          Evn i want to see that dream team with Alonso, Hamilton and Vettel as teammates. Damm that would be a treat to watch and lets have them race in W05 :D

          1. Formula Indonesia (@)
            8th September 2014, 11:19

            Yeah, btw I think this new era did not suit Vettel, maybe let all of them race in RB7, maximum downforce and ultra reliable. They could end with only 1-2 points deficit! Anyway talking about RBR, actually this year suit Webber driving style, if he stay 1 year longer maybe he still could win races in his final season

        2. Hamilton is no dream team.

      2. @coldfly for the crashtest dummies maybe they could get De Crashares back!

    2. I’d expect Caterham, Lotus, Sauber to not be around any more (and most likely Marrussia as well)

  18. Please tell me more about what teams running 3 cars has to do with the cost cutting trend.

  19. ..whatever the case, I quite enjoyed Toto’s wry “half-smile” when Lewis got past. Looks a good fit for the next Bond villain!..hahaha

    These conspiracy theories are pretty funny, more so that Nico’s surgical precision at Spa. Has Lewis turned the corner? Is Nico now a beaten dog? I dont think so, 6 races to go, and nothing can be taken for granted, I bet thre will be another twist in the Nico Lewis relationship.

    Here’s me hoping for a few more repeats of Bahrain in the coming races. Nico hasnt beat Lewis on track when all things have been equal, and he needs to do that..perhaps thats the best point he can make?

  20. Some time ago back in the off season of 2008 before the rule changes of 2009 this topic of 3 car teams came up. A small number of people on the site went on to explain to me how a team fielding 3 cars was more economical than 2. Now I can’t remember who they were but perhaps they may resurface and explain their economies of scale theory to us once again.

  21. This season is bringing out the worst in F1 fans….

    1. This season is bringing out the worst in some F1 driver(s)….

      1. Trenthamfolk (@)
        8th September 2014, 18:12

        You forgot #Rosberg

  22. Regarding the Sauber / Stroll rumours: not a lot of people know that Lawrence’s son, Lance, is part of the Ferrari Driver Academy. Also, I spotted him in the Ferrari garage during FP1 or FP2 (can’t remember which one). So this news doesn’t come completely out of nowhere.

    Would be sad if this does happen though: the team’s main stakeholder is still Peter Sauber, and I think it would be nice if it remains that way.

  23. Regarding Adam Parr’s tweet, are there really going to be 8 teams with 3 cars each in 2015? It would definitely be too soon. 2016 or 2017 is more likely. If anybody has any info can you please send me the link!

  24. Thanks for calling people “ignorant” because their opinion differs from yours. Did you write the same about the Monaco theorists?

    1. @dh1996 I accept that it’s a difference of opinion, but I say it’s a point of view which can only be held from a position of ignorance.

  25. Hm, 3 car teams? All of a sudden? I think its rather someone stirring the pot.

    Is it Bernie who (once again) wants to limit how much he has to share with the teams? Is it Ferrari pushing for customer cars (again) to get Haas to be able to in effect run a Ferrari?
    Or is it someone just thinking about how FI has owners facing jail over finances, Sauber seems to be on the verge ever since BMW dumped them last minute (are they back with payments to Ferrari again? Does seem to be the time of year for it), Caterham is supposed to have new owners, and they did invest some money in the update, but no one saw them or knows how much they are good for, Marussia’s owner has stopped building cars (on the other hand they are in for a boost in income from current and last years championship situation).

    Whatever. I sincerely hope it never comes to it (3 car teams). Who could endure seeing not just Alonso and Kimi but Jules Bianchi on top having to drag an awful Ferrari around? Or seeing Magnussen, Button AND Vettel suffer from daring but wrong gambles on design from McLaren. Maybe having an average 22yo driver line up at Red Bull is more enticing (Verstappen, Kvyat and Ricciardo)? But would Didi be willing to have not 1 but 2 teams of 3 cars, I would guess that is a bit too much even for him (on the other hand he DOES have drivers to fill all those seats).

    Sure, maybe Sauber could have Di Silvestro, VdGarde and Guttierez keeping the team afloat, and Force India might find another guy to keep cashflow going in the 3rd car. Williams could field 2 Brazillians (would the bank pay extra for that?) next to Bottas. But I doubt it would work for more than a year or 2 before we see teams who fail to earn points drop out and see the field dwindle even more.

  26. I thought it was a bit silly for Ricciardo to contemplate team orders on the BBC interview, but I hope that Vettel did get to hear about it.

  27. The reason these conspiracy theories are getting credence is because just at the moment F1 has become a kind of “crossover hit”. It isn’t just fans buying the record, your mum and your neighbour are as well. Lewis vs Rosberg has got the wider publics attention.

    And whenever F1 tips over into the general publics consciousness people who don’t know what they’re talking about start speculating. Team orders only became contentious when non f1 fans/journo’s started jumping up and down about it.

    I’m surprised at The Times, sort of, and i’m very surprised at Jackie Stewart, I thought he was more intelligent t. But i’m not at all surprised by Eddie the Eejit, he cant string a sentence together let alone come up with a coherent theory. He cant even wear appropriate clothing for a sixty something. I’m baffled at how he was ever a reasonably successful team boss.

    1. @antonyob

      Lewis vs Rosberg has got the wider public’s attention.

      Then why are the television viewing figures so poor? In the UK several races have been at lows last seen during the ITV years, and Germany’s audiences are poor as well. If any two countries were going to lap up Hamilton versus Rosberg, you’d think it would be those two.

      1. Maybe in the UK because it went to Sky. In Germany having a guy with a Finnish passport, a Finnish father brought up in Monaco isn’t quite as “of the people” as say MS.

        All I know is that people are talking about more than normal and its a bigger deal in the non f1 press. Which is true.

        1. Trenthamfolk (@)
          8th September 2014, 18:13

          @antonyob Valid points I feel

      2. These previous viewers are disappointed by consistent one team leaders. The contrived races from Merc like Monza, and Ferrari not performing. Also the shambolic double points fiasco and other nutcase policies of the FIA.

      3. @keithcollantine

        I wonder, do you see less page hits on the site? Not sure if the declining TV viewings actually reflect a decrease in interest. I personally watch much less races on TV (just the ones that are on the BBC), but still do follow the rest on websites.

        BTW As was evident from the Germany GP, Germans don’t really seem to care much for Rosberg though. Schumacher still has most fans and then Vettel.

      4. @keithcollantine It costs an arm and a leg to be able to have Sky coverage. On top of that, it is very poor (commercials, poor commentators), and very negative towards F1. They go on every week about how F1 is terrible and Crofty “asking questions” all the time.

        Because of all of this I would be surprised if the figures didn’t go down.

        And to add one thing, if, as a journalist, you say or write something like:

        “Is F1 too boring, is it not as good as in the past, is the racing too artificial, is the sport in decline? I’am just asking questions and playing the devils advocate.”

        Then that is not asking questions or playing the devils advocate, it’s popularizing an opinion and being a coward at the same time. It’s not journalism. Anyone could do that, which sort of explains why people like David Croft can have such jobs. It’s not as if he can properly retell what we are seeing on the screen either, he has never gone the first lap without misnaming at least 5 teammates.

        And the ignorance seems to be contagious, Martin can’t anymore recall what happened 40 laps ago, never mind one or two races ago.

        1. There are no commercials during Sky’s qualifying/race coverage & only 2-3 during each practice session.

          And I actually like the sky commentators (Croft/Brundle & Davidson for practice), Far better than having to listen to David Coulthard on the BBC who is just dreadful in my opinion.

          On the whole I love the sky coverage, Think its the best we have had available in the uk since the ppv coverage in 2002.

          i love the interactive additional video feeds for every session, i love the various viewing options (tv/tablet/online) & i love all the extra programming on the channel with the archive races every night, legends programs & the weekly shows.

          1. Are you paying for your coverage?

          2. @mateuss Are you paying for your coverage?

            I’m not paying specifically for the F1 coverage as i’ve been subscribing to the Sky Sports for about 15 years now.

  28. Another interesting detail in Mark Hughes’ race report linked above:

    illiams needs the permission of Mercedes whenever it wishes to use the ‘overtake button’ and that permission tends to come more readily when the fight is with a Red Bull or a Ferrari than when it’s a Mercedes…

    Recall this radio message from the race:

    https://twitter.com/f1fanaticlive/status/508588550607351808

    1. @keithcollantine
      If true then that’s another good argument for getting rid of many of the in-car adjustment options for the power unit, having all the options locked to 11 and the driver being made to use his right foot to decide how much power he uses.
      Personally I’d love to see the steering wheels striiped of all the buttons and knobs other than brake bias and a reset button for when the systems fail.

    2. @keithcollantine I find that amazing! And is the idea consistent with Austria, where Bottas held Hamilton up for istr a whole stint?

  29. On the 2014 Italian GP report (MotorSport) – what a good race was this!

    Both Lewis (start) and Nico (chicane x2) made mistakes – but only Lewis seemed to have the drive to fight for the win, and deservedly got it.

    Bottas outshone Massa, even coming in behind the Brazilian. Massa needed a mistake by Magnussen to pass him, where Bottas passed cars right, left, and (maybe even) centre.
    And to those claiming that Bottas was helped by DRS – in most instances the defending car was using DRS as well.

    Magnussen – All but respect for the guy, and outdriving Button. He made hardly any mistakes especially when Perez was attacking.
    PS – IMHO I think that Magnussen made a mistake defending against Bottas and should have given the place back immediately (screen shot shows that Bottas was ahead, even on FIA race ranking board).
    PS2 – many kudos for Button the way he drove wheel-to-wheel with Perez.

    Ricciardo again beat Vettel – On paper Vettel’s strategy seemed better and it was superbly executed as he undercut a few drivers. But notwithstanding that Riccardo showed his pure talent by claiming his deserved finishing spot on track.

    And then of course Perez – extremely well done, and good to hear the praise from the team over the radio.

    This will be a tough one to determine best drive(r).

    1. Formula Indonesia (@)
      8th September 2014, 11:00

      Nice one, I think it was not pure 100% loss of power from Lewis start, he also made a bad getaway, i think without those mistakes (from Nico too) the current race results was fair, (Lewis lost 5 seconds and Nico 5 seconds, maybe 4,5 or 4,75 but it still represent the true fact

      1. Unbelievable that you keep claiming that Hamilton made a mistake but some people always have to blame him on something.

      2. @f1indofans @coldfly what happened to hamilton was that his start-line computers (the ones that calibrate the clutch for the start, etc) failed, and he had to do the start without a calibrated clutch, so just he floored it and got tons of wheelspin

        1. @zjakobs, I missed that in my original review. Thus an even more deserved win for Ham

  30. @coldfly @f1indofans Lewis’ problem was complete loss of start mode with its maps and clutch settings, not any kind of mistake. Without those he could only floor it and hope for the best.

    1. @lockup, thanks. I missed that!
      Does not really change my analysis except that he now double deserved the win. Unfortunately no double points in Monza ;-)

      1. Yeah I think so :) Some interesting analysis on Motor Sport, that Lewis was so fast through Lesmos and out of Ascari that Rosberg was using up ES trying to compensate, then in trying to protect his rears NR was using a forward brake bias that affected his harvesting and also his braking into T1. Add in fuel use and Lewis had him stitched up every which was this weekend.

    2. Formula Indonesia (@)
      8th September 2014, 14:21

      @lockup ok, He did a decent job today, my analysis was wrong

  31. Bernie Ecclestone: “[Hamilton and Rosberg] should be allowed to race. That’s what they are there for. They are called racing drivers. We will have to find another name for them if not.”

    If Bernie stands behind this comment, then he should tray “Fuel-Tire-ERS-DRS-SteeringWheelOption-Manager”. Racing Drivers? LOL !!!

  32. Trenthamfolk (@)
    8th September 2014, 18:08

    Unfortunately, F1 has a long history of artificial positioning, bugus overtakes, team orders, undeserved wins, underhand tactics, cheating, theft and inter-team fighting. Not to mention the politics and ‘red-car’ favouritism of the 90’s and 00’s… (get well soon Michael). Conspiracy is an easy band wagon for fans to jump on when their driver cracks under pressure, as Rosberg did this weekend. It also gives us something to talk about.

  33. If the remaining teams are indeed going to run three cars each, would JEV still have a drive with STR for next season? If so, you’d think they’d delay the Verstappen announcement so they can announce their full three-driver lineup all at once.

Comments are closed.