What a turnaround. From the depressing procession in Bahrain to a wet-dry day of drama in Australia. But which portrayed the true face of Formula 1 in 2010?
Jenson Button won this race on a gamble, taking a champion’s responsibility on when to pit for slick tyres from intermediates on a still-damp track. As he admitted, he thought he’d made a monumental mistake when he entered the pitlane which was still soaking, and he must have been cursing his decision when he slid off at Turn 3 upon completion of the stop. But it turned out beautifully. Through his mixture of luck and good judgement, Button found himself in a position to control the race following more misfortune for Sebastian Vettel, and as Jenson proved in his championship year, it’s a position he’s never likely to throw away.
The contrast of his deserved joy to the undisguised anger of his team-mate was stark. Lewis Hamilton had a dreadful weekend, from his daft burnout that led to a police ticking off on Friday night, to his qualifying nightmare, and finally a race where the team’s two-stop call left him out in the cold.
But most damaging was his reaction. He put the blame for his hellish weekend squarely on the shoulders of his team, publicly and with visible ire. Jenson had made his own call to pit for slicks, but it was the team that dictated Lewis’s second stop. Hamilton couldn’t have made it clearer inferring that he’d been robbed of a result after one of his best drives. Robbed by his team.
How intelligent was it to react this way, on the radio during the race and in front of the TV cameras in the paddock? His mechanics and engineers won’t like it. Perhaps he had been let down by the decisions taken around him, but spitting the dummy was unbecoming of him. It should have been handled behind closed doors.
Of course, it was this time last year that he lied to the race stewards in Australia and landed himself in a messy controversy that ended with McLaren’s long-serving Dave Ryan being forced to stand down from the team. Lewis recovered and his relationship with his team recovered – but it had been damaging.
He said he’d learnt much from it, but that wasn’t evident this Sunday. You win and lose together, and all that? It seems not. And there’s another important factor to remember: Button wouldn’t have done it…
Jenson is full of confidence right now, and being the very likeable bloke he is, has found it easy to win over his new team. He has a great attitude that teams can feed off for inspiration. Now the doubts of critics about going into the lion’s den and taking on Hamilton have been banished. Yes, he can beat Hamilton and it is Lewis who will now be feeling insecure and uneasy. How he reacts from this point on will be fascinating to observe.
The contrasting fortunes and attitudes at McLaren were the key talking points from Albert Park, but there were others.
Red Bull once again failed to deliver on its position as the F1 pace-setter at the moment, with Vettel spinning out of a secure lead with brake failure and Mark Webber clumsily turfing himself and Hamilton out of the race. Both drivers and the team need to regroup quickly ahead of next weekend’s Malaysian GP.
Michael Schumacher’s rocky return to F1 continued, but we should reserve judgement for now. Even a seven-time world champion deserves a bit of time to work himself back in. We’d be foolish to write him off.
Robert Kubica gave us a timely reminder about his status as the ‘forgotten star’ of F1. Second place in his second race for Renault was unexpected and well-earned. Can he galvanise this once-great team into a truly competitive proposition once again?
As for the question I asked in the first paragraph… were the doom-mongers jumping the gun to label F1 dull after Bahrain? It’s impossible to make a true judgement from Australia when the conditions and the tricky nature of this parkland circuit played such a big part in the story of the race. F1 could still have a problem on its hands where ‘the show’ is concerned.
Perhaps every race should have a drop of rain. Bernie, what was that idea about sprinklers at every track again…?
That’s better Tanveer,A whole post without damning Schumacher…well done..
Happy easter if you are religious
Massa leads the World Championship!
And *that* is why Massa shouldn’t have let Alonso through in Australia!
don’t think i was referring to massa letting alonso through Mr T – i was referring to the incident with Webber and the swerving at high speed- that ain’t motor racing was my point –
as for Michael, i had the pleasure of meeting him in 1995 and he came across as a really nice guy however since 1991i have loathed his driving attitude and behaviour on the track- and one of teh reasons:
Perhaps others may know more than I on this – i seem to recollect Senna indicating that not all cars in 1994 were starting equal i.e. there was allegedly a team who still had traction control [banned] and that was why Senna was over driving- now i have no idea whatsover if that was the case –
all i do know is that in history the 1st world champion was known as a ‘thug’ and had at least once [pre-war] allegedly driven some-one off the road to their death – this is why Juan + whilst it greives me to partially agree with Mr T is why so many of us fans cannot abide that style of behaviour on the track [driving people off the circuit in case my meanderings have lost you all] and Michael’s continued struggle is viewed as such a lack of sympathay -
Chris, were Hamilton’s moves on Petrov in Sepang motor racing? Seems there were more moves there than Massa made on Webbo…
Another Boring race…seems that only the top cars overtaking the lesser teams makes for any excitement.
Once they come up to equal teams,game over…lets play follow my leader..
I was pleased with J Legards comments,when Hamilton was weaving in front of Petrov,
Brundle dismissed it as stopping the tow effect.
Legard said if it had been Schumacher,what would have been said then…
Right on Legard,no truer word spoken,everybody would have been saying….Dirty trickster,
But then Legard is a Schumi fan as myself.
How impressive is Petrov,I thought Kubica was good,so good to see a fighter
Chris Brooke:
The FIA investigations concluded that the 1994 Benetton B194 indeed have something called “Option 13″, enabling the driver to go through a series of 10 to 12 specific gear lever and steering button sequences in order to activate launch and traction control.
The FIA actually got it working…and did indeed say the B194 had it…but they couldn’t prove that Schumacher was using it in the races.
It was a very clandestine sequence which Briatore’/Symmonds/Schumacher (all three KNOWN cheats) were employing to make sure Schumacher was able to make lightning quick get-aways and leave Senna trailing out of corners.
If anyone wants more detail and the FIA techincal release on the matter, I have it and am happy to share it here on Motor Sport Magazine’s blogs.
There is more:
After Senna retired from the Pacific Grand Prix, he sat there on the Aida wall and watched and listened as the cars circulated.
Senna not only was able to hear Schumacher’s Benetton B194 employing traction control but, according to his expert ears, he noted that Verstappen’s B194 was NOT employing traction control!
Senna was going to take it all the way up to the FIA at the next meeting at Imola…but his young friend from Brazil, Barrichello, had a very nasty shunt on the Friday…Ratzenberger then had his fatal crash on the Saturday…and then he himself was killed on the Sunday…
That’s true. Prost, just last week in an interview, said that Senna called him just before Imola and was talking about the Benetton being illegal and how they had to take it to the FIA…
If Senna was calling Prost you know he was worried
thanks Mr T – isn’t that just so sad, to win at any cost is it worth winning?- 16yrs on doesn’t make it any easier and i wasn’t necc a senna fan – was until he left Lotus i suppose – the Portuguese GP of 1985 still stands in mind as one of the greatest drives i ever saw
Rich- yes i wondered if someone would see that as similar – i do not – as to me it wasn’t relatively dangerous it was trying to break the tow of slipstreaming in my mind not Petrov overtaking and being forced into a wall-
don’t know if any of you recollect the slipstreaming battles of Monza and Rheims if you do you’ll probably recollect similar practices with competitive but fair drivers – altough your point re Michael is well made – and i cannae argue with that – maybe that is what one reaps from their endeavours
My god…..after reading all that anti-shu posts,I am inclined to believe that the FIA,is pro Schumacher.
With all your Techno know it all,you have books galore knowledge.Your hatred goes beyond belief.
Tanveer,you should take your argument to the ombudsman,this information should be brought to the international press,revealing that Schumacher is a Fraud.
It’s a real pity that other great cheats in history seem to lose their importance in the press.such as Ireland losing to France via a Handball Goal.
Is it possible to change the record,your despise of the 7 time world champion is well known,I reckon you know more than the editor of this magazine.
Have you ever wondered how antique dealers on TV seem to know so much about all items…..they read up on it before the shoot…thus making us believe they have amazing knowledge.
Reckon you have your F1 annuals stacked up against your computer,,,yes you know the ones….most have a picture of your nemesis on the front cover.
Juan,
Some of your responses are verging on childishness.
Stop it!
I responded to Mr Brooke re his enquiry on Senna and not all cars being ‘legal’ for 1994.
If you don’t like the response simply because it doesn’t jive with your notions about your favourite driver, then that’s your problem.
You’re not one of those who believes in censoring posts simply because they don’t praise the object of your hero-worship, do you?
PS
The only thing I have ‘stacked up’ on either side of my flat computer screen are a pair of small speakers and an object of art. Clean and simple.
Msr Rico – if one actually reads the posts and not what one percieves is written i did mention I had met Michael and found him a really nice guy – and what i believe i am entitled to, is an opinion – and that is my distaste of what Michael considers acceptable driving behaviour – a legacy one or two others share, fortunately the newer crop of drivers don’t seem to have that kind of attitude and that is just so welcome
- so as Mr T says please don’t try and resrict our opinions as they don’t match yours – that takes what i believe is a positive debate into something i do not like the thought of
Any ones opinions are welcome,but continual damnation of one particular driver gets very “childish” as Tanveer puts it.
I am fully aware that Schumacher is not to everybodies taste,but nobody else seems to have written into nearly every post,something to do with damning Schui…
The conception of cheating did not start and end within Michaels career.
I am entitled to speak my voice if I don’t find something agreeable,and vice versa,I was under the impression that is what a debate was all about,
Chris Brooke, I’d say one of the newer drivers shares the attitude of on-track behavior you find so distasteful. This newer driver’s racing idol? One Ayrton Senna…
Rich, i take it you are referring to Lewis? true but then i’m not a great fan of Lewis’s either- the point i was trying to make was that breaking a slipstream tow was different to weaving whilst someone is trying to overtake you – had Lewis tried to do that at the end of the straight i would be a condemming as anyone else – apart from that am impressed with Petrov
p.s. Jarno is also a Senna fan – don’t see him doing that cutting up too often
Well, Jarno is usually tootling around by himself in the midfield so would not have the opportunity (or inclination?) to involve himself in ‘cutting up’.
And, if Hamilton obeyed the rules and did not weave all over the straight, then Petrov would have attempted to overtake!!! Instead he was obliged to stick with Lewis so it appeared to all the Lewis fans that Lewis was only ‘trying to break the tow’.
Weaving is weaving.
Petrov did attempt to overtake at the end of the straight, and Hamiton made no move to block him then, so I expect that the zig zagging was an attempt to break the tow. Petrov may have been better off if had not followed Hamilton…he would have had a much shorter distance to cover….
So how do the stewards decide whether it is a fair weave or an unfair weave? By the time Petrov tried to pass it was too late because Lewis was by then able to ‘stall’ his rear wing by lifting his left leg up to engage the ‘F-duct’ or whatever they call it. Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? I think I will give up.