Editorial , November 2000

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Manarello must be a heady place to be right now. I cannot imagine that the Monday after Michael Schumacher’s Japanese GP win was terribly productive in Italy. But somewhere there must have been a bespectacled jobsworth accountant tucked away in some dingy office with a large pile of beans spread over his desk. And he, and only he, knows how much Ferrari have spent since Jody Scheckter won the 1979 world drivers’ title. It must be an astronomical figure.

There are lots of theories why Ferrari have underachieved over the years. But the reason seems obvious to me: only four times have the Scuderia had on their payroll the most complete driver of the era: Ascari in 1952 (when Fangio was injured); Fangio in ’56; Lauda in 75-77 and Schumacher ’96-2000. These periods have provided five of Fenrari’s 10 driver titles, as well as four near-misses. You don’t need to be Einstein. Yet Ferrari missed it.

Stirling Moss never signed an F1 contract with them; neither did Jackie Stewart or Ayrton Senna; Gilles Villeneuve did, but they gave him lorries to drive; Alain Prost did, but they fell out after another of Ferrari’s nearmisses. Moss fell out, too, over a promised drive that was whipped away at the last minute early in his career; Fangio wasn’t keen but had nowhere else to go and left after one year; JYS was also wary of the internal politics — and was canny enough to keep a DFV between his shoulder blades.

Sportscar racing is a different story. Everybody drove Ferrari sportscars — if they wanted to win. The amazing Moss excepted, of course. There can be no talk of underachievement in this sphere. Despite the best efforts of Jaguar, Aston Martin, Porsche and Alfa Romeo, the Prancing Horse usually ran roughshod in the late 1950s, early ’60s. And hand in hand with that reign came American acceptance, ‘mass-production’, expansion and legendary status (see pages 22-30). Formula One on the other hand was just a financial drain.

It still is, of course. Except the whole world now watches every move. And even defeat merely serves to burnish Ferrari’s legend. Had Michael Schumacher romped to success back in 1996 it would not have been met with the same approbation his eventual success has — the trials and tribulations of his first four years were gloriously, typically Ferrari. And that’s why we love them, really. The bean-counters will consider the huge sums that find their way into Schuey’s back pocket as money well spent. The romantics among us, though to see Ferrari turn it around, will have a turn a feeling that a regularly successful outfit will be a less attractive proposition than the ‘bumblers’ of yore. But whatever your view, be sure that the indefinable something Ferrari has is something money can’t buy.

You may also like

Related products