Is that really a surprise? Both Hamilton and Rosberg have been under-cutting one another all season. Hamilton publicly questions the wisdom of swapping engineers around because he knows that the media will put pressure on the team; Rosberg tells Verstappen (who then tells the press) that Hamilton is more concerned about safety than he appears in public, because it undermines his position as a leader among the drivers.
Hasn't been confirmed but his contract stated in 2014 that if he's not at the top team (Red Bull) in his first three years then he's up for grabs. Now he's at Red Bull, joining in May, seven months before that stated threshold. I think it's safe to say he's buckled up tight for foreseeable future.
I don't know ... that sounds awfully fishy.
That's not what I meant at all. Mercedes' comments feel like damage control, trying to undo what has already been done. If the interview was conducted by a Red Bull-friendly media outlet, how did Lauda get into a position where he said those things? I know journalists ask leading questions, or questions where they can infer certain things, but I struggle to see a scenario where Lauda was led to make inflammatory statements about Hamilton without realising what was going on. So either he said it and now he's trying to backtrack, or the tabloids did what tabloids do and latched onto a detail and exaggerated it as far as they could take it - in which case, this is complete mismanagement by Mercedes because the one way to guarantee that everyone reads the article is to deny it.
And you don't think Hamilton upset the team when he publicly questioned the wisdom of shuffling the mechanics around? He almost certainly knew what would happen: that the media and his fans would put pressure on the team, and sure enough, Mercedes were forced to publicly deny the rumours of a conspiracy against him. When was the last time that a team had to do that? Not just in Formula One; any sport. We know drivers play the media all the time - Rosberg and Räikkönen do it, while Mark Webber was exceptionally clever at it. I struggle to believe that Hamilton had no idea what would hapoen next; if so, why go to the media at all? Why not voice those concerns within the team?
Hamilton is under contact, Wolff has said the incident has no bearings on Nico's contract. What is being discussed here is tabloid style nonsense.
Don't start.
Contracts can be broken. Mercedes have a one hundred and three point lead over Ferrari. With forty-three points on offer each race, that lead can evaporate quickly if something like Spain happens again. And if that happens again, you can bet Mercedes have something to say about it.
Which is yet to be negotiated. Do you really think Wolff will take such an open-minded view if there's another clash between the drivers? He also said that the Spain incident was forgivable because it was the first of its kind in thirty races. The Austria incident was the first of its kind in four. It may not impact upon contract negotiations, but it certainly won't be forgotten.
That's why I posted the link to the Autosport op-ed (they're offering free access to Premium content to celebrate the British Grand Prix) - it's easy to just look at the Austria incident in isolation, but trouble has been brewing since 2014. Probably the only reason why it hasn't spilled over until now is because Rosberg didn't really get any momentum going in his 2015 title bid. That's why I think they're both as bad as each other.
What's happened now is that they've both spat their dummies out at each other. What was a boiling point is now an imminent implosion...
I think that's what Mercedes have struggled with the most. They treat their drivers pretty equally, but I think they have consistently under-estimated the way Hamilton is held to a different standard by fans and the media and haven't been able to manage it. When Hamilton defied team orders in 2014, he was apparently well within his rights to do so. But skip ahead to Austria, and to hear Ted Kravitz tell it, he was well within his rights to expect team orders telling Rosberg to move over. When he passed Rosberg, he claimed to have given him racing room, but how many times have they shared the same piece of track and Hamilton hasn't given Rosberg that room? Suzuka and Austin 2015 come to mind, as does Canada 2016 - and that's just off the top of my head. When fans analyse the race, Hamilton's previous behaviour doesn't count - but Rosberg's does; everyone was so quick to point out Rosberg blocking Hamilton in Canada a few years ago, but refused to include the likes of Suzuka 2015. And Hamilton sees no problem publicly questioning team strategy because he knows that fans and the media will put pressure on them. Since this is an English-language forum and because I can't read German very well, we're probably only getting half the picture, but I'm sure Rosberg is giving as good as he gets in the German media. So even though Mercedes have done everything right in managing their drivers, the media and the fans are a two-headed monster that they can't control. There is an expectation that they will give Hamilton preferential treatment, and pressure to do so when they are perceived as giving him anything less. I genuinely think that they have no idea how to handle it, because no driver has had such a cult following.
The biggest concern is that these aren't two similar characters. These aren't different characters. These two drivers are exactly the same person and have the exact same plan to reach the top - either they do or nobody else does. That's the biggest thing Mercedes need to worry about. It's like having two Kobe Bryant's play each other in a game of Basketball - there isn't a winner until one of them falls. Unfortunately this time, both of them fell and blamed the other.
Ted's talking up the prospect of "one Mr. L. Hamilton of Tewin" driving for the Scuderia in 2018. And it's easy to scoff at that, but his source is Sky Italy's lead commentator; Sergio Marchionne apparently wants him.
Which part of Vettel is their only consideration don't you get? They'd like a number two who can finish ahead of championship rivals, fair enough, but who exactly could they put in the car that would do that, and NOT get their nose out of joint playing second fiddle to Vettel?
Someone who can do it for years, and who can do it consistently? Let's be honest Räikkönen hasn't been ultra-consistent over the past few years, and even if he rediscovers his form, how long does he have left in him. There will come a time when Räikkönen retires, whether by choice or because the team let him go - and Ferrari need to be actively planning for that time, even if they're happy to let Räikkönen decide when he leaves. So long as they just take the wait-and-see approach with a rolling one-year extension, they're giving promising drivers reasons to look elsewhere.
