Fernando Alonso, Sebastian Vettel, Korea, 2012

Montezemolo denies reports Vettel will join Ferrari

2012 F1 seasonPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Fernando Alonso, Sebastian Vettel, Korea, 2012Luca di Montezemolo has played down the prospect of Sebastian Vettel joining Ferrari in 2014, saying he doesn’t want “two roosters” at the team.

“Today the problem is not with drivers,” Montezemolo told Italian radio station Rai.

“2013 is still to come but I don’t want to have two roosters in the same hen house, rather two drivers who race for Ferrari and not for themselves.

“I don’t want problems and rivalries, which we didn’t have between Schumacher and Irvine, between Schumacher and Barrichello, between Alonso and Massa or Massa and Schumi or Massa and Raikkonen.”

Montezemolo also denied claims his team would poach Red Bull’s star chief technical officer Adrian Newey: “I can say that he is very good at his job but we also managed to win eight constructors’ titles in the last 13 championships without him: I have huge faith in our own engineers.”

Korea saw Ferrari move up to second in the constructors’ championship but Fernando Alonso lost the lead of the drivers’ championship to Vettel. Montezemolo said improving the team’s performance on Saturdays is key to their chances in the final races:

“We are a few tenths off the pace of the best, above all in qualifying. We must try to have a front-row car because otherwise, starting further back, it makes life much harder and you are at greater risk of getting caught up in accidents. To have a quicker car we must work day and night in a methodical and determined fashion.”

2012 F1 season

Browse all 2012 F1 season articles

Image © Red Bull/Getty images

142 comments on “Montezemolo denies reports Vettel will join Ferrari”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3
  1. Interesting denial from Luca. But there’s just way too much smoke at this point for there to be no fire, IMO. Not to mention Ferrari have a history of denying future megadeals (i.e. Schumacher, Alonso) right until they actually happen. JA wrote about it 3 years ago: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2009/07/fernando-alonso-and-ferrari/

    All that said, none of this may matter if Alonso snatches the title this year. But, if Vettel does win the title this year (over Alonso at that), it might just strengthen the resolve of those at Maranello to sign Vettel.

    1. @journeyer I remember the long, long wait for Alonso to be confirmed.

      But what’s interesting for me here is that Montezemolo said more than it won’t happen. He said it goes against his philosophy of F1 racing to have two top drivers in the team. So if it does happen it would be quite a U-turn.

      I hope it happens, because I like seeing the best drivers in the best teams.

      On the basis of the last couple of seasons you could question why Vettel would jump ship to a team with a slower car and a faster team mate. But I’m sure Ferrari will eventually get it right again – they’re just too good, too rich and too well-resourced not to.

      And then there’s what this says about Massa. Montezemolo has just indicated they’re keeping him because he’s not good enough to beat Alonso. Ouch.

      1. @KeithCollantine And Alonso, according to Montezemolo, is a ‘rooster’, who drives only for himself. It’s all true but a team boss still shouldn’t talk about his drivers like this.

        I actually believe this is just Montezemolo’s strategy and that you cannot take these words at face value but some interesting things still probably can be found between the lines.

        1. @girts

          He could just mean that with two top drivers in the team there’s a good chance they would start driving for themselves instead of the team but with their current practice of having a clear number 1 driver both drivers are working for the team as they both understand their role – Alonso is there to try to win the WDC, Massa to back him up and to try to get enough points for the WCC.

        2. And Alonso, according to Montezemolo, is a ‘rooster’, who drives only for himself.

          I think you misread it…. He said he rather have two drivers that race for Ferrari and not drivers that drives for themselves. He meant that Fernando and Massa race for the Team and not for themselves or have you heard anything bad coming from Fernando towards Ferrari????
          I guess it´s all about how you chose to interpret the message!

      2. I’m fairly certain that this weekend proved that they like Massa not because he’s slower than Alonso, but because he rolls over even when he’s not.

        1. At the moment Massa is every team boss’ dream – he is good enough to be the number one but ready to be the number two.

          1. It was exactly why they were looking at Webber earlier in the year …

      3. Its going to happen. There were denials of Kimi going to Ferrari too. I think LdM wanted Kimi with Schumacher (2 roosters) but Schumacher wanted to retire then.

        Ferrari getting new drivers are always very long drawn out processes but they always happen. It will be fascinating to see him against Alonso in Ferrari and not in a Newey designed aerodynamically perfect car. Still if he does go no-one will be able to accuse Vettel of lacking balls!

      4. I prefer the drivers scattered accross the different top teams, as it allows me to see which ones are the clear ;eaders etc, and which ones can inspire great work to happen, and that’s quite interesting

      5. @keithcollantine, I wonder how secure Alonso is at Ferrari, not because he lacks talent but because he went to Ferrari as part of a massive sponsorship deal from Santander a Spanish Bank, times are not good for Spanish banks in general.

    2. Great spot. I still think it’s going to happen.

      1. I am wondering why would Vettel want to Leave his biggest supporters “Adrian Newey – Christian Horner – Dr Helmut Marko – Dietrich Mateschitz ” and more importantly a car with higher chances of WDC to move to Ferrari to have a hard time there. Is it for the Legacy ? well really interesting.

        I can think of only one thing. He is moving to Ferrari if Adrian is moving there in 2014. I guess otherwise he will stay put at Red Bull. Lets see.

        1. “a car with higher chances of WDC”
          If u watch only the present….but thanks to god driver thinks different… e.x Hamilton.
          In a winning long-term contract Ferrari is the best. They have fashion,Money, best technologies and with best possibility of winning WDC…is not a case that they have won 8 WCC in the last 13 years so they have 70% of possibility of winning cars….every driver wants to go to them, the last one is hamilton, watch:http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/Hamilton-admits-Ferrari-talks,50580.html
          if u want to compare the story of Red Bull and Ferrari let’s do it…but it will be just losing time…from 1999-2009 Newey won the amazing sum of 0 World championship and we are talking for a long long period of 11 years.
          I have the same consideration also for Mclaren a little bit less but they are good too. With all the respect that i have for Red Bull, they have to spend at least 20-25 years in formula 1 to be compared to the big Guys Ferrari and Mclaren. To be honest i bet that in 7, 8 years when publicity doesn’t have anymore money they will disappear or change name.

        2. Newey’s contract runs out at the end of 2013. I think he has achieved all he wanted at Red-Bull. After a dry spell between 2000-2009 he has re-emerged as the most dominant man in F1 again. Genius.

          1. Didn´t Newey at some time say that he will never go to Italy, because his family, specially his wife didn´t like the country?

          2. Didn´t Newey at some time say that he will never go to Italy, because his family, specially his wife didn´t like the country?

            Yes, yes he did. I remember the article.

    3. @journeyer

      But there’s just way too much smoke at this point for there to be no fire, IMO. Not to mention Ferrari have a history of denying future megadeals (i.e. Schumacher, Alonso) right until they actually happen.

      Luca flatly denied that Sergio Perez would join Ferrari in 2013 … and Perez went to McLaren instead. Elsewhere, Christian Horner has previously confirmed that Vettel is under contract until 2015.

      1. Not to mention all the reports about Webber having signed for 2013… which didn’t happen either.

      2. Yes but Perez’s ‘inexperience’ that LdM regularly emphasized clearly wasn’t the reason why Ferrari didn’t hire him.

        1. Then what was?

          1. @prisoner-monkeys There could be many reasons and I still believe that an already signed agreement with Vettel as of 2014 is the most likely of them. All that Ferrari could offer Perez was a one-year agreement and they refused to do that because 1) It would raise further questions (you usually do multi-year deals with young & promising drivers) 2) It would be unfair to Perez and might harm his future career.

            It could also be that Ferrari thought that Perez might potentially be ‘too good’ for Alonso and thus do harm to the harmony within the team although I think it’s less likely.

            But if a driver is mature enough for McLaren, he must be mature enough for Ferrari as well and nothing suggests that Massa is going to be a better driver than Perez in 2013 even if he has driven a few strong races lately. So I just don’t by this ‘inexperience’ stuff, which is a reminder that one should not believe everything that LdM says.

          2. Vettel might be on the way to Ferrari at some point, but Alonso would have to leave first. At some point, Ferrari will cotton on to the fact that they’ll never win the WCC with a ‘one driver’ policy. Vettel has proved he can live with a competitive teammate, and that’s something that ‘Nando has never been comfortable with. So I’d predict that Ferrari’s long-term plan is Vettel and A. N. Other

          3. artificial racer
            15th October 2012, 17:21

            I’m sure inexperience is part of it. Fact is Perez has shown good speed at times, but Sauber was a quick car this year, and there’s only so much confidence one can have in Perez’s abilities. He was good in junior formulae but did not dominate.

            Ferrari are coalesced around Alonso for now and the second driver needs to be fast, but more importantly have the personality to submit. Mark Webber for example would never agree. For a young driver like Perez this also can’t be appealing. Frankly, the longstanding team orders and arrogant attitudes have always made Ferrari a team I love to hate. (But F1 needs them.)

          4. Sorry, @girts, but that theory is let down by these comments from Luca.

    4. I think LdM’s comments come as no surprise, yet it still felt to me like a slap in the face to hear (read) them. Poor LdM doesn’t want to have to deal with ‘problems and rivalries’ of having two gladiators driving for themselves rather than Ferrari (which is a sweeping generalization in itself), all the while slamming the door of true competition in the pinnacle of racing in the paying, viewing audiences faces. Shame on them. I hated the trumped up MS/Ferrari era for the extremes they went to to carry out this philosophy, but in more recent years it felt like they at least had backed off from that a bit, if not by hiring two gladiators, at least by not building the car strictly for one, and literally contracting the other to be subservient from race one…but now I have to wonder. I think perhaps today’s Ferrari was built for FA, hence FM’s struggles with it early on, and I think there isn’t a contract for FM to be subservient but the whole team, including FM, is engrained in the philosophy anyway. I guess LdM’s only problem that he is prepared to deal with is who to hire that is good enough to gain meaningful WCC points while not good enough to beat FA, and with a lacking in integrity to agree to be subservient and set aside their own childhood dreams in order to help someone else achieve theirs.

      Any of you who still think LdM is somehow speaking code for ‘we’ve hired SV for 2014’ should wake up. Ferrari want to do it the easy way….the sell-out way…the unsporting way. Sure what they are doing is legal, but it isn’t moral imho, at least not toward the viewing audience. Their’s is a formula for ‘success’ or at least numbers compilation, but the losers are the paying audience who get manipulated into thinking they are watching true racing in the pinnacle of racing.

      I’ve never wanted to see single car teams moreso than now. I like FA, and I would have been fine with him winning the WDC this year because I still think he doesn’t have nearly all the advantages that MS had at Ferrari, but today I wish FA to not win the WDC this year. And if SV wins it and some want to argue he too is favoured at Red Bull ala the Ferrari way, then I will continue to blame the MS/Ferrari era, with special thanks to the FIA and F1 for setting it all up and creating a trend that has forced some teams hand to do something somewhat similar to Ferrari as the only way to compete against an elephant in the room.

      I remain steadfast in my reaction to this type of nonsense in that I will continue to disrespect and have an asterisk beside any WDC that needed the help of a non-competing teammate from race one of the season in order to ‘win.’ My benchmark is Senna/Prost at Mac. Two gladiators who won all but one race and yet each weekend we didn’t know which Mac it would be…and we were on the edge of our seats. A viscious rivalry both on and off the track (of the type MS was sheltered from and therefore had his F1 life much easier and hence the numbers compilation), and the WDC and the WCC awarded to Mac as well. Take note LdM. Two gladiators can still win you both titles, and you can respect the paying audience and it’s intelligence at the same time.

      1. Well said.

      2. “Any of you who still think LdM is somehow speaking code for ‘we’ve hired SV for 2014′ should wake up. Ferrari want to do it the easy way….the sell-out way…the unsporting way.”

        This is harsh. Teams have had #1 drivers since time immemorial – especially Ferrari. Heck, even Fangio was undisputed #1 in all his 5 titles. Their main goal is to win races and titles. If that’s how the team wants to do it, it’s perfectly legal and acceptable. I’d rather an orderly team rather than a team taken to the brink of internal chaos – as McLaren was in both 1989 and 2007 (especially the latter with Spygate, which was blown wide-open by a disgruntled Alonso).

        All that said… LDM has a history of denying deals right until they happen. Why? Because once they do happen, people won’t care about the denials anymore. There’s a certain level of frustration at Ferrari that they haven’t won the WDC since 2007. And the longer Alonso fails to do so, the more LDM will want to hire the guy who’s winning over him… Vettel.

        1. Sorry mate but Alonso is not to blame for Ferrari failure to deliver decent car, and when they did in 2010 they failed so badly on race strategy, even more can be said they gave 1st title to Vettel…
          and LdC is always talking, talking and talking endlessly to get attention to Ferrari, thats his role, thats what he is being paid for… Nevermind that what he says is in 90% taken out of space…

        2. @Journeyer – I agree with pretty much everything you’ve said but it seems you’re insinuating that Alonso himself is completely responsible for his failure to win the WDC in the past three years. I think in 2010 that was certainly the case – he made quite a few uncharacteristic errors that year if I remember correctly – but 2011 and 2012, I’m not sure what else he could have done to win it. He hasn’t had the car. And this year especially he’s made very few errors. I think if their failure to win since his arrival could be blamed on anyone, I’d be inclined to blame them more than Alonso.

          And if they lose it this year, apart from Suzuka, China and Australia (qualy) he’s done absolutely nothing wrong. It was their inability to develop the car (assuming in the final four races they don’t have a sudden jump in performance). My point in saying this is, that even if Vettel joins them – unless they give him the machinery, I can’t see him doing anything more. In my opinion anyway :)

          1. No, not at all. If anything, Alonso is single-handedly keeping them in it (earning tons of respect from me in the process). But put yourself in Ferrari’s shoes. Vettel has beaten you for the past 2 years and is well on his way to making it 3. He, along with Red Bull and Newey, have the best package right now. What’s the next best thing you can do if you can’t beat them in a straight fight? Break up the package, of course. They’ve tried (but failed) to get Newey. The other way to break up that party is to get Vettel himself. Red Bull is a very strong team right now. But like Benetton, they still seem to be a 1-trick pony (Schumacher back then, Vettel-Newey right now). We’re all asking if Vettel can win without Red Bull. But just as important is: can Red Bull win without Vettel?

          2. @ella Tagging you here in case you haven’t seen my reply. Apologies for missing the common courtesy. :)

        3. @journeyer … I think it is erroneous to suggest that the alternative to a designated number one and two from race one of each season, which imho robs the paying audience of what they are paying for, is internal chaos.

          Rather, in respecting the paying audience, teams can gleen the talents and resources of the whole staff including the best drivers available (since this is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing) to build the best car they can to advance BOTH drivers (thus preventing internal politics and chaos) and allow them to push each other on the track (giving the paying fans what they pay for), and when the math hasn’t worked out for one of them as the season nears it’s close, then you designate a number one, which everyone can accept and understand given that both drivers had a fair shot. To me TEAM in F1 does not mean one driver on the track is there to not compete against his teammate, and nor should that define the pinnacle of RACING.

          1. @robbie The team’s job is not to get the best drivers available. Rather, it is to build the best team available. There is a subtle difference there – the best team normally doesn’t employ the two best drivers because they will just end up dividing the team. It is probably no coincidence that ever since Prost-Senna blew up, we haven’t had a 2-champion lineup that lasted more than a year (Hill-JV in 96, Alonso-Lewis in 07).

            That said, I do applaud Ferrari for (seemingly) being ready to give an equal-driver policy another try, this time with Alonso-Vettel.

          2. Alonso-Vettel will never happen. It’s just a rumour. LdM has just said it, and unless you think they will go against their own philsophy, which you have just defended by saying to do otherwise divides the team, why are you so convinced Ferrari will be going ahead and allegedly hiring two WDC’s? According to you, it’s divisive and the last thing they should be is applauded for that.

            Fortunately Mac and Merc are two teams that disagree with you. You have conveniently forgotten that Mac has had two WDCs on their team for two years now (without division or blow-up), and Merc doesn’t have a subservient driver there either.

            Bottom line for me, I find it almost unbelievable that some people have resigned themselves to teams in what is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing not going with the best two drivers they can get, and building up their team that way, with healthy competition that would truly build up the best team possible, but rather to settle for a lesser driver that won’t be as useful on or off the track in providing input to advance the team, but rather is just there to not compete against the number one in the pinnacle of racing, while they hope he at least gets enough points to help them win the WCC.

            I can’t imagine any other sport where the owner would simply settle for inferior players just so there is no ‘division’ among the team.

            Some lesser F1 teams unfortunately have to settle for pay drivers that are there for their money moreso than their ability and that is an unfortunate thing that many lament as well. Most wish for the best drivers possible to be in F1.

            All this nonsense just proves to me what a terrible precedent the MS/Ferrari era set. Thankfully to this day not all teams have bought into it.

  2. Thank you Keith for not posting an article saying it was confirmed and for waiting for an official word on the matter… unlike many other “respectable” sites.

  3. Hmmm… that’s a fairly firm denial.

    I still think it’s going to happen, as I can’t see any other reason for them to retain Felipe Massa.

  4. So he’s basically saying he wants a team of 2 cars where only one can win. He doesn’t want competition between the 2 drivers and he’d rather have one good driver and one average driver.

    What a load of old tosh. Vettel will be at Ferrari in 2014 and this “denial” confirms it.

  5. I think this simply means that Montezemolo believes that it’s far too early to talk about their 2014 driver line-up openly. In 2009, he suggested that Alonso would not join Ferrari as soon as 2010 less than three weeks before the deal was officially confirmed.

  6. Kimi Räikkönen
    15th October 2012, 12:04

    Why go to Ferrari when Red Bull have Adrian Newey?

    1. Because Vettel may want a new challenge. Moving to Mercedes, who have won one race in the time that Mclaren have won sixteen, would give you the same answer.

      1. Kimi Räikkönen
        15th October 2012, 12:21

        Hamilton and Vettel ate two entirely separate cases though. Hamilton won his championship in 2008. He’s going to Mercedes because of the changes to the regulations in 2014. Vettel has won the wdc the last two years and I think he’ll win it this year too. Unless Red Bull has a serious downturn in form next year would be foolish, in my opinion. Why decide to join a team dominated by Alonso when you’re winning where you are?

        1. Kimi Räikkönen
          15th October 2012, 12:22


        2. Again, he may want a new challenge. He’s won 2 titles with RBR, and may take a third. Although he could stick to winning where he is, he has little else to actually do or prove for RBR, and may want to win for the sport’s historically most successful team. Alonso himself left Renault to join the second most successful team immediately after his 2 titles.

          1. I don´t think he needs a new challenge, they, I mean RBR, are creating history. Since 2005 they have won 2 championships, and win 36 races… yes is still a low way behind the 62 years of Ferrari, but is not necesary bad… I have been thinking in why he will do so, and te only xplenation that I can come up with is that he is promese a better car (motor regulation anyone), but we still not sure is that will happened… Fernando Alonso has been giving beto power over his team mate… there is no way in hell he will take Vettel, as much as he is saying other wise…

        3. He’s going to Mercedes because of the changes to he regulations in 2014

          What’s to say Ferrari won’t be more competitive then? Granted, Ferrari don’t exactly have a star-studded history when it comes to making turbocharged engines but they do manufacture their own engine/KERS-ERS package. They may well have an advantage over the more aero-dependant Red Bulls…

          1. Ferrari don’t exactly have a star-studded history when it comes to making turbocharged engines

            1981 first turbocharged engine to win at Monaco
            1982,1983 constructors championship
            They use to have the most powerful engine it was rumored that they have an advantage of 50 hp they were having the best engine in the worst chassis
            The battle betwenn gilles & keke demonstrate that

          2. I personally think Renault, BMW & Honda’s engines were better (but maybe not as reliable).

    2. Why go to Ferrari when Red Bull have Adrian Newey?

      During the 1995 season would you have advised Schumacher “Why go to Ferrari when Williams have Adrian Newey?”

      Räikkönen drove five Newey designed Mclarens without picking up a WDC and subsequently won a title in his first year in a Ferrari.

      1. Good point.

      2. Kimi Räikkönen
        15th October 2012, 13:06

        After 1995 Schumacher didn’t win another title until 2000. Hill and Villeneuve won in 1996 and 1997 whilst driving a Williams. Mika Häkkinen won in 1998 and 1999 after Newey went to McLaren. Many people condemned Schumacher’s Ferrari move as idiotic.
        Kimi Räikkönen nearly won the title in 2003 and 2005. I’m a huge fan of Kimi but a McLaren should have taken the 2007 title but for the friction within the team. But my point was, times have changed, Ferrari are no longer the irritatingly dominant force they once were. Newey’s Red Bulls have taken that title. Not quite as much this year but we have seen a resurgence of late. If you were mounting a title challenge would you not want to be in the best car possible which over the last few seasons has been the one Vettel is sat in?

        1. Many people condemned Schumacher’s Ferrari move as idiotic.

          Yep, the idiot won 5 titles in a row.

          1. Kimi Räikkönen
            16th October 2012, 9:04

            I didn’t mean that. When he originally moved to an ailing Ferrari did you really think it was a good idea? Sure, it paid off but when he went there in 1996 people thought it was a bit odd considering that he had just won two titles with Benetton.

    3. Maybe the 2014 engine’s regulations will compromise Adrian’s aero skills
      No driver have won more than 2 titles in a Newey car (that does not mean that Vettel will not win this year)
      The fashion of the Prancing Horse is irresistible

      1. fashion

        sorry the fascination

      2. @tifoso1989 Newey would get the engine exactly he want since Red Bull is now de facto works team of Renault. He would input many of his philosophy into the engine, but will it be great? We know Newey sacrifices many things for aero efficiency and it could be not a good idea in 2014. with much greater recovery energy, I think it would be horse power game. maybe a little bit greener than last not-freezed era though.

        I don’t think it’s the reason Vettel considering Ferrari though. but engine regulation is surely a part. Maybe Renault is not so enthusiastic about F1 and if they withdraw…

        1. @eggry – Lotus is the de facto works team of Renault, they use Renault engines and the ex-Renault factory. Adrian Newey is for sure an aerodynamicist, and perhaps sacrificing other things (such as KERS judging bytes amount of failures the Red Bull’s have had) may not be the wisest thing to do as you said, especially since the maximum capacity is effectively doubling and there is turbocharging to boot.
          Ferrari may be a wise option for Vettel, if they would allow him to join with Alonso still there.

          1. Lotus has no upperhands against Red Bull now. You should read news about Red Bull-Renault contract which is I guess last year renewed. They have largest pie for opinion for the engine now.

        2. @eggry, the FIA have pretty much determined the dimensions of the new engine, there is no opportunity for aero advantages.

    4. If Vettel want to emulate success of Schumacher, it’s not enough just winning 7 titles. He should make his own team and clearly Red Bull is not since there’s Adrian Newey. of course, there were Ross Brawn, Rory Byrne, etc but they’re the people starting with Schumacher. Meanwhile, Vettel is simply sit the seat which Newey already made.

      so I believe Vettel would go to different team sooner that winning several titles with Red Bull. I don’t know it would be Ferrari. Well, if he doesn’t go to Ferrari in 2014, then also Mclaren seat will be available when Button or Perez’s contract expired. Anyway I’d like to see him challenging.

      1. Just because KR didn’t win in an Adrian Newey car doesn’t mean others weren’t. But the questions was to Vettel ‘why go to Ferrari when Red Bull has Adrian Newey?’ And , would you have said to MS ‘why go to Ferrari when Williams has Adrian Newey?’

        The reality is, imho, there has not even been one consideration on SV’s part to go to Ferrari, nor has he been approached by anyone at Ferrari. It is obviously rumours and wishful thinking and nothing more. LdM has just confirmed he doesn’t want two WDC’s on the team at the same time. Not even a WDC-less strong challenger. And SV has been observing the Ferrari way for 20 years now ie. all of his cogent teen and adult years have been spent seeing Ferrari favour only one driver. Why would he even have Ferrari on his mind unless they were in need of the one WDC level driver they like to have on board. FA will have to be on his way out from Ferrari for any other proven or potential WDC to be going to that team. So that ship has sailed for now. It’s FA and subservients until he is gone from Ferrari. And then it will be some other WDC and a sell-out after that. Maybe it will be SV and a sell-out but the last thing it will ever be is FA and SV at Ferrari.

        Back in 95 AN didn’t nearly have the CV that he has now, but if he had then perhaps MS would have ended up with him. But AN wasn’t quite the known entity that he would soon become, and Max and Bernie had far bigger plans to end the 16 year (at the time) WDC drought at Ferrari post-Senna. Ask yourselves why MS would even leave Benetton where he had just ‘won’ 2 WDCs to go to a team that hadn’t won a WDC in 16 years. Answer…mega bucks, mega contract that included much of his crew from Benetton, and a subservient teammate, which then gave them the green flag to go ahead and build him a designer car…and let the numbers compilation begin. And before long, the likes of Patrick Head was saying, ‘what a shame they forgo the spirit of racing for the sake of share value.’

        1. Thats funny? i remember patrick head calling the scumi/Ferrari combination a class act.

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.