Vettel: “You don’t want any gifts”

2013 F1 season

Sebastian Vettel, Red Bull, Bahrain International Circuit, 2013Sebastian Vettel says the thrill of winning would be diminished if he felt his success was being handed to him.

Speaking to NBC last weekend, Vettel said: “Of course a win is always exciting. But you don’t want to win, how can I say, the wrong way.”

Vettel, who scored a controversial win in Malaysia after overtaking his team mate when he’d been told not to, said: “You want to work for it and you want to make sure that you get the feeling you really achieved the win because you worked for it.”

“You don’t want any gifts, that’s for sure, because it just doesn’t feel the same,” Vettel added. “If anybody puts me a piece of paper here and says ‘sign here, you’ll win the race’ or ‘sign here, you’ll win the championship’ – ultimately in a way that’s the target, to win the championship. But where the excitement when you sign a piece of paper and you know the result before going into the race?”

“I think the thrill you wait for when the lights are on, when the lights go off, to start racing, the thrill once you’re in the race, to fight for position, make sure you’re consistent, you look after yourself, after the car, the tyres etc… and you fight and race hard until the end. And when you cross the line then and you win the race that’s the biggest satisfaction you can get.”

“So I think we’d lose a lot of the excitement and the thrill if you just write the story beforehand.”

“Sometimes it doesn’t help telling the truth”

Following the Malaysia fall-out Vettel said he accept it wasn’t always possible for him to get his point across clearly in the media:

“I think first of all you have to some degree limited input on how much you can change or influence your image. Because ultimately people have the right to make up their own minds. For sure with the situation with the media as it is they obviously have the power to make things come across the wrong way.

“But I think the most important is that deep down yourself you know the truth. Sometimes it doesn’t help telling the truth because people are maybe not ready for it or not really listening. I think controversy is always more popular than probably the truth. But I think these things they equal out.

“It’s a long process, it’s a long career probably people have in Formula One. It’s a long season as well so with all the stuff going on sometimes of course you feel why people don’t get what’s really going on. But then, as I said, the most important is really that you know for yourself. The one thing I really care about is that the team knows, the people I work with, the people I enjoy my time here together with, that they really know what’s going on.”

Vettel is one of the three drivers on the grid who does not use Twitter: “I’m not a fan of social media,” he admitted.

“Some people like it, some people don’t. I don’t judge anybody but it’s not made for me, I don’t see the need to tell everyone what I’m doing.”

2013 F1 season


Browse all 2013 F1 season articles

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free

228 comments on Vettel: “You don’t want any gifts”

1 2 3
  1. Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 26th April 2013, 17:21

    Good for him that he’s telling everyone how he feels and what he thinks. Sad he didn’t do it in the podium at Malaysia… it’d have been GREAT to see the two of them speak their minds and putting down fire with gasoline :P.

    • Commendatore (@commendatore) said on 26th April 2013, 17:43

      +1
      I remember what Schumi did at the Austrian’s 2002 GP podium ceremony.
      While he stood in embarrassment, he forced the rightful owner – Rubens to the top step, knowing he would earn himself a penaly. Vettel on the other hand, did nothing of the sort, he even smiled like he deseved the victory! It was the most disgusting and most miserable podium I’ve seen in recent years.

      And that’s something I’ll never forget. So in that regard, Vettel, regardless of the number of the young German’s titles (past and future), he will never reach the greatness of the best F1 driver in F1 history – Michael Schumacher!

      I fear I wont support him even if he comes to Ferrari one day, just as it was the case with Nando…

      • Mallesh Magdum (@malleshmagdum) said on 26th April 2013, 17:48

        @commendatore TBH even Schumi isnt tht respectable considering his Villuenve incident and the 2006 Monaco penalty

        • anon said on 26th April 2013, 19:33

          Villeneuve’s tyre left the track and locked his brakes to make that diving lunge, he would have taken Schumacher out if Schumacher didn’t maintain his line.

          Villeneuve should have waited for a better passing opportunity. Same with Hill. Even Hill has admitted what he did was a mistake.

          • Yeah right, that’s why Schumacher was excluded from the 1997 championship, because it was Villeneuve’s fault..

          • John H (@john-h) said on 26th April 2013, 23:17

            From the horse’s mouth:

            “I have some moments that if I could have them again, yes I would do them differently – probably 1997 in Jerez” (source)

          • Ginola14 (@ginola14) said on 27th April 2013, 2:24

            Yes maintaining his line = clearly shifting his steering wheel left to ram into Villeneuve’s car.

          • Damon said he would of waited had he known he had hit the wall. From Hills view point he wouldnt of seen that.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 26th April 2013, 17:57

        @commendatore The two incidents don’t bear comparison.

        Schumacher was the beneficiary of a team order and should have felt ashamed about being on the top step of the podium when Barrichello had beaten him fair and square until the last corner.

        Whereas Vettel was ordered to do what Barrichello did – not fight his team mate – and refused. Just as Webber himself did at Silverstone in 2011. And I praise Vettel for that just as I praised Webbed then. Vettel had nothing to be ashamed of.

        • PhilEReid (@philereid) said on 26th April 2013, 21:52

          I still don’t understand why people think disobeying team orders is okay. Whilst I don’t agree with the use of them (for the most part, the use of them when necessary is okay), once they are ordered, then they should be obeyed, just as a sign of respect, if nothing else.

          • John H (@john-h) said on 26th April 2013, 23:22

            just as a sign of respect, if nothing else

            Indeed.

          • @philereid – it’s precisely because I don’t agree with the use of them that I support disobedience: an F1 driver is like a wild animal, you shouldn’t try and cage it.

            Purely from a fans perspective, I couldn’t care less what the men on the pitwall would like to happen, I want to see the best or the fastest driver win and if that means sticking the fingers up to the men on the pitwall then so be it. I’ll take excitement over morality any day of the week.

          • anon said on 27th April 2013, 14:01

            Vettel shouldn’t be dictated to by his underling (Horner). Horner needs to know his place. Many people can do Horner’s job. There isn’t anyone else in the world as good as Vettel. Not even Hamilton, and especially Alonso.

        • thatscienceguy said on 27th April 2013, 0:39

          I don’t have too much of a problem with what Vettel did, except for one thing.

          Earlier in the race Vettel was asking for team orders to move Webber out of the way and let Vettel through. You can’t ask for team orders but then only abide by the ones you like, especially in the space of about 20 laps. Either ask for team orders and then agree to abide by whatever comes back, or don’t ask for team orders if you intend on ignoring them anyway.

          • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 8:30

            Vettel was team-ordered from lap 24 on not to pass Webber, being told to ‘be patient’. Webber never let Vettel through.

          • thatscienceguy said on 27th April 2013, 9:26

            That’s exactly my point. Vettel WANTED team orders, then when team orders came later in the race, he ignored them. You can’t decide which team orders you obey and which you don’t.

          • othertales said on 27th April 2013, 10:27

            @thatscienceguy
            I couldn’t agree more! It’s that double-standard behaviour that really bothers me and the fact that everyone keeps (conveniently?) forgetting how he asked it for Webber but then praise him as a pure racer for ignoring team orders later on.

          • Pink Peril (@pink-peril) said on 30th April 2013, 3:43

            That’s the thing. Like it or not, TO are legal in F1. So the drivers have to accept that some times they will work in your favour, sometimes against. You can’t pick and choose which ones you will obey and which ones you won’t.

      • Guilherme (@guilherme) said on 26th April 2013, 18:02

        @commendatore I’d like to know what your thoughts on the podium ceremony at the 2010 German Grand Prix… I suspect you didn’t find it ‘disgusting’.

      • Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 26th April 2013, 18:32

        @commendatore you didn’t get what I said, then, cuz I praise Vettel for what he did. I think he just managed it a bit badly inmediately after the race…

      • anon said on 26th April 2013, 19:24

        Schumacher ended up giving the win back to Barrichello at Indy, and gave him some other soft wins at the end of 2002 by not driving with his usual intensity. So it all evens out.

        Not to mention Ferrari had only just missed out on the championship three times in the late-90’s, so that was fresh in the team’s mind. They didn’t want to leave anything to chance since they didn’t know how long their success would last.

        By the way, Schumacher was ordered to move aside and hand the win to Irvine in the 1999 Malaysian Grand Prix and Schumacher obliged.

        • The soft wins he gave back to rubens, especially the dead heat at indy were not good for F1 at all. It was difficult even die hards fans to justify it was pitiful.

          • anon said on 27th April 2013, 14:05

            It wasn’t a dead heat at Indy. Rubens was given the win.

            It was no worse for F1 than when McLaren did it in 97 and 98, when Schumacher moved over for Irvine in 99, when Massa moved over for Irvine.

            When Schumacher benefits from team orders people froth at the mouth. Why are you only outraged by Schumacher doing it?

      • Michael Schumacher as a beacon of sportsmanship and fair play in Formula One? I don’t think so. The guy was involved in more controversy across his career than any other driver in history, with the possible exception of Senna. If Schumacher had celebrated that victory the crowd would have mutinied, more like saving his own skin rather than some noble gesture.

        • @debaser91 +1! As much as I like the guy (and Senna for that matter, who would’ve guessed from my avatar :P) I do acknowledge they were dirty players of the game. Schumacher more so I feel personally, so quite why he is being portrayed as “a beacon of sportsmanship” baffles me!

          • @Vettel1 and @debaser1

            +1

          • anon said on 26th April 2013, 20:54

            Both the Hill and Villeneuve incident were low speed with little damage or threat of harm.

            Senna tried to spear Prost into a wall at 260 km/h. He even announced before the race what he was going to do with Prost, and he held that promise.

            Senna was one of contemptible people in all of sport.

          • So because they were low speed makes it ok? Some pretty warped reasoning there. Senna drove someone off the track. Schumacher drove someone off the track, the intent to cheat is exactly the same. I can understand Senna’s reasoning, even if I don’t agree with it given what happened the year before at Suzuka and the issues with Balestre. That is not a justification but it is a reason. Schumacher on the other hand resorted to desperate and cowardly tactics to stop another driver from winning, not once but twice.

          • anon said on 27th April 2013, 14:10

            Schumacher’s were spur of the minute decisions, at low speed and with next to no risk of injuring or killing someone. Both times Hill and Villeneuve made lunging dives basically putting the question to Schumacher.

            Senna’s decision to take out Prost at 260 km/h was premeditated and should have had him thrown out of the sport.

            It’s okay to take someone out in premeditated fashion at 260 km/h to win a championship, yet not okay four seasons later at a low speed corner?

            You can’t have it both ways. Karma, Senna. Karma.

          • Spur of the moment, give me a break. I can accept a rush of blood to the head maybe once, but there is no way I am giving Schumacher the benefit of the doubt given the amount of times he applied his own liberal interpretation of the rules to get an advantage. The low speed thing makes no difference at all, the fact is they both drove another car off the road. And where exactly am I trying to have it both ways? I think what Senna did was disgusting. I also think what Schumacher did was just as bad.

          • @debaser91 I have more empathy for Senna purely because he was majorly cheated the year before, but again I agree that didn’t therefore give him rights to put another drivers life at risk (although it was fairly baffling also that they changed the side of pole position).

            Schumacher definitely though had little reason other than personal greed to hit Villeneuve: I give him the benefit of the doubt with regards to Hill, but that second instance was a blatantly obvious attempt at putting him out of the race. As much as I like Schumacher, he has a dark side.

          • You can probably tell where I stand on Adelaide 94 from my avatar haha. I agree the reasoning behind Senna’s decision can be understood, there was definitely some funny business going on with Balestre and Prost, but then again it can’t ever be acceptable to deliberately drive into someone.

          • @debaser91 oh absolutely, just I have slightly more sympathy for Senna’s case! That’s relative of course though – I found in particular the ’97 incident appalling.

            Again though in ’94 I think I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, but I can see how it could easily have been interpreted as a deliberate move especially considering his later antics.

      • F1fanNL (@) said on 28th April 2013, 21:29

        he even smiled like he deseved the victory!

        That’s because he did deserve the victory. If Webber had deserved it he would have gotten it.
        There were team orders, there was Webber thinking the race was 7 laps long and there was a deserving winner. The end.

        • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 28th April 2013, 23:53

          (@vettel1) (@debaser91)

          I’ve watched that Adelaide ’94 crash more times than I can count, and still can’t quite figure out if it’s deliberate or not. Perhaps others could help shed light on what they think and why, but I genuinely can’t figure it out…

          And I adore Senna, so it pains me to say that his move on Prost, and his treatment of Prost in general was pretty dire.

          • Nick (@nick101) said on 30th April 2013, 10:10

            Ayrton Senna was one of the most, if not the most, despicable drivers in F1. A dangerous, arrogant bully who should have been thrown out of the sport.

            “If you no longer go for a gap that exists, you are no longer a racing driver” – truly one of the most moronic statements in the history of F1 from an ego maniac with a God complex.

      • jim (@jimjohnny) said on 29th April 2013, 13:47

        @commendatore. Its interesting you think like this. At no point can I remember Vettel being handed a victory on a plate due to their teamate being asked to move out of the way like Schumacher or Alonso. Schumacher/Alonso personify everything you should be targeting your anger towards. I don’t like Alonso for the same reason I don’t Schumacher, they are bullies.
        Vettel is being portrayed in the media as the bad guy, as another Schumacher but this is how twisted the media are. This is what Vettel is talking about in the above article. All Vettel did was overtake another driver, he fought hard, showed some skill and earned the Victory in Malaysia. Alonso would have got on the radio and used teamorders to get his teammate out of the way.

        • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 17:02

          While I get to some degree Keith’s admiration for a bloke who ignores team orders presumably because that shows he is a true champion, a true racer, who will stop at nothing to win, I’m trying to resolve how F1 would be, and how much sponsors would like to contribute, to a sport rife with drivers who ignore all team requests at all times in order to further their own cause, with no regard for the team and it’s sponsors and their wishes, even when it simply comes down to getting two cars home safely and with maximum points.

          In SV’s words above it sounds like success to him can only come in the form of doing it the right way and not being handed it, and yet somehow he can justify passing a teammate against team orders who has turned his car down by team order in order to conserve it and get it to the finish line. Such an honourable and well won victory there, SV! I guess we have to look at what the word ‘honourable’ means to you.

          I’m not saying I’m a fan of team orders, but there are such things as team strategies and plans and ways and means of getting maximum points for the very people that pay millions to field a couple of F1 cars and give the drivers the equipment to achieve glory. SV finds glory in ignoring his team and risking taking himself and his teammate out and passing a teammate who has had to turn his car down, after being told to hold station.

          • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 17:12

            thatscienceguy… very well said. SV wanted team orders earlier, and when he himself did get a team order he ignored it. Sounds honourable to me. I guess he would have admired and congradulated MW then, if in fact earlier MW had been given an order to let SV go and ignored it.

          • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 17:24

            anon…ask yourself how often the head of the FIA, or FISA in the case of the Senna and Prost incident you refer to, has decided mid-weekend to change the rule and put the pole sitter on the dirty side of the track.

            You may condemn Senna for premeditating the hit on Prost, but certainly ask yourself what the circumstances were that lead to him basically saying he was going for it in the first corner and whatever happened was not on him. ie. if you are going to change the rule and put me on the dirty side of the track as a reward for getting pole, then I am not responsible for what happens in turn 1. I am going for it and let the chips fall where they may if you are going to change a rule mid-weekend.

            Ask yourself if the French head of FISA, Balestre, would have put Frenchman Prost on the dirty side of the track for the start of the race had he (Prost) gotten pole.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 18:22

            @robbie

            In SV’s words above it sounds like success to him can only come in the form of doing it the right way and not being handed it, and yet somehow he can justify passing a teammate against team orders who has turned his car down by team order in order to conserve it and get it to the finish line. Such an honourable and well won victory there, SV! I guess we have to look at what the word ‘honourable’ means to you.

            Yep, he ignored the team, and Vettel wrongly, asked for them earlier, which is dissappointingly hypocritical of him. But remember that Vettel had a) saved an extra set of option tyres from qualifying (doing Q1 and Q2 on the same tyres, hence only being 15th and 9th in those 2 sessions), and b) according to Horner, had saved more fuel than Webber earlier in the race. I don’t like team orders either, but there are occasions when I don’t mind them being applied. For me, this wasn’t one of them, given how much faster Vettel could have gone.

          • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 19:15

            Yeah if SV himself decided on his own to save an extra set of options during quali, and SV himself used less fuel earlier in the race, nothing to do with the settings and strategies the team gave him on either day, then I would say SV earned to not be ordered to hold station behind MW. But, for all the brilliance of saving a set of tires the day before, and managing better fuel economy earlier in the race, MW still lead after the final pits, and I doubt SV was making all the decisions for his weekend by himself.

            I don’t know if we have heard why RB ordered SV to hold station behind MW in spite of his extra pace, but I can only surmise that in fact the team set up both drivers with tires and strategies such that they were where they were come the final stint, and that is why they didn’t want to punish MW for the way it worked out. Plus I surmise that the team was also trying to justify orders because of it being early days in the season, and them still being on the steep side of the learning curve regarding their car/tire/fuel economy relationship, and therefore, as I can only surmise, not wanting to punish MW for only doing as the team asked all weekend.

            This is a team that has proudly claimed in the past that they allow their drivers to race and that there is no designated number one.

            Where I think team orders belong and always have and always should as long as the formula has them with 2-car teams is at a time when they shouldn’t be necessary anyway. By that I mean, when the math hasn’t worked out for one of the drivers on a team, and it is his teammate that has a legitimate WDC shot as the season winds down, then it goes without saying that the lesser point teammate not rob points from the one with the shot. If he needs to be ordered to not rob points, so be it, but it shouldn’t be necessary and he should know that it is his team responsibility to ‘help’ the one with the shot by not interfering.

            In a perfect world, imho, I would prefer one-car teams. It would never happen because BE thrives on the controversy, which creates headlines, which creates millions and millions in revenues. But what a shame because with one-car teams we would be seeing all drivers on all teams going ten tenths at all times in an apples to apples comparison, and to me I would rather that kind of competition create the headlines than tabloid fluff.

  2. Mallesh Magdum (@malleshmagdum) said on 26th April 2013, 17:31

    He wanted Webber to move over in Malaysia, right?

    • Harry Westwood (@sirspuddington) said on 26th April 2013, 17:32

      Exactly!

      • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 26th April 2013, 17:43

        well, but when he didn’t get what he wanted from the team , he applied the old quote: “When you want something done, do it yourself”

        • Neel Jani (@neelv27) said on 27th April 2013, 7:07

          That’s a secondary issue. In the first place, he really wanted that.

          Malaysia 2013: On Webber, “Mark is too slow. Get him out of the way”
          Hungary 2012: On Jenson, “I can go much faster than him so do something”
          Britain 2011: On Webber, “Be wise now, be wise”

          • Cyclops_PL (@cyclops_pl) said on 28th April 2013, 20:05

            +1 and that’s how Vettel understands not getting things handed to him on a silver plate. Why most things Sebastian says are in stark contrast with things he actually does?

    • Mads (@mads) said on 26th April 2013, 18:30

      @malleshmagdum
      Not necessarily.
      It could just be a result of frustration because Webber was deliberately, and understandably driving slower then his ultimate pace to save the tyres, but that stopped Vettel from going faster because the team wanted him to keep a 3 second gap to Webber to make sure he could maintain his tyres. Which then meant that Hamilton was able to get very close to him.
      Of cause he said that he wanted Webber out of the way, but I think it had more to do with his situation with Hamilton, and not that he just wanted to be gifted the win.

    • David not Coulthard (@) said on 27th April 2013, 2:30

      Well, we’ve certainly seen Force India drivers moving over because of different strategies. It might’ve happened…….

    • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 8:34

      He wanted the team-order against him lifted. Big difference.

    • Todfod (@todfod) said on 27th April 2013, 9:25

      @malleshmagdum

      Touche

      We all heard that on the radio. Vettel was definitely asking for his gift but he didn’t receive it.

      Its funny that Vettel would talk about the thrill of winning it ‘without gifts’ … considering that Newey has gifted him the best car on the grid for 3 years in a row.

      I actually used to like Vettel.. but every time he opens his mouth.. he seems to be a bigger douche than before

    • In the heat of the moment, you’re going to say what’s going to benefit you at that moment. I don’t like that, but it is how it is: there are probably many other examples of drivers wishing team orders in their favour but who would happily veto them if it was to their benefit (look no further than Senna in Imola ’89).

      I don’t really pay much attention to what a driver says on the radio (although again I should stress I don’t like a lot of the complaining) because when you’re driving a car at 190mph in close proximity to other cars doing the same speed, your mind becomes a bit preoccupied on that for you to try and think about what you’re saying!

  3. The rabble-rousing British press have had their knives out for Vettel right from the start. If I believed a word they wrote, I suppose I’d be seething with irrational rage towards Vettel myself.

    • @jonsan maybe they were just scared that we were going to see another dominant German from the start that’d steal the limelight from Hamilton! ;)

      • The British press had good reason not to like Schumacher given what happened in Adelaide 94 with Hill. Vettel isn’t loved in the UK but I don’t think theres anywhere near the same animosity that there was towards Schumacher.

        • I’ve not seen much of this hatred from the British press towards Schumacher as I wasn’t even born in ’94 but I could understand that possibly – it may be justified! With Vettel though I really don’t see what he’s done so wrong, besides beating Hamilton of late.

          • M Dickens (@sgt-pepper) said on 27th April 2013, 11:44

            (@vettel1) (@debaser91) I’d actually say the British press is on the whole quite deferential/respectful towards Vettel (even though you clearly see misgivings over his talent under the surface). However I’ll absolutely agree with you that he draws considerable contempt from huge swathes of the viewing public, and it started long before all of this team order stuff showed truly the loathesome individual that he is. The difference between Vettel fans, and those who arn’t are the people that;

            a) Feel it’s all down to the car.
            b) Are able to see through his facade.

            This is why those who back him, and those who don’t will never agree – because there will never be a true way of measuring his supposed talent vs. strength of the car while he has a worn, demoralised (and occasionally sabotaged) Webber as a teammate, and because some people will also never be able to see through his carefully constructed, but truly false pretence of a ‘nice guy.’

          • I don’t give a flying continental whether Vettel (or any other driver) is a “nice guy” or not. Some of the comments here remind me of teenage girls arguing over which of the Kardashian sisters are the koolest. This is meant to be a sports forum, right?

            You never see raging controversy on football forums over the question of whether Lionel Messi is “nicer” than Ronaldo.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 18:32

            @sgt-pepper If you feel Webber is worn and demoralised, then it’s down to how much better Vettel is. How “demoralised” was Webber in 2009 when Vettel beat him then? Doesn’t it follow that Vettel would only improve since then?

            @jonsan +1

  4. Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 26th April 2013, 17:41

    I don’t know if it is a clause in the contract or something in the team, but there is a lot of hypocrisy coming from that team, which makes many fans hate them more and more ,i don’t know when this series of hypocrisy will end
    i hope it ends ASAP

    You don’t want any gifts, that’s for sure,

    How about the ones coming from Torro Rosso

  5. BreezyRacer (@breezyracer) said on 26th April 2013, 17:49

    Yes, by all means Seb, no gifts .. as in not waiting till your teammate filled his part of the bargain, and is on hard tires and reduced power, then finally blowing past him .. scumbag!

    Everyone knows now that what you say is all just posturing .. and what you do is pure manipulation.

    • Mads (@mads) said on 26th April 2013, 18:36

      @breezyracer
      Vettel’s attack on Webber was in no way sneeky the way you present it. Did you actually watch the race?
      Vettel attacked Webber straight after Webber came out of the pits.
      At no point did he pretend to hold position.
      Yeah sure he was on different tyres to Webber, and he had more fuel left, but that is strategy. Webber had enjoyed the extra power and soft tyres earlier in the race. Vettel saved his for the last stint. Nothing unfair about that.

      • BreezyRacer (@breezyracer) said on 26th April 2013, 21:18

        Actually they had a gentleman’s agreement with each other and the RB management that their race between each other would be called based on positions after the last pit stop. SCUMBAGS do not honor what they agree to, however.

        • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 8:37

          @breezyracer You know what is also SCUMBAG behavior? Making up false accusations, like saying there was a gentleman’s agreement when there wasn’t.

          • othertales said on 27th April 2013, 10:57

            If there wasn’t a pre-race agreement, then why was RBR asking Vettel to hold position? Why was Newey looking so uncomfortably at Vettel before the podium? Why was Webber so clear-cut on the Multi21 remark when the three of them were in the room? Why was Horner (half-heartly) asking for Vettel not to be silly and hold position?
            Because they were to race until the last pit-stop and then positions would hold.

            If that was not the case, surely you wouldn’t say that RBR decided to give Webber the win just because?…
            Because if one accepts that RBR does indeed work like that and decide on the pitwall or beforehand on who should win rather than letting their drivers race to the end (as they say they do), then how many times have they decided beforehand or at the pitwall in the past that we have no hints or real knowledge of?

          • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 14:22

            You can get your panties in twists all you want hoping desperately you can hang on to this stick to beat Vettel with, but in the whole saga the word agreement has only been uttered when Red Bull said “there was no pre-race agreement.”

          • othertales said on 27th April 2013, 19:12

            I’d be interested to know your thoughts on the 2nd paragraph of my previous post.

    • David-A (@david-a) said on 26th April 2013, 20:43

      @breezyracer – You missed the bit where Vettel had an extra set of soft tyres that he saved in qualifying, by doing both his Q1 and Q2 runs on one set of tyres, and the bit where Vettel was on a lower fuel saving mode, because of his management earlier in the race.

      • BreezyRacer (@breezyracer) said on 26th April 2013, 21:19

        And you missed the bit where they all agreed the race was called after the last pit stop. Vettel is a SCUMBAG.

      • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 19:48

        @breezyracer – You missed the bit where Vettel had an extra set of soft tyres that he saved in qualifying, by doing both his Q1 and Q2 runs on one set of tyres, and the bit where Vettel was on a lower fuel saving mode, because of his management earlier in the race.

        @david-a If Vettel did this all on his own without the team helping decide on settings and strategies, then sure, he earned to be allowed passed MW without a fight, yet he was told to hold station. The team order in fact favoured MW. Why?

        If SV single-handedly saved a set of tires on Saturday and a bunch of fuel on Sunday, why would they punish him in favour of MW? I suggest that the team’s decisions are what mostly resulted in putting both drivers in the position they were in by the last stint on Sunday, and so the team decided not to punish MW for how it worked out. Can’t think of why else they would instigate this order, and I certainly can’t wrap my head around SV theoretically single-handedly, as you seem to be implying, saving himself a set of tires and a bunch of fuel only to be punished for that by having to hold station.

        • David-A (@david-a) said on 29th April 2013, 20:07

          @robbie – Okay, in fairness, I doubt Vettel did that all by himself- I was just a bit miffed at the “scumbag” comment from Breezy.

          But still, for me, the team order didn’t entirely make sense either. Vettel was told to “be patient” over the team radio (after SV’s silly call for a team order to favour him), but then wasn’t allowed to attack later on. RBR managed the situation poorly IMO.

          • Robbie (@robbie) said on 29th April 2013, 20:21

            Agreed. Too bad this team, which touts racing between their drivers, called the team order. To me it either had to have been because they feared the drivers would take each other out, even if by ‘fair’ and hard racing, and due to the history on the team between them, or they simply didn’t want to punish MW for how it worked out. In general, it’s way too early for team orders and yet Merc did it too. Methinks it has to do with the learning curve they are on regarding the tires, the teams feeling their way toward the best strategies and not wanting to punish one driver for helping them learn in these early stages of the season.

  6. katederby (@katederby) said on 26th April 2013, 17:53

    Of course Vettel wants to win the right way, all drivers do but he’s not adverse to telling the team to make sure he’s not challenged by his team mate or telling them to move him out of the way.
    But once you start lying it’s hard for people to trust anything you say.

  7. BasCB (@bascb) said on 26th April 2013, 17:55

    Its great to see Vettel becoming more and more of a person with opinions, emotions and genuine personality. Some of it is likable, some of it is very competative, some is smart, a bit clumsy, but the most important thing is that we want real answers to questions instead of driver thinking first about what their team/sponsors/BErnie/the FIA/… would think of what they are saying.

    I also hope that both drivers keep to it that they will not heed team orders. Good on Red Bull for having given up on wanting to keep a lit on all of it too much.

  8. What’s the “truth” he is talkin about? Is he referring to something in the whole Malaysia episode which we are not heard of yet?

  9. spoutnik (@spoutnik) said on 26th April 2013, 18:00

    He had given his word and broke it. I just hate this kind of people. A guy like Ayrton Senna would never have broken his word (or he would not have given it)

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 26th April 2013, 18:02

      What about Imola ’89?

      • Jono (@me262) said on 27th April 2013, 6:47

        What about Imola ’89?

        who ever leading out of first corner was the alleged agreement. depending on who you agree with: Prost believed tamburello to be the first corner but senna believed tosa to be first corner as tamburello was just a kink on the straight. you be the judge

      • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 8:42

        Senna was arguing a technicality. Senna in Vettel’s shoes would have argued that he was ahead of Webber coming out of the pits, regardless of who turned into T1 first.

    • Haha that’s a fine case of selective memory right there.

      • xjr15jaaag (@xjr15jaaag) said on 26th April 2013, 20:01

        what did he do at Imola 89?
        (wasnt around then)

        • Churaragi (@churaragi) said on 26th April 2013, 20:24

          From wikipedia

          The Alain Prost/Ayrton Senna war began to build up speed after the Frenchman said that McLaren had a pre race agreement that whoever led into the first turn should stay there, which was ironically suggested by Senna.[1] In Prost’s view, Senna had broken this agreement by passing him partway round the first lap after the restart.

        • @xjr15jaaag The agreement was that whoever got to the first corner first would not be challenged on the first lap, so there wasn’t a crash. The problem came because the race got restarted because Gerhard Berger had a massive crash at Tamburello. Senna kept the lead from pole the first time round, but got a bad start in the restart which meant Prost got to the first corner hairpin first, but then Senna passed him. Senna justified what he did by saying as it was a restart the original agreement no longer held.

  10. Lauri (@f1lauri) said on 26th April 2013, 18:16

    But then again he says things like “get him out of the way”.

    • FS (@vfftw) said on 26th April 2013, 18:40

      Wouldn’t you? Everyone contradicts themselves and no one is above their emotions.

      Vettel seems to be saying that he doesn’t want victories and championships to be handed to him on a silver platter. Instead he wants to have worked for it, but whether he’s worked for it fairly or not seems to be a completely different thing. In any case, this is yet another example of poor wording from him. Maybe he should hire someone to help him with that.

  11. OEL F1 (@oel-f1) said on 26th April 2013, 18:25

    “Get Mark out of the way, he’s too slow”.

  12. Harry Westwood (@sirspuddington) said on 26th April 2013, 18:28

    Look, I respect the fact that he disobeyed the team and fought Mark because we must all remember, Mark would’ve done the same (and has done, British GP 2011) and it provided one the best battles I’ve ever seen. The reason people (myself included) don’t like Vettel is that he has this tendency to whine and complain more than most other drivers, so I think for people to say it’s “the british this and the british press that” because it’s not and to say so is incredibly immature. I’m entitled to MY OWN opinion and you’re entitled to yours, I won’t try and force mine upon you. Don’t get me wrong, I know that he’s sensational behind the wheel of an F1 car, I mean I don’t like when people say “It’s the car not the driver” Because if that was the case, where was Webber in 2011? I don’t think Vettel should be ashamed of what he did in Malaysia.

    • @sirspuddington – fair play to you then: I don’t like Button for that very reason of complaining but again I couldn’t care less if people liked Vettel but I do care that they respect his abilities which you evidently do so well done.

    • Churaragi (@churaragi) said on 26th April 2013, 20:37

      so I think for people to say it’s “the british this and the british press that” because it’s not and to say so is incredibly immature.

      To suggest people can’t have their opinions influenced by others is to suggest a man can be an island.

      Sorry but you have no argument against it, like it or not the opinions of others and the environment affects everyone. That is where herd mentality comes from, and that is where conformity comes from(this is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments )

      Even when people know they are right and have a strong opinion or view, if the group or the environment does not support that view, it becomes very hard for the individual to keep that view.

      If you have tons of sources telling you something, but you believe something else, only few people will actualy be able to hold on to their view and not conform.

      Besides, there is nothing to suggest a view is honest but rather an attempt of being different just because the person wishes it so. In this case holding a contrary view itself is the goal, rather than reaching a personal view by analyzing its merit.

      In essence, the opinions of others matters and this effect is incredibly powerful regardless of what you think.

  13. Blackmamba (@blackmamba) said on 26th April 2013, 19:18

    Newey has been giving Seb very good gifts for the last 3 years indeed, and this year’s gift is already proving to be just as big a hit as the previous ladies.

  14. anon said on 26th April 2013, 19:28

    Who cares. The team should have backed Vettel 100% and allowed him to fight Webber for the win. Vettel’s the reason for the last three championships. In the hands of Hamilton or Alonso, Red Bull would have two drivers championships at most.

    • Hamilton for sure (we all remember how dismal 2011 was) but maybe Alonso could’ve got three – as much as I don’t like him I have to admit he’s bloody good…

      • D (@f190) said on 26th April 2013, 19:50

        I’m not so sure. We’ve seen some stupid mistakes from both drivers and even Vettel at times. When red bull had such a pace advantage in 2011 I think both Hamilton and Alonso could have easily brought home the championship. Hamilton had a shocking last half of 2011, but to say that he would do the same in the red bull is not really realistic.

        • @f190 – true, the RB7 did have a definite pace advantage but honestly I feel there were a lot of wins Hamilton wouldn’t have got the way he was driving a lot of the time. Although most of it was crashing into Massa, so perhaps he would’ve been far enough ahead ;)

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 26th April 2013, 20:25

            In the hands of Hamilton or Alonso, Red Bull would have two drivers championships at most.

            Ha, laughable.

            The RB6 in 2010 was dominant in half the races on raw pace alone. If Hamilton or Alonso had driven that car, the WDC chase would’ve ended several races before Abu Dhabi.

            RB7 in 2011 – no explanation needed. Anyone from Hamilton, Alonso, Raikkonen, Button or even Rosberg would’ve been WDC in that car IMO.

            2012 is the most debatable. However, given that Alonso only finished 3 points behind in inferior machinry, it’s safe to say that he should probably have won the WDC in the RB8, same with Hamilton, who made absolutely no mistakes that year.

          • Hamilton was nt at his best in 2011 but still I think he would ‘ve won the title if he was driving RB7.. Maybe he would’ve won less races than Vettel managed to …

            I cant see anybody apart from Hamilton and Alonso in the current drivers winning 3 straight titles if they were driving a Redbull instead of vettel..

          • xjr15jaaag (@xjr15jaaag) said on 26th April 2013, 20:48

            @kingshark
            2010: the RB6 (the title winning RB6 driven by Vettel) had so many reliability problems over the course of the season which lost him an incrtedible amount of points:
            Bahrain: spark plug failure: P1-P4
            Australia: Brake disc explosion: P1-DNF
            Spain: An incredibly high wearing front left brake: P2-P3
            Turkey: Rear anti-roll bar failure in quali: Potential P1-P3
            Monaco: Cracked chassis: Potentially P1-P2
            Monza: Brakes sticking on: No real change of position
            Korea: Massive engine failure: P1-DNF
            Total theorhetical loss of points: About 80 points lost.
            Very few drivers could have made up that amount of ground on their rivals to win the title, but Vettel did; Hamilton and Alonso would have lost their rag in a massive way I reckon.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 26th April 2013, 21:00

            @kingshark

            The RB6 in 2010 was dominant in half the races on raw pace alone. If Hamilton or Alonso had driven that car, the WDC chase would’ve ended several races before Abu Dhabi.

            Without car reliability issues, it would have ended several races before Abu Dhabi with Vettel anyway. Alonso in particular didn’t have an error free season, like Vettel didn’t have an error free year.

            RB7 in 2011 – no explanation needed. Anyone from Hamilton, Alonso, Raikkonen, Button or even Rosberg would’ve been WDC in that car IMO.

            None of them bar possibly Alonso would have won as dominantly as Vettel that year. Hamilton’s form was dismal, Button was still only a bit better, Rosberg is untested at being in a winning car/position, so I could even see Ham/But/Ros being pushed very close by Vettel/Alonso/Raikkonen (on his 2012 form), if the latter 3 were in the 2011 Mclaren (which was further ahead of the F150 than But/Ham showed imo).

            I can honestly only see Alonso, winning 3 in a row with RBR, with Hamilton dropping 2011. Raikkonen is harder to gauge, since he wasn’t even in the sport for a while, nor was he all that consistent in 08/09.

          • @kingshark what @david-a said.

    • vishy (@vishy) said on 26th April 2013, 20:46

      A statement with no backing. Obviously you are a die hard vettel fan.

      • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 26th April 2013, 21:30

        @david-a
        Fair ’nuff explanation.
        xjr15jaaag

        Total theorhetical loss of points: About 80 points lost.
        Very few drivers could have made up that amount of ground on their rivals to win the title, but Vettel did; Hamilton and Alonso would have lost their rag in a massive way I reckon.

        That doesn’t change the fact that inspite of the 80 points loss, the RB6 was easily the the car to have on raw pace alone.

        Bahrain – fastest, though Ferrari were close
        Australia – fastest
        Malaysia – fastest
        China – Not fastest in the race.
        Spain – fastest
        Monaco – fastest
        Turkey – equal fastest to McLaren
        Canada – Slower than McLaren and Ferrari.
        Valencia – fastest
        Great Britain – fastest
        Germany – Ferrari were quicker.
        Hungary – fastest
        Belgium – equal fastest with McLaren
        Monza – Slower than Ferrari and McLaren
        Singapore – equal fastest with Ferrari
        Japan – fastest
        Korea – fastest
        Brazil – fastest
        Abu Dhabi – fastest, though McLaren were close.

        A car with such tremendous speed, with our without reliability issues, clearly should’ve won the championship IMO. Vettel did well despite his bad luck, but also made a handful of mistakes (not saying Alonso was flawless).

        • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 26th April 2013, 21:31

          My response was to @xjr15jaaag

          • celeste (@celeste) said on 26th April 2013, 23:35

            @kingshark just wanted to point out that the RBR in 2011 was fast in Vettel´s hands… in Webber´s it was a joke of a car…

          • celeste (@celeste) said on 27th April 2013, 0:23

            @kingshark Because that Brasil win was really earned by Webber ;);) ;)

            And maybe you are right, it wasn´t a joke, but it wasn´t a monster, in Webber´s hands RBR would have only won 3 races. So I don´t see a reason to believe every competent driver would have won a Championshio in that car, unless you are saying Webber isn´t competent…
            Aus- Vettel 1, Webber 5
            Mal-Vet1, Web 4
            Chi- Vet 2, Web 3
            Tur-Vet 1, Web 2Spa-Vet 1, Web 4
            Mon-Vet 1, Web 4
            Can- Vet 2, Web 3
            Eur-Vet 1, Web 3
            GBr-Vet 2, Web 3
            Ger-Vet 4, Web 3
            Hun-Vet 2, Web 5
            Bel- Vet 1, Web 2
            Ita-Vet 1, Web DNF
            Sin- Vet 1, Web 3
            Jpn-Vet 3, Web 4
            Kor-Vet 1, Web 3
            Ind- Vet 1, Web 4
            Abu-Vet DNF, Web 4
            Bra- Vet 2, Web 1

          • F1fanNL (@) said on 28th April 2013, 21:53

            @celeste

            +1

        • @kingshark – just look to the McLaren MP4-27 to show the importance of reliability.

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 26th April 2013, 22:28

            @vettel1
            I definitely wouldn’t consider the MP4-27 to be in the same league as the RB8 when it comes down to raw speed though. The RB8, on raw pace, was the car to have in 15 out of 19 races in 2010; with China, Canada, Germany and Italy being the only exception. The MP4-27 was slower than the best car in many more races in 2012.

            That being said, I do agree that Vettel drove well in 2010, he had a lot of reliability problems but he still kept his cool despite all of that.

          • @kingshark of course – the RB*6 was faster relative to the field than the RB7!

            I was very impressed by the way Vettel managed to keep his composure despite all the misfortune he had faced, which is a quality I also admired on Hamilton last year.

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 27th April 2013, 0:04

            @celeste
            A joke of a car in Webber’s hands?

            Webber won a race and finished the championship in 3rd place, he scored a total of 10 podiums, 3 pole positions, 7 fastest laps, and 258 points.

            It was anything but a joke of a car. A joke of a car does not simply score 650 constructors’ championship points.

          • F1fanNL (@) said on 28th April 2013, 21:55

            @kingshark

            A joke of a car in Webber’s hands?

            Webber won a race

            WOW! He won a race. That clearly means it was by far the best car on the grid.

        • mnmracer (@mnmracer) said on 27th April 2013, 8:48

          Kingshark, weren’t you on another forum defending Hamilton and why you can’t expect someone to win the championship with poor reliability? :lol:

        • anon said on 27th April 2013, 17:14

          Someone is drinking the Alonso kool aid…

          There wasn’t much between the top three teams in 2010. Just flat out lies to suggest the Red Bull was dominant. Ferrari were getting a lot of 1-2’s and 1-3’s. The Ferrari definitely had the (small) edge the last half of the season.

          The veteran Alonso choked. Got stuck behind Petrov. Team was on the radio pleading with him to pass. He couldn’t. The young guy in his third full season got the job done though. He was the only one of the top drivers that didn’t crack under the pressure.

          Repeated it last year too. Alonso blew the championship with his qualification in Abu Dhabi. Vettel on the other hand goes from 22 to 3. Then in Brazil on a wet track, Vettel saves the championship by going from last to 6 with a damaged car. All the pressure on him, everything to lose and he keeps it together to make history winning three in a row.

          Alonso came to Ferrari because his technical expertise. Because Kimi didn’t work well with the engineers (compared to Schumacher anyway). Where has it got Ferrari? No closer to winning a championship than they did with Massa in 08.

          Instead Ferrari have to sit there while Alonso constantly rubbishes the car because ever since his Renault days Alonso has abided by the theory of under-promise and over-deliver. Call yourself a samurai and the gullible public will see you as some brave fighter that “always gives 100%” because you know, other top drivers don’t give 100% right??? Other drivers don’t like winning races and championships right???

          • I completely agree with regards to the pressure: Vettel handles it far better than anyone else, which is why he just keeps getting stronger as the season progresses. That quality had undoubtably won him two titles.

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 27th April 2013, 19:45

            There wasn’t much between the top three teams in 2010. Just flat out lies to suggest the Red Bull was dominant. Ferrari were getting a lot of 1-2′s and 1-3′s. The Ferrari definitely had the (small) edge the last half of the season.

            No they did not. On raw pace, Red Bull was definitely fastest, reliability was the only reason to why RBR did not dominate both championships.

            Germany – Ferrari
            Hungary – Red Bull
            Belgium – Red Bull
            Italy – Ferrari
            Singapore – Equal
            Japan – Red Bull
            Korea – Red Bull
            Brazil – Red Bull
            Abu Dhabi – Red Bull

            Where was Ferrari’s “small edge” in the second half of the season?

            The veteran Alonso choked. Got stuck behind Petrov. Team was on the radio pleading with him to pass. He couldn’t. The young guy in his third full season got the job done though. He was the only one of the top drivers that didn’t crack under the pressure.

            Hamilton couldn’t pass Kubica either. Do you even remember how tough it was to pass in F1 before DRS? The Renault’s were impossible to overtake in Abu Dhabi unless they made a mistake, which neither Kubica nor Petrov did.

            Repeated it last year too. Alonso blew the championship with his qualification in Abu Dhabi. Vettel on the other hand goes from 22 to 3. Then in Brazil on a wet track, Vettel saves the championship by going from last to 6 with a damaged car. All the pressure on him, everything to lose and he keeps it together to make history winning three in a row.

            Alonso blew the championship how? He finished 2nd in Abu Dhabi, which was probably the maximum his car could achieve. Vettel crashed multiple times that race, once with a Williams and once with the DRS board. He was lucky that the SC came out at the right time on both occasions.

            Regarding Vettel’s drive in Brazil, he nearly threw away what should have been an easy championship. Why was he driving with a damaged car to begin with? He collided with Senna, which was according to Martin Brundle, his fault.

            Alonso out-scored Vettel by 10 points in the final 3 races of 2012 despite driving a slower car. Who really choked that year?

          • Vettel does handle pressure well… but to say he handles pressure better than anyone else is completely baseless… I know you are gonna come up with the excuse that he won 3 straight titles and he got better and better towards the end of the season…

            Vettel’s titles are a result of a very fast driver driving a very fast car… and he deserves a lot of credit for the 3 titles( Which many people dont give him)… But there is absolutely nothing to suggest he handles pressure better than everyone.. the Redbulls always seem to get better by the end of the year (2010 and 2012 are very good examples) and being the better driver in the team he reaps the benefit… and that’s what world class drivers do.. when you have the machinery make full use of it… In Redbull’s and Vettel’s case they seem to have the best machinery towards the back end of the season(2010 their reliability was much better in the sec half and in 2012 their pace improved and they were the fastest for a few races except brazil)…

          • Kingshark (@kingshark) said on 28th April 2013, 22:39

            @F1fannl

            WOW! He won a race. That clearly means it was by far the best car on the grid.

            He also had 3 pole positions, 7 fastest laps, and 10 podiums in that car. He also scored 258 points and finished the championship ahead of Alonso, inspite of the fact that Mark has never been and will never be a true top driver.

            Are people really questioning if the Red Bull was really the car to have in 2011?

  15. Shena (@shena) said on 26th April 2013, 19:32

    I guess Seb’s former physical trainer said it better in the recent interview.

    “Of course, the first championship is a great experience but in the end it is never about the championship,” he says. “The coolest thing is the road to success. You always remember the first GP victory in China for Red Bull. The emotions of the mechanics and people who had been years in F1 and had never won anything. But the biggest thing for me was always to see behind the success. I saw how badly Sebastian wanted to win and how much work he was putting into making his dream come true. He was like a machine when were training. And He was analyzing his driving, working with engineers, mechanics. Also, the coolest thing is when you see the up and downs. You saw the blown engine in Korea, you felt the pressure and anger when Sebastian and Mark crashed in Turkey. You have seen also the days when the driver is so tired that you have to push him through training, ask him to put everything in when it is tough. I love the motivating part, or the time when you have to cool the driver before race. Sometimes you fight, sometimes you are laughing, sometimes crying together but always you have the dream what you are working for together”

    Or from the man himself at the end of the last season
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=zjI6t16XPlg#t=696s
    “Look back and realize what we have achieved as a team, and the last 3-4 years winning so much. But then the way we did it as well. It’s not just the fact, the number you can read up in the book or in statistics. It’s the emotions we have, the time we spent together, the memories we share together. That’s what makes it really really special and that’s something that no one can take away from you.”

1 2 3

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.