Decision time looms for Alonso

by Andrew Benson -

BBC Sport 17 September 2008

 

Fernando Alonso has been at the heart of the Formula One driver market "silly season" all summer and the double world champion’s future is beginning to come into slightly sharper focus.

 

Ferrari’s decision to extend world champion Kimi Raikkonen’s contract until the end of 2010 caught most in F1 by surprise – it had long been expected that Alonso would end up at the Italian team sooner or later.

 

But with Ferrari apparently out of reach until 2011, Alonso’s options have narrowed, fundamentally to a choice between staying at Renault or switching to BMW Sauber or Honda.

 

BMW Sauber in theory do not have an opening – both Robert Kubica and Nick Heidfeld are under contract for next season already.

 

But it is not a happy ship right now and it is widely known that the team are courting Alonso.

 

A normally reliable source told this writer at the Italian Grand Prix last weekend that Alonso would indeed go to BMW next year, and when I inquired as to how certain he was, he came up with the remarkably precise figure of 98.5%.

 

That’s a pretty high level of certainty and it is based on some inside knowledge – he even professed to know how much BMW would be paying Heidfeld in compensation for losing his drive.

 

Certainly, BMW Sauber is the most obvious choice for Alonso.

 

They are the most competitive team open to him, they have made impressive progress over the last few years and are therefore on an upward curve, and they have experience through their road cars in the energy recovery systems that will be introduced into F1 next year.

 

Alonso and Kubica are close friends but that does not necessarily mean they would make happy team-mates.

 

Alonso is known to rate Kubica extremely highly – he even said earlier this year that he believes he is the best driver in F1 at the moment given what he is achieving with the equipment at his disposal.

 

Alonso has found out this year just how much he does not enjoy not being at the front

In reality, Alonso believes himself to be the best driver in the world – and many in F1 agree with him.

 

But would he really want to risk his reputation against someone that quick, especially with memories of his tumultuous season at McLaren last year alongside Lewis Hamilton fresh in his mind?

 

Turn that thought on its head, though, and you can ask the same question of Kubica – would he fancy taking on Alonso in a team that clearly was committing themselves to the Spaniard as their main hope for future success?

 

Relations between Kubica and BMW are already frosty – he has been openly critical of some of their management decisions recently – and if they sign Alonso it is possible the Pole could walk, leaving BMW to partner their new signing with Heidfeld.

 

Alonso’s other options are, on paper, much less appealing.

 

Renault have been anything but convincing this season, even if they have made progress in the last few races.

 

And while Alonso has made some mistakes this season, all rooted in trying to push his recalcitrant car faster than it wants to go, without him Renault would look pretty awful.

 

Honda have been far, far worse and the only reason for him to go there would be as a long-term project, having faith that they will get it right one day.

 

With former Ferrari technical director Ross Brawn now at the helm, that looks more likely than it did a year ago, but the question for Alonso is just how long it will take.

 

Brawn has been making positive noises about the progress he believes the team have made and about what might be achievable next year.

 

But then he would, wouldn’t he?

 

Monza was on fire with conspiracy theories about the Ferrari-Raikkonen situation at the weekend

Press Brawn on the subject and even he admits that progress in F1 is an incremental thing.

 

Surely the best Honda can hope for next year - given where they are now and allowing for their knowledge of energy-recovery systems - is to be qualifying somewhere around an average of 12th in 2009.

 

Alonso has found out this year just how much he does not enjoy not being at the front – does he really want to commit to another two or three years in the same position?

 

Even if he has faith in Brawn, it would be a very brave decision. Good technical manager that he is, Brawn does not design the cars. And some of Honda’s other senior personnel have less convincing records.

 

Logically, then, it surely has to be BMW for Alonso. But his intentions are notoriously difficult to predict, so close-knit is his little group of advisers.

 

There is one wildcard, though. Monza was on fire with conspiracy theories about the Ferrari-Raikkonen situation at the weekend.

 

They all arose from the widespread mystification about why they had extended the Finn’s contract when they apparently did not need to.

 

Raikkonen has appeared half asleep for a lot of this season, and has looked extremely expensive for his £30m salary.

 

Speculation had largely been about whether he would retire or be sacked – not whether his contract would be extended.

 

Why, people wondered, close the door on Alonso to secure on a longer contract someone whose performance you must have reservations about?

 

Unless things were not as they seemed, of course.

 

Raikkonen, the theories went, had sounded less than effusive when asked about the possibility of sacrificing his own title ambitions to support team-mate Felipe Massa’s.

 

Perhaps Ferrari had offered him another year on the condition that he backed the Brazilian against Hamilton now.

 

Or perhaps Raikkonen does intend to retire at the end of this year or next, and Ferrari have made him promise to help Massa in return for an extra year’s pay-off when he does eventually make way for Alonso, either this winter or next.

 

It might sound outlandish, but in the Byzantine world of F1 politics nothing is impossible.

 

It is those politics that led to Alonso being in his current situation. He fell out with McLaren last year and his behaviour has made some teams wary of him.

 

So far, though, the world has only heard McLaren’s side of the story, and it may be perceptions would change if Alonso told his.

 

Difficult personality or not, though, Alonso remains arguably the finest all-round racing driver in the world. And, as one former F1 driver put it at the weekend, "you’d still want him in your car."

 

Certainly he is too good not to be in a competitive seat next year – and F1 is the poorer for having so great a driver wasting his career in the midfield.

 

A lot to discuss in this excellent piece. Any Comments on any of the theories?

 

Kimi has had a number of personal problems this season that alas I am not at liberty to discuss but am aware of them (straight from the horses mouth) and undoubtedly these personal problems have impacted on his driving, the guy is a highly talented racer and I am fully confident will bounce back strongly in 2009

 

I know Kimi himself and anyone who doubts my record read back in the thread where I said all along Kimi would be at Ferrari in 2009 ;)

Edited September 20, 200816 yr by B.A Baracus

Kimi has had a number of personal problems this season that alas I am not at liberty to discuss but am aware of them (straight from the horses mouth) and undoubtedly these personal problems have impacted on his driving, the guy is a highly talented racer and I am fully confident will bounce back strongly in 2009

 

I know Kimi himself and anyone who doubts my record read back in the thread where I said all along Kimi would be at Ferrari in 2009 ;)

Personally I think (and you can hate me for that) that a professional sportsman should not bring his personal problems into his job. And his job is to drive and win (with a Ferrari), and be a good team player too.

He is very fast and talented but I think he has that extra little thing not that had Michael Schumacher or Mika Hakkinen, or even Jacques Villeneuve.

 

Although he was very good last year at the last couple of races lets face it, without the problems that McLaren had (the spy scandal, Alonso's selfish behaviour, Hamilton's inexperience) and without a certain Felipe Massa he wouldn't be F1 world champion (by 1 single point).

 

Of course this is my opinion, you can now officially hate me :P

 

BTW I think it was obvious that if Kimi doesn't want to retire Alonso will never get to Ferrari. That'll be too risky for the team next to Felipe who doesn't want to be a number 2 driver anymore.

Hamilton loses his appeal, no surprise there then.

 

Read this article on BBC website, quite interesting.....

 

The right ruling on Hamilton?

 

No-one in Formula One will be surprised at the decision to uphold the penalty that deprived Lewis Hamilton of victory in the Belgian Grand Prix - but that does not mean it was the right one.

 

The decision not to allow McLaren's appeal on a technicality neatly sidesteps the need for governing body the FIA to make a ruling on whether its stewards made the right call at Spa earlier this month - but it does not address the wider questions raised by their decision.

 

It leaves the world championship finely poised, with the McLaren driver just a point ahead of Ferrari's Felipe Massa with four races to go ahead of this weekend's inaugural night race in Singapore.

 

That is great for those wanting the title fight to go to the wire but less so for those more concerned about the championship's integrity.

 

Many will believe that if Hamilton loses the title by less than the six-point swing that was a result of his penalty at Spa, then the wrong man will be champion.

DID HAMILTON COMMIT AN OFFENCE?

 

Hamilton was outspoken during Monday's appeal court hearing in his belief that he had done nothing wrong.

 

He said he was within his rights to go off the track at Spa's Bus Stop chicane in his battle with Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen and that he gave back any advantage earned before re-passing the world champion.

 

Both are debatable points.

 

Hamilton contends that he cut the chicane to avoid a collision with Raikkonen, and that the Finn could have given him more room.

 

Interestingly, in evidence before the court of appeal, Hamilton said something he had not before in claiming that their wheels were interlocked and that had he braked the Ferrari's rear wheel would have broken his front suspension.

 

Regardless, many of his fellow F1 drivers think Hamilton did have options.

 

They believe Hamilton could have chosen to drop back behind Raikkonen rather than go completely off the track on the inside - indeed that had there been a wall or barrier there instead of a run-off area, he would have done, or not even tried the move in the first place.

 

As for Raikkonen giving him more room, why should he have?

 

He was ahead by half a car's length and on the racing line as he turned in to the second part of the Bus Stop. It was his corner. In those circumstances it was up to Hamilton to sort himself out.

 

And, if there was a barrier there, and Hamilton had not pulled out of the move, the chances are they would have collided, with a high probability of Hamilton being blamed for taking both of them out of the race.

 

It is hard to imagine Hamilton, who is as hard a racer as they come, acting any differently had the roles been reversed. He certainly didn't give Red Bull's Mark Webber much leeway as they fought over seventh place in Italy nine days ago.

 

The main reason for the replacement of barriers with run-off areas is safety - although there is the happy by-product of giving drivers in touch-and-go situations more options to get themselves out of them and stay in the race.

 

But the drivers have to buy into the bargain, too. The rule saying it is illegal to gain an advantage by running off the track is there to stop drivers taking the mickey by exploiting the run-off areas.

 

Once Hamilton had committed to his move, had he not used the run-off area, and instead braked and followed Raikkonen through the chicane, it is extremely unlikely he would have been close enough to pass the Ferrari into the next corner.

 

That is why the Belgian GP stewards decided he had not sufficiently surrendered his advantage.

WAS THE PENALTY FAIR?

 

Whether Hamilton deserved to lose the race as a result of his minor transgression is a wholly different question from whether he committed an offence by a strict interpretation of the rules.

 

While most F1 drivers agree that he did not fully surrender his advantage, they are equally united in the belief that to lose the race as a result of it was harsh.

 

The problem most people have with this decision was that it was so transparently unfair.

 

Hamilton was almost certainly going to win the race anyway. In the slippery conditions, his McLaren's grip advantage over the Ferraris was too big for him not to.

 

Raikkonen's crash not long after his brush with Hamilton and Massa's snail-like pace on the final lap of the race are proof of that.

 

And Massa, who inherited the victory, was never a contender all afternoon.

 

According to a strict application of the rules, the stewards at Spa had no choice but to penalise Hamilton.

 

The penalty for what he did is to drive through the pits, where there is a speed limit, without stopping. Or - if it happens in the last five laps of the race - for 25 seconds to be added to his race time.

 

But in practice this rule is rarely invoked.

 

What normally happens in these situations is that the driver who benefits from cutting the corner subsequently allows the guy he passed to overtake him, although there is usually some discussion with race control first.

 

However, in Spa, there was no time for that.

 

McLaren knew the move was open to interpretation, and therefore a possible penalty - or they would not have asked race director Charlie Whiting for his opinion about it. Whiting told them he thought it was OK.

 

But Whiting's opinion is just that - he has no power over the stewards, even if traditionally these situations have been sorted out between the team and race control.

 

Nevertheless, if McLaren were concerned Hamilton could get a penalty - and given the level of paranoia at the team about the motives of the FIA, world motorsport's governing body - they should have intervened, asked Hamilton to let Raikkonen back past again and then let them carry on.

 

This was surely a time for flexibility in the application of the rules - just as had been the case when Ferrari illegally released Massa from the pits into the path of another car at the previous race in Valencia.

 

The normal penalty for that is also a drive-through. But the Valencia stewards decided the incident had not affected the result of the race, and Ferrari were let off with a fine.

 

The decision was widely applauded as a rare example of the stewards using their common sense - a bit of which would have gone down well when it came to discussing Hamilton's misdemeanour.

 

But the lack of consistency that so angers F1 teams about race stewards was on display several times at Spa.

 

Firstly, in one of the GP2 races, title contender Bruno Senna was given a drive-through for an incident remarkable in its similarity to Massa's in Valencia.

 

And in the Grand Prix, Raikkonen three times ran off the track, arguably gaining an advantage each time, and not one of the incidents was even scrutinised.

 

THE FUTURE

 

F1 needs a clear rule defining what is acceptable when a driver involved in a close battle passes his opponent as a result of going off the track.

 

At the Italian Grand Prix, a consensus was emerging that drivers would have to give the place back and not be allowed to overtake at the succeeding corner.

 

That at least provides clarity but it should be enshrined in the rules - after all, it was an attempt to act on a precedent rather than a clearly defined rule that got Hamilton into all this trouble in the first place.

 

There is also the issue of the FIA's perceived bias in favour of Ferrari.

 

FIA president Max Mosley rejected those claims in meetings with the press at Monza, dismissing them as "nonsensical", and saying the sport could not survive if they were true.

 

Nevertheless, the number of incidents in which rulings have come down either for Ferrari or against their opponents in recent years - and the climate of fear that pervades F1 when it comes to criticising the FIA - makes it easy to see how such feelings have taken root.

 

The Spa controversy was just the latest in a large catalogue of those.

 

And for the sake of its own credibility and that of F1, the FIA needs to find some way of changing those perceptions.

 

Source: BBC news (sport)

If it had been the other way round Kimi would have got away without any penalty.

 

The FIA are bias against McLaren and always favour Ferrari

 

Loook at the Massa incident in the pits at Valencia. This could have been extremely dangerous yet he got away with it.

The FIA are bias against McLaren and always favour Ferrari

 

Yea that's true.

 

If it had been the other way round Kimi would have got away without any penalty.

 

The FIA are bias against McLaren and always favour Ferrari

 

Loook at the Massa incident in the pits at Valencia. This could have been extremely dangerous yet he got away with it.

 

I can post another 7 or 8 of these...... but you get the idea there is one rule for Ferrari & another rule for the rest of the teams.....

 

Montoya-Schumacher Malaysia 2002 Incident

 

(Schumacher cuts across the track from pole and into the racing line of Montoya. Montoya then tries to get ahead entering the first turn and Schumahcer not willing to give up his position bumps into Montoya's car damaging his front wing. Montoya is then given a drive-through penalty for the incident when virtually all the experts thought it was Schumacher's Ferrari who was at fault.)

 

Going back to the Massa incident in the pits, Massa/Ferrari did not receive a drive through penalty when released wrongly into Sutil's car, only receiving a fine, yet if a drive through penalty had been given it would have dropped Massa into 2nd place giving Hamilton's McLaren an unassailable lead in Valencia.

 

Yet in F2, Senna had an identical incident in the pits to Massa, yet rightly received a drive through penalty.

 

From these two incidents Massa/Ferrari have gained a 10 point swing on Hamilton/McLaren. Like many in the sport (including former F1 champions Nicki Lauda, Emerson Fittipaldi, Allan Jones, Jackie Stewart, etc have expressed) I just hope if Massa/Ferrari wins the World title then he/they do it by a margin greater than 10 points otherwise it will be a tainted victory throwing the sport into disrepute.

 

But all of this comes as no surprise in the son of British Fascist Leader (Oswald Mosley "Blacks are second class citizens only fit for hard labour") Max Mosley's last season as head of FIA (or Ferrari International Assistance - as it is now known).

I think the argument regarding Massa not getting penalised is that Sutil/Force India could be at fault. They weren't in a race and would've known Massa would be leaving at that point. Holding him back would've done nothing, unlike in the GP2 race.

Non of this Pro-Ferrari FIA is any new.

 

2006 every decision those f***ers made went against Renault and help Ferrari close a mammoth gap. They still lost to Renault in the end through their own f***-ups and the fact that Renault were the stronger team. McLaren and Ferrari both went to the FIA crying about Renaults Mass-Damper system, and is was subsequently banned. Even though the two-faced mongs had approved the deviced less than 12months prior.

 

The FIA are totally Ferrari biased, there's no use in them denying it. I'm sure the stewards are as well. They have made some dodgy decisions in Ferrari's favour and then gone against every other them. Monza 2006 springs to mind <_<

 

Mind you i'd rather Ferrari cheat and take the title than it go to Ron Dennis, w*n**rboy and FauxFerrari

I think the ruling was correct after hearing about it after the race and from the other drivers perspectives though at the time I was pretty mad. For sure Ferrari appear to get preferential treatment and it is yet another thing the FIA have to address if they are to ever make F1 a truely worldwide sport.

 

For this year though I'm not at all gutted about Lewis - the cocky little wotsit doesn't deserve the championship however the McLaren has been the faster car and imho deserves the title after a decade without one.

 

Looking forward to the night race in a bit - will be good to see a straight fight between the two/three/four? title contendors

I think the ruling was correct after hearing about it after the race and from the other drivers perspectives though at the time I was pretty mad. For sure Ferrari appear to get preferential treatment and it is yet another thing the FIA have to address if they are to ever make F1 a truely worldwide sport.

 

For this year though I'm not at all gutted about Lewis - the cocky little wotsit doesn't deserve the championship however the McLaren has been the faster car and imho deserves the title after a decade without one.

 

Looking forward to the night race in a bit - will be good to see a straight fight between the two/three/four? title contendors

 

Have you watched any of the Grand Prixs this year?

 

It has been the very opposite of last year when McLaren had the fastest car, with Ferrari being the superior fastest car in races especially in the first third of the season, just that they have not been able to capitalize on their car advantage due to consistently making mistakes (such as Massa/Ferrari's error today with the hose) otherwise Massa should be 20 points ahead of Lewis by now irrespective of FIA's manipulations, whilst Raikkonen has been a shadow of the same driver who drove so brilliantly last year.

 

 

Deserved win for Alonso (although by luck, I know) in Singapore. Renault are working very hard and Fernando had so much misfortune in the qualifying.

 

LMAO Ferrari. They've screwed up again the race. It looks like they don't want to let poor Massa win the Championship. they still want to favour Raikkonen? He should be dropped, brainless driving from him. And as I said before if he has personal problems he should just leave them at home and act like a professional sportsman.

BMW wants to drop Heidfeld because he is underperforming, although he has almost the same points as Kimi. So who should be dropped by their teams????

 

whilst Raikkonen has been a shadow of the same driver who drove so brilliantly last year.

... with the help of Massa...

Bugger me, i've been waiting for that for quite some time

Have you watched any of the Grand Prixs this year?

 

It has been the very opposite of last year when McLaren had the fastest car, with Ferrari being the superior fastest car in races especially in the first third of the season, just that they have not been able to capitalize on their car advantage due to consistently making mistakes (such as Massa/Ferrari's error today with the hose) otherwise Massa should be 20 points ahead of Lewis by now irrespective of FIA's manipulations, whilst Raikkonen has been a shadow of the same driver who drove so brilliantly last year.

 

Oo allo we have a debate! I think Ferrari certainly started the season well but as we have gone on McLaren have been far better suited to a wider range of circuits from tight Monaco to a highspeed Hockenheim. They have also been far more reliable in the later stages of the season and I think that's vital for the best car - to finish first, first you must finish.

 

Lookaig at today's race - I think Ferrari need to look again at the lights system for their pits - If the hose man can accidently press the 'Go' button whilst refueling then that needs to be looked at - again. Alonso and Rosberg were both thoroughly deserving of the top two places on the podium also a good race by Glock and DC. I was so disappointed to see kimi charge throguh the field only to throw it all away yet again this season whilst Massa once again proved he hasn't completely got rid of that panicky, agressive driver who we used to see at Sauber years ago.

Am I the only one that thinks it funny how Massa got a drive through penalty today when he was out of contention running last, and yet a couple of races back he gets off with a fine when he is running at the front. :thinking:

Good race for Nick. I really hope can he stay in BMW. Deserve great team, after that years and working in F1.

Am I the only one that thinks it funny how Massa got a drive through penalty today when he was out of contention running last, and yet a couple of races back he gets off with a fine when he is running at the front. :thinking:

I think this time it looked more dangerous (though that might have been just because of the fuel rig) and also, was the pit land not reversed from Valencia? I'm sure in Valencia the argument was that Force India released Sutil so he'd come across Massa (they weren't in the race and could easily have avoided it by holding him back two secs) whereas in Singapore Ferrari were at the front, therefore there was much less chance of the collision being avoided. It's also the second time in fairly quick succession (they were fined last time and clearly haven't taken warning, a harsher penalty therefore deemed the correct action).

http://www.bmw-sauber-f1.com/en/index.html#/homepage/

 

:yahoo: :yahoo:

BMW Sauber will field an unchanged line-up of Robert Kubica and Nick Heidfeld next year.

 

Poland's Kubica is currently third in the world championship standings behind Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa heading into the Japan Grand Prix, while Germany's Heidfeld is fifth.

 

Austria's Christian Klien will remain the team's test and reserve driver.

 

"We see Nick and Robert as a strong driver pairing and Christian as an experienced test driver," BMW Motorsport director Mario Theissen said in a statement.

 

"We are in no doubt that we will again achieve our ambitious aims with them in the team's fourth year."

 

The announcement ends speculation over Heidfeld's future and also slams the door on Renault's Fernando Alonso, winner of the Singapore Grand Prix, who had been linked with a move to BMW.

 

AFP

Renault's Fernando Alonso took a superb victory in the Japanese Grand Prix as title rivals Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa collided in a dramatic race.

 

Hamilton made a poor start, ran off the road at the first corner and was tipped into a spin by Massa on lap two.

 

Both were given penalties for different incidents but Massa recovered to take seventh and cut Hamilton's lead to five points with two races left.

 

Hamilton, his car damaged by Massa, was 12th and out of the points.

 

Massa finished eighth on the road, but was promoted to seventh when Toro Rosso's Sebastien Bourdais was penalised 25 seconds, demoting him to 12th, for a collision with the Brazilian on lap 51.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport...one/7665745.stm

 

After Japan, these are the first seven:

 

1- Hamilton (84)

2- Massa (79)

3- Kubica (72)

4- Räikkönen (63)

5- Heidfeld (56)

6- Kovalainen (51)

7- Alonso (48)

Edited October 12, 200816 yr by Newgi

After Japan, these are the first seven:

 

1- Hamilton (84)

2- Massa (79)

3- Kubica (72)

4- Räikkönen (63)

5- Heidfield (53)

6- Kovalainen (51)

7- Alonso (48)

 

Heidfeld have 56 :P

Edited October 12, 200816 yr by Nick F1