Incidents and F1. A combination that has flourished since the dawn of time. Fortunately, the commendable work done in safety over the past few decades has decreased the likelihood of serious consequences for drivers. And so, after a close encounter between cars and / or barriers, the only question under debate is linked to the guilt of the drivers involved. In short… determine who’s guilty. Nothing more. In such cases, as a rule, reason lives in the pockets of many, who are actually convinced that what they think is the law. Fans are somewhat justified, given that they are blinded by their sporting beliefs. But those who are F1 insiders, who live and breathe F1 daily, in my opinion, in addition to having an idea about what happened, shouldn’t bother to go straight between who is judging and who is judged. But Wolff did it, last Sunday, during the red flag.
Did sending an e-mail to race director Masi immediately after the incident, in the brilliant mind of the Austrian manager meant facilitating the task of the stewards? Provide the court in charge of issuing a sentence with additional elements that are obviously (according to him) crucial as people involved and informed about the facts? What do you say? To all this must be added a clear, at least “tendentious” implication. Taciturn but more alive than ever. If it were a quote, it could be expressed more or less like this: “Any opinions you have about it, Michael, you have to take into account that we are Mercedes“. Oh I forgot. Mr Toto didn’t just go out of his way to send an email. When after a few minutes the Australian’s answer did not arrive, in fact, he proceeded to call him via radio to let him know with extreme nonchalance, and then started a real coversation.
There is no need to reach superfine levels of cerebral sophistication to understand that the plot of the movie is summed up by a precise word: PRESSURE. Evidently apt to nourish a sort of “Fantozzi-style psychological subjection” that the international federation, who knows why (I smile), suffers against his majesty Mercedes, addressing the Brackley battleship with a crossword definition. Perhaps who knows…in this regard, carrying out a sociological analysis on the “F1 world”, an itinerant micro-environment unknown in its true self, could help us understand the mechanisms that thrive free within it. Investigating effects and causes that for me, despite a fair amount of attendance in the paddock in recent years, still remain a mystery.
Returning to the point, I don’t know if you ever went to court. To reflect on how to set it up, what documents to present and what strategy to adopt to find a favorable resolution. Unfortunately, I did. I had to think of everything, considering the existence of specific ways to bring out “my reason” over that of the antagonist. The intention was simple: to get the sentence issued by the magistrate to be in my favor. And here comes the question: since when in F1 can those directly involved be able to participate in the process put in place directly with the clear objective of bringing the result of the dispute to their side?
To be honest, I don’t give a shit about who, between Max and Lewis, was more or less to blame in the contacts at the Copse. In a genuine way, I would have filed it as a race accident without wasting too much time. What I would like to point out, however, concerns the haughtiness with which the German team considers it a “duty” to say or do whatever it wants. This is an attitude that I have been observing for some time now, standing diaphanously in front of me when I think of the Germans. Mercedes need to be right. All the time. And the reason is quickly explained. Thinking that you are on the right side, in practice, gives you a great sense of stability and inner strength. It makes all Mercedes men feel safe and confident.
On the contrary, admitting to being wrong would mean losing and signing documentation that says “we too know how to be weak and imperfect”. A concept that the Germans do not even want to hear about, although they are aware that as humans they can make mistakes too. I refer, to be as explicit as possible, to that obsessive-compulsive need to bring reason to one’s side. Like when, to give an example known to all, caught red-handed while Mercedes performed an illegal test in Barcelona, the team threatened to withdraw from the top category if a disqualification came. Completely lawful, I would add. That’s why, frequently, 1+1 equals 3 for the multiple championship-winning team.
Reading the piece before publishing it, I realized the total absence of an uncritical thought towards the issue. But on the other hand, going back to wearing the discarded clothes of the “Monday Engineer” (click here to find out more), exempting myself from the accusatory practice would not be fair to anyone. For this reason, because I find it adequate, as well as for a level playing field, I also throw Christian Horner, the F1 spice boy, into the cauldron of convictions. Yes, because the Red Bull team principal, moreover with extreme enthusiasm, participated in the “Royal Rumble” style antics set up when the race was red-flagged. Horner did throw himself headlong into the “forced dialogue” Wolff – Masi without thinking for a moment. In his case, however, a slight mitigating factor must be taken into account. I don’t know about you but I can’t blame too much for his behavior. On the other hand, who would not defend their “protege” if put in a bad light in front of the spotlight?
I would be quite pleased to hear your opinion on this. Let me know. After all, in F1 as in life, “it’s all about understanding”. (Cit)
Translation by: Author: Beatrice Zamuner – @ZamunerB