‘F1 is an auction’ says Alguersuari after missing drive

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Jaime Alguersuari is the latest driver to criticise the F1 driver market after missing out on a chance to drive in 2013.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Alguersuari says Formula One has become an auction (Reuters)

“Those who committed themselves with me have given me reasons that I must accept but that I do not share. F1 has become an auction.”

Formula One TV viewing hits the skids (The Guardian)

“For the first time, the report did not publish a total figure for the global TV audience, which in 2011 was 515 million. But the 2012 audience is thought to be just over 500 million, when declines in China and other markets is counterbalanced with countries where F1 viewing is growing.”

‘Axed drivers used up chances’ (Sky)

Martin Brundle: “They all had their chances to shine. Maybe that sounds a bit brutal, but they had their chances to shine. Just like when I got kicked out of F1, you had your chances, nothing else was there and it’s about the fresh blood.”

Rosberg denies Mercedes destabilised (Autosport)

“This season shouldn’t be affected much at all, not initially anyway because the main people in charge of building this car haven’t changed. So there is still a lot of stability in that region.”

Georgie Thompson leaves Sky’s F1 team (The F1 Broadcasting Blog)

“Natalie Pinkham will replace Thompson as presenter of the magazine programme The F1 Show.”


Comment of the day

@Vickyy’s thoughts on Force India:

This team confuses me a lot.

Every now and then we hear about collapse, owners in trouble (both) and just faint signs of second driver while we are approaching all important second test.

On the other hand, the above effectively sounding simulator plan, wind tunnel investment, new sponsors etc. makes me wonder where exactly this team is heading to.

Although, I am very impressed with their (and Sauber) productive use of not-mighty resources which was very effectively translated to results in second half of 2012, scored in every race from Spa to Interlagos, lead for good 30 laps in Interlagos.

Lets hope this team is immune to the turmoil back in India and scores some miracles in coming season.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Steve_P83 and Mister Nillionaire!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

One year ago today Caterham confirmed that Jarno Trulli was being ushered out of the team to make way for Vitaly Petrov, despite Trulli having already tested the team’s new car:

Image © Red Bull/Getty

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

106 comments on “‘F1 is an auction’ says Alguersuari after missing drive”

  1. Martin Brundle: “They all had their chances to shine. Maybe that sounds a bit brutal, but they had their chances to shine.

    That’s true, specially in Kovalainen and Glock cases. I mean, Kovalainen was highly rated before McLaren, but he failed miserably there, and while he held the upper hand against Trulli, when Petrov joined him, they were evenly matched, and eventually it was Petrov that got Caterham that 10th place.

    With Glock is the same. While he was going up with Toyota, he moved on to Virgin and that was it. He spent 2 seasons doing nothing really in terms of competition, and then Pic came along and proved a good rival.

    It’s tough, as none of them were beaten by miles, but considering the opposition, they didn’t particularly shine, did they?

    1. @fer-no65 What could’ve been for Glock had he chosen Renault instead 3 years ago…

      And I agree with Brundle. It may be harsh, but that’s Formula One. Just look at how quickly, despite very different circumstances, Hamilton and Vettel impressed.

      1. @enigma indeed… i really really liked Glock, he showed great potential in 2008 and 2009. 2010 should’ve been his year but sadly it went another way.

      2. Hulk impressed me too and he struggled because of pay drivers (kicked out of teams to make room for payed seats). But that didn’t stop him for getting pole with Williams and fighting for win with Force India. If he makes another good season he should be number one pick for the top teams.

    2. I entirely agree: when people mourn the loss of Kovalinen you could be easily mistaken for thinking he was a future world champion such was the reaction, and that he was being replaced by someone who couldn’t drive a shopping trolley.

      Of course they were decent drivers but they weren’t exactly anything particularly special, were they? That said though, there was more promise in Glock than Razia for example…

      1. when people mourn the loss of Kovalinen you could be easily mistaken for thinking he was a future world champion such was the reaction, and that he was being replaced by someone who couldn’t drive a shopping trolley.

        Couldn’t agree more.

    3. It’s tough, as none of them were beaten by miles

      I’m not sure you could say that in Heikki’s case, he got a chance in a top team and he got smashed. I dont think he performed at his best in those seasons, but as Brundle says at least he had a chance.

      I’m not really bothered about losing Kovy, Glock or Kobayashi. I think they’re all great guys and solid drivers, but none were future champions. The bigger problem is the wrong people are coming in to replace them, Bottas is the only rookie I have any hope for this season, and he got in on merit.

      1. @george I was talking about last season in that bit… Heikki’s reputation had been growing since joining Lotus/Caterham, and he really didn’t get beaten up massively against Petrov either. That’s what I meant.

        1. @fer-no65
          Oh, that’s fair enough, I agree with your statement in that case.

      2. Driving for McLaren when the whole team was in love with Hamilton, was never going to be a straight forward thing, especially while Ron was leading the team.

        1. @cornholio then explain other that have not had support but finished much better than 7th in points driving the same WCC/WDC car as their fellow team mate. Like say Fernando Alonso or perhaps Rubens Barichello.

          1. I agree but your statement has some slightly misleading information: Fernando Alonso did not drive a WCC/WDC car in 2007

        2. @cornholio – Oh come on, Kovalainen was appalling at Mclaren He could only win 1 race, when Massa/Hamilton had car failures ahead of him. He was beaten to a win in a head to head fight with a Toro Rosso (and by a quarter of a minute, at that), and finished behind both BMWs and a Renault, despite a superior car.

    4. I agree, although the issue is less to do with these drivers leaving the sport ad more to do with the quality of the drivers replacing them.

        1. IMO, this might sound harsh, but Kovalainen has to be one of the most overrated drivers on the grid. I mean, the guy spend 1.5 years in clear race winning machinery. All of 2008 and half of 2009. During those 27 races, he did nothing significant.

          In 2008, he won 1 race, finished 3 times on the podium, and 7th overall in the championship — with the same car his teammate won the championship.

          In 2009, he finished the championship 12, and his best result was a 5th place; with the same car his teammate won 2 races and scored 5 podiums with.

          In 2012, IMO he was no better than Petrov, who is perhaps one of the weakest drivers on the grid.

          Despite this, people are still disappointed about the fact that he doesn’t have a seat for 2013? Don’t get me wrong, he’s a nice guy, but has done nothing to prove that he’s worth it in F1 anymore.

          1. In 2008, he won 1 race

            Let me add to which, that one victory was only after his two main rivals, Hamilton and Massa, suffered a puncture and engine failure respectively.

            All that in a car who won the WDC that year.

          2. @kingshark I cannot disagree with most of your statements. His Mclaren days were a disaster as I havent seen a driver fail to meet expectations as Heikki did at Mclaren. If you ask me, I think Kovalainen had a couple of good seasons in his career so far – 2007 & 2010 .

            All his teammates, other than Lewis, were nowhere close to the peak of their careers so it makes it even harder to know how good he was in a midfield or backmarking car. I think 2012 was a real test.. as Petrov is among the poorer performers on the grid, and he managed to give Heikki a good run for his money.

          3. I don’t think Petrov is as slow as people think. Ok, he was smashed by Kubica in his first season, but he improved by large margin in his second season, claiming podium when the car was good and beating Nick Heidfeld, which spent much more in F1 than he deserved and should’ve been kicked out much earlier. I think, that he and Kovalainen derserved to stay in F1.

          4. @osvaldas31 To be honest he was behind getting beaten by Nick Heidfeld before Nick was replaced. Nick was also away from the sport for a year and was thrown in as a last minute replacement. Other than the Melbourne podium in 2011 and a 5th place finish at Hungary in 2010, Petrov hasn’t done anything noteworthy in his career so far

    5. William Brierty
      17th February 2013, 10:40

      This is why I love Martin Brundle, he just rains cogency and cold, hard sense onto any issue. As ever, he is of course right…
      Timo Glock – showed promise with Toyota, but hideously overestimated the speed of the new teams and sacrificed a good Renault seat for a No. 1 role at Virgin, perhaps trying to avoid having Kubica as his teammate.
      Heikki Kovalainen – a driver that requires a relaxed team atmosphere in order to perform. and after a excellent rookie season, overestimated his driver ability and wondered straight into the lion’s den, McLaren. His move to Lotus did wonders for his driving performance, and some of his qualifying performances (Valencia ’12) could be described in the same paragraph as those of Hamilton, Vettel or Maldonado. As things stood at the end of this year, Kovalainen was more than good enough for F1, but he nievely believed that larger teams would recognise his back of the field heroics and that he’d be catapulted into a Ferrari. However it’s the midfield where the big teams forage for talent, and that’s where Kovalainen should’ve gone.
      Kamui Kobayashi – “bounced” onto the F1 landscape, but didn’t really impress when he arrived. A few great overtakes and a few great qualy laps, but all too few and far between, and whenever he got himself into a good situation he ruined it by making a poor start/poor restart/mistake/contact. I think the only exception to this rule is Japan ’12. Kobayashi was given a good chance, with a good team and the rather excellent C31 and failed to impress. End of.
      Bruno Senna – although he could be mentioned in the top seven best wet weather drivers on the grid, he equally could be mentioned in the worst seven qualifying drivers. If you watch him onboard he simply doesn’t chase the throttle all the way through the corner, and for me simply wasn’t fast enough for F1.

      For me the issue srrouding pay drivers is not that Kovalainen, Glock, Kobayashi and Senna are gone, its that real young talent cannot find a seat. If Bianchi gets the Force India seat the runners up in last year’s GP2 and FR3.5 will be in F1, whereas the champions, Frijns and Valsecchi will be nailed into reserve roles. That, for me, tells me something is wrong. Here is a fact. Valsecchi and Frijns ARE good enough for F1, but Chilton and Van der Garde AREN’T.

      1. Personally I feel that being pushed into a reserve role isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Van der Garde and Chilton are, in my opinion, not good enough for F1. The fact that they are at Caterham and Marussia reinforces that. I feel both teams aren’t good enough for F1, and are only there to fill up the grid, as they don’t seem to be going anywhere. I think if you are a rookie, and you want to go somewhere in Formula 1, don’t go to Caterham or Marussia. Better to wait for a chance at a midfield team; impressing the top teams is a whole lot easier in a Williams, Force India or Sauber than it would be in a Caterham or Marussia.

      2. Bruno Senna was a bad qualifier only in 2012, losing 15 FP1 and with tyres Button described as the hardest of his entire career since he left karting. In 2011 Senna was really fast in qualifying, so we can’t say how good he would be. Had he started in F1 with Honda or Brawn he would have a good and solid F1 career, as he showed more talent than Damon Hill in junior series and was almost as fast as Button the very first time he drove a F1 car, at the Barcelona test with Honda.

  2. Alguersuari said that a team that usually scores points had promised him a seat for 2013 last year. I think that must have been Force India – they did have two very talented youngsters onboard, but they must’ve been sure at least one of them would’ve been picked up by Ferrari, McLaren or Mercedes.


    1. Or maybe Alguersuari was making something up out of the hope.

    2. @Enigma I can’t quite remember the dates deals were announced, but could it have been Sauber.

      I’m not entirely sure they thought they would manage to get Hulkenberg when they lost Perez. Then when they scored Hulk they needed Esteban’s money. Maybe they intended an Alguersuari/Guttierez lineup before they got Hulk??

      1. @silverkeg, I think it’s likely you’re right about Sauber’s intention of having Alguersuari/Gutierrez, in which case Jaime has nothing to complain about: they chose the more talented Hulkenberg over Alguersuari; money had nothing to do with it.

        Also, if I remember correctly, Jaime was talking about his 2013 drive quite early in the season, before Hulkenberg’s move to Sauber was announced, and Force India stated their intention was to continue with their two 2012 drivers, with Bianchi as reserve, so it’s not likely Alguersuari had an agreement with them.

    3. I swear i replied to this last night? where did it go lol

      anyway, Kova, Glock and Hekki performance curve was static and not likely to improve anytime soon. That is not the case with Jamie, when he left the sport his performance was on the up. He was getting better and better. He has every reason to be unhappy as he was never allowed to fulfill his potential.

      The only reason there seems to be is his falling out with redbull boss after being on the same piece of track as Vettel in practice. The way they strung him along until every other drive was taken for 2012 with no intention of running him was appalling.

      1. The only reason there seems to be is his falling out with redbull boss after being on the same piece of track as Vettel in practice. The way they strung him along until every other drive was taken for 2012 with no intention of running him was appalling.

        Alguersuari was sacked because he failed to impress in almost 50 races in the sport. Buemi outqualified him 32-14, and outscored him in 2 of 3 seasons together. Alguersuari never recorded a top-six finish, just like Buemi, Speed and Bourdais (although Jaime is better than at least Speed, probably Bourdais too). And most of Jaime’s points finishes came from 18th on the grid in 2011, on the Pirellis.

        1. he set his car up for the race, which due to the (lack of) speed of the car was very clever.

          and when he entered the sport age 19 he had never driven an F1 car. He was getting better and his 2011 and second season end good, and remember he got taken out a few times from great positions, spa rings a bell. If there current two do better this year than he did in 2012 then fine but frankly i dont see it.

          You cant throw a driver on the heap at age 21 when he is clearly improving every race and season. At 21 alonso had only just started at renault and lewis hamilton had never entered an F1 race.

          1. Are you sure that setting the car up for races was down to him being clever? It’s not like it worked for 1.5 seasons prior to 2011.

            The current two (Vergne and Ricciardo) scored more points (and on more occasions) in their first season than Buemi and Alguersuari did in 2010 (their first full season together), with both the STR5 and STR7 being approximately the same compared to the rest of the field.

            And though you could argue JA was good enough to be in F1 at his age, at STR he had to be outstanding, otherwise get dropped. And I’m afraid that it wasn’t Korea practice that made he fell short.

  3. I’m not against team’s favouring drivers that bring a financial benefit provided they are competitive with their fellow competitors, so in the case of the Force India seat I would be happy to see Bianchi (who is rumoured to be perhaps brining Ferrari engines) get the seat over someone like Alguersuari.

  4. “For the first time, the report did not publish a total figure for the global TV audience, which in 2011 was 515 million. But the 2012 audience is thought to be just over 500 million, when declines in China and other markets is counterbalanced with countries where F1 viewing is growing.”

    At a time when F1 is enjoying one of the greatest eras in terms of competition, this is rather embarrasing for everyone involved. 2012 should’ve been a record breaker, and it wasn’t… then what’s happening?

    Well, for one they are getting out of date. Why isn’t streaming (paid streaming that is) available? people would pay to watch races on their laptops, I’m very sure. Indycar offered for free not long ago (not sure if they still do), so why don’t F1? that’d increase viewing figures massively I think…

    1. what’s happening?

      Well putting F1 on pay TV certainly isn’t helping.

    2. Bernie’s still living in the Stone Age! I wonder if it’s the fact that he has that old-people phobia of computers… ;)

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        17th February 2013, 0:41

        No lol. Bernie is forcing us to view F1 in the Stone Age. Bernie himself is living it up.

        1. @tophercheese21 true enough, true enough! He could very well be a technophobe though which is why he hasn’t cashed in on the online market just yet; after all, he only wants money!

      2. @vettel1 I’d not be surprised if half that loss in terms of viewing choses illegal streams instead (I’m one example).

        Why not offering a good, stable and reliable streaming option to people? maybe those that hate their local broadcast could have the option to chose an official transmission without commentators. I mean, you’d have F1Fanatic on twitter and the race in the same screen… that sort of does it, doesn’t it?

        1. Since F1 in my country went on pay TV, I discovered the beautiful world of streaming F1 and I’m loving it 10x more then what I was previously watching on TV.

          Not to mention that my monitor is much better then my TV. :)

        2. i would pay to have a reliable and legal stream from FOM. you could sign in and pick the country you want the commentary from.

          1. I Love the Pope
            17th February 2013, 4:44

            YES! F1 and the NFL are the only reason I pay the $120/month cable bill here in the States.

          2. thatscienceguy
            17th February 2013, 7:06

            A live stream would have to come from the local broadcaster I would think. If the live stream came from FOM I’d suggest all the local broadcasters would be extremely annoyed – they’d be losing potential viewers to the livestream. It’s a competing coverage in the local market which the broadcaster has paid for rights to. That then hits advertising revenue. You’d probably see more local broadcasters not renewing their contracts, and less tv coverage, which you’d then complain about.

            I don’t know if there is any provision for local broadcasters to do livestreams in their contracts, but maybe the questions should be posed to them, not to FOM?

        3. Exactly… I live in Japan, and the only way to watch F1 since the sky/bbc ******** is via streams.
          Im quite happy to do so. And cannot give 2 ***** about Bernie not earning anything from illegal streaming.

          1. A live stream would have to come from the local broadcaster I would think. If the live stream came from FOM I’d suggest all the local broadcasters would be extremely annoyed – they’d be losing potential viewers to the livestream.

            Thats exactly correct, Broadcasters sign exclusivity deals giving them exclusive coverage in there respective country’s.

            Even if FOM did start an online streaming service, It would have to feature some sort of geo-blocking & since most broadcast contracts worldwide are exclusive to the respective broadcasters nobody would be able to watch it.

            Someone above mentioned Indycar, They no longer feature live online streams because of the same issue, The current NBC/ABC contracts give those broadcasters exclusive live rights so the only way to access the Indycar broadcast is through them.

        4. @fer-no65 – absolutely: a subscription service for a live stream that costs less than a pay-tv subscription I’m sure would be very popular and would actually give Bernie the same profit if used effectively. It just begs the question why it hasn’t been done if so many people would like one…

          1. Speaking of Bernie and his out of date FOM. Why do FOM take off loads of classic F1 races off youtube. This is the way way new fans can learn about the history of the sport(and therefore become die hards like us and spend $$$).

            I would understand them wanting to take off any video that they actually sell on dvd, but as they have not even caught up with 00’s to put all popular season reviews on dvd i cant see why they have an issue with them being on there.

            Either release all these classic season reviews on DVD like they should of done over 10 years ago or let F1 fans embrace the sport on youtube and become passionate F1 fans that travel the globe to fill bernies pockets.

          2. Why do FOM take off loads of classic F1 races off youtube.

            Its not just FOM, THe various broadcast holders (Sky, BBC, RTL etc…) also monitor Youtube & have F1 content from there broadcasts removed.
            Its also an outside company which deals in online copyright infringement who request’s the removal rather than FOM & the broadcasters themselfs.

            Its done because there the rights holder to all F1 content, Broadcasters pay FOM to gain the rights to archive material so legally nobody else other than FOM is allowed to distribute F1 material.

            Same happens with a lot of video content online be it music videos, tv soaps or sports so suggesting that FOM are out of touch or wrong for doing it is incorrect.

          3. release the stuff on DVD then. Im not wrong, its not clever to request(who ever requests it, its owned by FOM) for e.g 1 part of the BBC 1995 italian GP to be removed from a long term business point of view. It just isnt smart.

            They are only losing not gaining. IF the season reviews were possible to buy then fine but they are not and thats the issue. soaps are on tv, music can be downloaded. F1 races of the past are not.

            It is probably why some of the younger fans views on racers of the past is nothing like what actually happened. But all they have is Wikipedia to refer to. from reading some online blogs some young fans think the 80s was all about senna and the likes of piquet, prost, rosberg and co never existed or are instantly disliked for no real reason as they are not Senn. Youtube is the only way for new fans to learn about the past as FOM will not create, re-release what ever you want to call it the footage they all ready have. We fans from before 00 had them on VHS.

    3. The only time I did not watch the F1 over “stream” in 2012 was Hungary GP due to I was moving and internet connection was yet to be installed.

      As you mention. Formula One got one of the most dynosaur type of people when it’s coming to communication. I baffles me why we are still not on world wide $5/month live/on demand SkyF1 type package. Considering the exposure F1 enjoys, they just got zero clue on how much money they miss out.

      Of course TV figures will fall, you gotta be living in a den if you expect any different.

  5. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    17th February 2013, 0:44

    I agree with Jaime, Formula 1 has become somewhat of an auction when it comes to getting a seat.

    They’re all talented drivers, they wouldn’t be there if they weren’t, and it then becomes a case of who can bid the largest sums of money.

  6. Oh boooo hooo. At least you’ve even made it to F1 .

    I love Karun Chandhok’s practical approach. He said something along the lines of that’s life and you move on.

    And it was never illegal to have talent. So the ball again falls into the driver’s court.

    And none of this even comes close to the tragedy met by poor Kubica, now to have solid chance at becoming something and have it all go away — now that’s even worse !

    I don’t know why people like Jaime make these provocative statements about F1 — everybody knows the deal when they join.

    1. +1 I’m also getting a bit bored of this paydriver argument, the fact is that if they don’t have sponsors is very likely because they haven’t worked to get them, the better you are, the easier it will be, and if they do make it to F1 and don’t last more than a couple of years is for the same reason: not good enough. I rather a F1 that is this dynamic instead of having the same faces in the same teams every year.

      1. if they don’t have sponsors is very likely because they haven’t worked to get them

        If sponsors support someone practically from childhood, it’s difficult to imagine that he personally worked to get them. Perhaps it was his parents, or perhaps even plain luck. (Anyway, almost everybody complains about their luck, it’s just that these guys have the opportunity to do it in public…)

  7. Jaime had his chance at STR. What he did was fight with Marko over a stupid little issue with Vettel.
    Maybe Jaime thinks too much of himself.

    1. explain to us where he was wrong with disagreement with Marko. and remember they are not in the same team? despite what red bull think and how they claim others use dirty tricks STR and Red Bull should in no way help each other on the track. Interested to hear your answer.

      and also explain why its fair for a team to string a driver along(knowing he had other offers) until every drive in the paddock was gone, for then to say sorry we dont need you.

      1. You don’t argue with your boss. Simple as that. Especially when you are just a pawn with plenty of people competing for your position.

        1. You don’t argue with your boss. Simple as that.

          It wasn’t Jaime that started the argument or continued it, That one was 100% on Helmut Marko.

          There was also zero reason for Helmut Marko to have even got upset over it, It was a practice session & Jaime is entitled to run his practice session without been expected to compromise it to help another team.

          There have been numerous times where STR drivers have been told to jump out the way of a Red Bull & that sort of thing between what should be 2 separate teams is wrong & thats why I don’t think Red Bull (Or anyone else) should be allowed to own 2 teams. Each team should be separate & be allowed to do whats best for them without having to worry about what people in there other team thinks.

          1. exactly! well said. said better than i managed to.

            also i dont see a problem with occasional argument with boss as long as there is good reason. it shows passion for your work. Having been a manager(tho much smaller scale lol) i much prefer people who want to do their best and will challenge with new ideas to achieve that rather than lemmings that never utter a word and usually never reach their full potential(and therefore the collective teams potential)

          2. It doesn’t matter who started it. It doesn’t matter who was right and who was wrong. JA needed Marko. Did Marko need JA – not so much.
            Helmut Marko does not seem like a man you can argue with.
            “challenging with ideas” at the moment when your boss thinks you disobeyed direct order (if we assume there is such about impeding red bull car) shows your potential, right?

          3. so he should just be a lapdog then and be a yes man? oh dear thats not my idea of a character or a man i want to see in the sport.

            And if Marko is directly ordering drivers of another team that is another serious issue that needs addressing in the sport.

            JA was doing his job 100% and Marko got in his face the moment he stepped out of the car. Marko was in the wrong and then childishly made sure he wouldnt get a drive again. Funny didnt think they did ‘dirty tricks’

          4. If you are talking about justice, better leave it for fairy tales.

  8. Never agreed with Martin Brundle more.

    These guy’s all had their chance an blew it, none of them will be missed. I feel sorry for drivers who deserve a chance but haven’t had one.

  9. I think Jaime is being a bit bitter. He didnt exactly set the world alight during his STR stint.

    Yes, I agree this pay driver debate has gone on too long, this is the reality of motor racing. As we have previously discussed, the pay drivers that have rocked up in the past were a lot worse off than the current crop. The current batch of rookies have risen through the ranks and have success in their respective ranks. Ok, not everyone of them has a report card as gleaming as Valteri Bottas”, but they majority have shown to have reasonably good pace. As we learned a few years ago with Kamui Kobayashi, form displayed in lower formulae isnt directly proportional to their performances in F1.

    I tend to agree with Martin Brundle to a certain extent, but the fact is, if there a driver has money behind him, he will get to stay. I didnt think Perez particularly outclassed Kobayashi, but the former finds himself at Mclaren while the latter is out of a job. Its no secret Perez comes with money.

    1. Yeh and perez got 3 podiums 2 2nd places in races he made koba look silly in all honesty.
      True he has money but he also has a lot of talent he deserved the seat,
      he bought the car home 3 times to the podium .I cant believe people think hulk deserved it more lol the 1 chance he had to bring a result home he fluffed it by taking ham out .I defo agree with people saying Hulk had a chance to get the drive but perez was more impressive. Perez needs to work on his qualifying but his race pace is 2nd to none

  10. I’d rather see a Formula 1 of experienced drivers who deliver good racing instead of constant “giving a try to fresh blood” Martin Brundle is talking about. Sure, you’re gonna have new, perhaps interesting drivers to look at, but will that actually improve the quality of racing? Hardly, I say. And now about Brundle’s comment about Kobayashi:

    He’d be amazing from time to time, pull off a few great overtakes, and be on the missing list for the rest of the season.

    Doesn’t what he’s talking about happen to every driver who races in F1 for more that one year? They become stable; you can expect results from them? And please don’t tell me that Kobayashi wasn’t good enough – 6 points – that’s all I’m gonna say. There are no drivers that remain unexpected for the whole time. For me, Kobayashi’s performance in 2013 would be as much of an unexpected thing as a new driver’s performance. In that case, I disagree with Brundle.

    1. I agree with what you say about Kobayashi. Brundle will slate him now he’s gone, sing about him when he was driving. I wonder what his reaction will be in Di Resta leaves. He never misses an opportunity to give him high praise – for not much of a reason other than the fact they are best mates.

      1. On the logic of JA and HK going then Paul has one final chance(his 3rd) to shine and if he doesnt he should be out the door like Martin suggests.

        1. Di Resta will be gone imo .The funny thing is he thinks he deserves a top drive lol.

  11. Alguersuari and his management strike me as incredibly naive. That’s two years in a row where they’ve been surprised by a lack of a seat because they had a “verbal confirmation”. If you don’t get the contract signed and in your hand, you don’t have a seat. Fool me once and all that…

  12. I Love the Pope
    17th February 2013, 4:46

    Jaime never managed to outclass Buemi, and though the latter will probably never drive in a race, at least he is employed in F1.

  13. I love how the same day that Brundle says ‘each driver had their chance and wont be missed’, Jaime says ‘F1 has become an auction’. Absolute gold.

    Once again M Brundle is right on the money!

  14. So Jaime, who was backed in junior formulae and got his break in F1 because of the company that owns the team which has just won both world championships three times on the trot, is complaining about well financed drivers getting seats. Strikes me as odd.

    And sorry Jaime, you seem like a nice chap, but you’ve been involved in motorsport long enough to know that in F1 just having “verbal confirmations” from teams that you’ll have a seat isn’t enough. Heck, even when you have a signed contract it doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll actually make it to the grid! You lost out on a seat this season for a number of reasons, move on, work hard and get negotiating for 2014.

  15. Algersuari should be the last person to complain. He was brought into a team which asked for nothing in terms of sponsors, gave him some three years to show something. Just a hint of potential. HE failed to do that. He had his good races here and there, but overall he was nothing more then average. He was given a much better chance then most other new F1 drivers get, and he didn’t make use of it. He can’t blame that on money and politics.

  16. F1 is staring at impending disaster.
    This conclusion can be made by looking into F1’s official feeder series-GP2. Let’s take a look at the drivers who have been confirmed for the upcoming season thus far.
    Marcus Ericsson-impressed early on by winning Formula BMW UK and Japanese F3. But has failed to shine in GP2 for three seasons, with only 2 wins to his name.
    Stephane Richelmi-only claim to fame is finishing 2nd in Italian F3 on his 2nd attempt. In fact, in seven years of car racing, he has only five wins.
    James Calado-one of the few impressive guys in GP2, with runner-up finishes in British Formula Renault, British F3, GP3.
    Daniel Abt-again pretty impressive, and a pay driver too. Seems the best shot of any of these GP2 guys to get into F1.
    Johnny Cecotto, Jr.-Done nothing much apart from a 3rd place in German F3(where he was beaten by a less experienced teammate).
    Mitch Evans-very impressive and young, with triumphs in Formula Ford, Toyota Racing Series and GP3.
    Fabio Leimer-did well only in International Formula Master, three seasons in GP2 has yielded only 2 wins.
    Julian Leal-Only triumph was in Italian F3000. 2 seasons in FR3.5 were both 20th-place finishes, and 2 seasons in GP2 yielded 27th and 21st places. Not good.
    Felipe Nasr-One of the few impressive giys, having won both Formula BMW and British F3 as well as a strong showing in the Daytona 24 Hours.
    Jolyon Palmer-2nd in an less competitive F2 field is all there is to show. Did improve last year in GP2, but chance of doing a Chilton is remote.
    Jake Rosenzweig- The less said the better. 3 seasons in FR3.5 has yielded 19th, 15th and 18th. Has no junior formula wins after five years. Need I say more?
    Rio Haryanto-not too bad, but only claim to fame is Formula BMW championship.
    Stefano Coletti-Again very unimpressive, has won nine races in eight years in cars.
    Simon Trummer-need I say more. 2 BAD seasons in GP3(25th and 18th) and now he is in GP2.
    Rene Binder-3 years in German F3 Cup led to 3 wins, and he was the only guy to come directly to GP2, whereas the likes of Jimmy Eriksson(GP3), Lucas Auer and Tom Blomqvist(both European F3) have been slugging it out below GP2.
    Daniel de Jong-2 wins in Formula Renault are all he has to show.
    So this is the status of F1’s official feeder series. To think that some of these guys will replace Alonso, Vettel, Hamilton and Raikkonen.

    1. Man-look at the Formula Reanault 3.5.

      I-well see Abt, Calado and Evans one day.

      See that I used your hyphen typing methods.

      1. FR3.5 have drivers like da Costa, Magnussen, Sirotkin, Vandoorne, Sorensen, Melker and Jaafar.

        1. Dont forget Nato, Pic’s bro, Webb, Aleshin, Laine, Stevens and Stockinger.

          1. @jeff1s Do you mean to say the aforementioned guys are poor drivers? I beg to differ w.r.t. Nato(beaten only by Kvyat among last year’s Formula Renault 2.0 double campaigners), Arthur Pic(Formul’Academy Euroseries champion, solid Eurocup Formula Renault 2.0 season), Webb(strong showings in both British Formula Renault and British F3) and Aleshin(has won several titles including FR3.5 in 2010, beating Red Bull Junior Daniel Ricciardo, also a stroong showing in F2 in 2009 with 3rd place). I also forgot Nico Muller, who had 2 strong years in GP3 and was previously champion in Swiss Formula Renault(now FR2.0 Alps).
            And if you were saying that they’re all impressive I will disagree with you w.r.t. Laine, Stevens and Stockinger.

    2. @wsrgo @jeff1s I can see Nasr, Cecotto, Calado and Evans from this year’s GP2 field eventually move up to F1. Evans is highly rated here in Oz and NZ, and he should be a big talent to look out for in the future. I’m not up to speed with the who’s who in FR3.5, but Antonio Felix da Costa will be in F1 very shortly, as well as Frijns. Exciting times, but the talented ones will inevitably rise over the pay drivers. Hopefully :)

    3. Formula Renault 3.5 is looking much more promising, with drivers such as those wsrgo has mentioned. GP2 though I agree is looking rather poor and just highlights that money can’t buy you talent. I would rather see the likes of Kovalinen back in F1 rather than that field of drivers, and that is something coming from me.

      1. @vettel1 I think the scenario a few years down the line will be young boys and girls, searching for sponsors and money instead of honing their own talents in karting and junior formulae. People like Daniel Juncadella(F3 Euroseries champ), Matheo Tuscher(F2 runner-up) and Aaro Vainio(4th in GP3 behind only Evans, Abt and da Costa) should be getting drives in GP2, not the likes of Trummer, Leal, Rosenzweig, Coletti etc.
        I just hope F1 doesn’t go back to the times of the early and mid ’90s. As Mr. Collantine rightly put, F1 is a premier motorsport and only the best, not the richest should come. F1 will lose its very meaning if guys like these come and if it cannot continue to sustain itself as the premier motorsport category due to financial considerations, it should stop.

  17. I’ve read the Martin Brundle ‘article’ on Sky, talking about pay drivers. Brundle says that the drivers that are making way (Kovalainen, Glock, Kobi and the lot) have had their chance, and it’s time to bring in some fresh blood – that’s the way it is in Formula 1 (opinion shared by Chilton). I cannot believe that they didn’t dig deeper than that: clearly the number of pay drivers has increased dramatically over the past three years, there must be an underlying reason for that, which of course was debated by the F1Fanatics on… Friday was it? Formula 1 has a problem, that’s obvious. The blame lies with many parties, notably but not exclusively CVC, Bernie and the teams, but why wasn’t this mentioned in this article?

  18. I completly agree with Brundle, if you have your chance to shine and you don’t take it then you should get given the boot, and well I just don’t think Georgie Thompson did shine. Natalie Pinkham for me had a fantastic last year and deserve the promotion on the F1 Show.

  19. I disagree with the view that Petrov, Kovalainen and Glock deserved to be left without seats just because they hadn’t impressed enough when they had the chances to do so. Not every world champion immediately wipes the floor with all his competitors. The most obvious example on the current grid for that is Button, whose career was a roller-coaster ride before 2009.

    There was not much to choose between Alonso and Trulli in 2004. If Alonso had replaced Barrichello at Ferrari in 2003, it’s very possible that Schumacher would have convincingly beaten him and the Spaniard’s career would have turned out differently. I am not going to say that Kovalainen is as good as Alonso because there is no proof for that. But I believe that one should be careful before dismissing a driver’s potential just because he hasn’t managed to set the world on fire during a certain stage of his career.

    And, even if you believe that Glock & Co were never potential world champions anyway, I think that Brundle and a few other pundits miss the point here. The departure of some good drivers doesn’t mean that F1 is going to lose its popularity or that the sport has now turned itself into a casino for rich kids. If F1 doesn’t have the 22 best single-seater drivers in the world and if ‘auctions’ take place all over the grid, then the sport is not going the right direction.

    1. Thank God that someone can talk sensibly, without some sensational-******** kind of one-liners, like “you had your chance” and similar.

      Why replace someone just for the sake of replacing them, if the replacement isn’t someone who is better or who you believe has better potential.

      I’m not arguing that teams don’t need money, but then don’t make it out like it’s because drivers weren’t good enough to stay.

  20. aaa c mon not Georgie :P

  21. I agree with both Brundle and Alguersuari here.

    I agree with Brundle because in Formula 1, you either perform, or stop wasting everyone’s time and go somewhere else. Formula 1 is meant to be the highest echelon of motorsport, so teams are not going to humour a driver who is merely good when they demand the very best.

    But at the same time, I agree with Alguersuari because there are drivers being forced out of the sport before their time, and they are getting replaced with second-tier drivers who make up for the shortfalls in their talent with money. We’ve lost Timo Glock, Kamui Kobayashi and Heikki Kovalainen whist gaining Giedo van der Garde, Luiz Razia and Max Chilton – and that’s not an even trade. If we could all make a perfect grid, listing the twenty-two drivers who deserve to be on grid more than anyone else, how many of us would list van der Garde, Razia and Chilton before Glock, Kobayashi and Kovalainen?

    1. Depends on the choice of crystal ball specifications? :D
      How do you compare drivers with 40+ races in F1 to those with 0?

      1. @crr917 – I usually measure drivers on potential: if a rookie has good results in the lower categories he has lots of potential, whereas an “old hand” doesn’t have much potential to progress from where they are, so if they will likely remain midfielders I’d rather see them replaced with fresh blood. Not however if that fresh blood is Razia, so I agree with @prisoner-monkeys.

      2. @crr917 – Sometimes you see a driver, and you just know that he will one day race in Formula 1, and that going through the feeder series is simply a formality. Drivers like Lewis Hamilton and Antonio Felix da Costa stand out as perfect examples of this. On the other hand, you have drivers like Luiz Razia, who only experienced success in GP2 in his fourth season, and only experienced it because there weren’t any standout drivers fighting for the title.

        1. I know exactly what you mean. I remember years ago seeing Hulk in a1gp and immediately knew we’d see him in f1 sooner or later (and probably a championship contender at some point)

    2. Red Bull – Vettel/Webber
      McLaren – Raikkonen/Hulkenberg
      Ferrari – Alonso/Button
      Lotus – Grosjean/Massa
      Sauber – Perez/Frijns
      FI – Bianchi/Kobayashi
      STR – Riccardo/Vergne
      Caterham – Pic/Petrov
      Marrusia – Costa/Gutierrez

  22. Issue I have is that Jamie to shouldn’t be disappointed because he brings in money as well as we saw before he got the boot. There are plenty of drivers in the past decade that shouldn’t have had a drive just because their pocktes were lined. The main issue I have is when drivers like Frijins are passed up to reserve, but other new F1 drivers are given a full seat and and only due to money (outside looking in) that is worrying. Then when a team like FI that we know needs the money, holds an auction for the final seat rather than putting in a new guy like a Hulkenburg that can get them noticed again, it worries fans more. The point is the idea of a diminishing return, we all know teams need money to compete with the big guys, and hiring drives with sponsors bring in the money; what I don’t want to see though are more average guys while the real merit drivers drive another season in the feeder series.

    Either way I don’t like it, but at the same time it’s tough, because during a financial meltdown the mid pack teams were brought to the brink, and lower top tier teams had to leave. Teams like Toyota (who spent the most some years), Honda, BMW which are big names couldn’t afford a sport, which means mid field had to adjust to that and find new engine suppliers. Howeve,r with a lack of money, means a lack of engineering resources that are able to fight Ferrari, Mclaren, RBR and Merc GP and then teams have to hire paid drivers. So the issue then becomes a paid driver in an already bad car due to lack of resources before that driver came on.

  23. William Brierty
    17th February 2013, 11:02

    Thank you, Sky, you’ve seen sense and ended this pointless tokenism. Georgie made it abundantly clear that she was completely uninterested in F1 and that she knew nothing about, and often just regurgitated a few F1 words she had remembered in a serious voice, or just talked about “psychological effect” during interviews. What actually was her GP weekend role? She stood next to Anthony Davidson at the SkyPad, nodded at bit, pretended she was listening, and stared longingly at “Ant” before rounding things up by saying something completely irrelevant in her newsreader voice. The only real reason she stayed was that she had a blatant crush on “Ant”. OK Sky, you’ve mended one mistake, don’t make another by giving Natalie all those ridiculous outfits that you squeezed Georgie into last year, you’ve just got rid of Lord Leveson, you don’t need a whole load of feminists on your back now.

  24. Brundle is talking rubbish. He had 12 years to shine, now drivers are being thrown in younger than ever and given only 2 years – so late developers are given no opportunity whatsoever. (And if they’re driving alongside another new driver, who’s to know what is car and what is driver).

    You want the best drivers in F1, regardless of age or how many years they’ve had, and there are a host of better drivers sitting on the sidelines. Truth is, even old man Rubens would still out-drive some of the nonentities on the grid this year.

    1. @2dafffid I 100% agree Brundle has no room to talk especially when the guys complaining have only been in an F1 seat for as little as a year. Brundle was never going to be a champion we saw that, and he got to drive for some of the best teams a couple of them during their peak or second best on the grid.

  25. I wonder why they replaced Georgie Thompson. I always thought she did a pretty good job, especially when you compare her to the likes of Simon Lazenby, who in my opinion, was frankly terrible.

  26. The Georgie Thompson thing seems more like speculation to me still. After all, the blog post does specifically say “this has not been officially confirmed”. A few of us were speculating similarly on Twitter during the F1 show, but until it is confirmed by Sky, I wouldnt take it as truth as that just sounds like a blog post based purely on the speculation to me. (I even speculated that she was not there as she was busy sorting out her make-up ready for round 1 in Australia :P)

  27. Next weeks tv guide blurb reads Ted and Georgie … blah blah blah so may just be mixing it up a bit or the guide may be wrong.

  28. Did ya see what they did there – quoted UK audience in millions in the hope that nobody would notice. Well I have a calculator – and my estimation is a 12% drop in UK TV viewing figures in one year! That’s a disaster! If F1 was a quoted company – their share price would have just bombed. How does Bernie get away with it?

    1. Unethical business practices, totalitarianism and simple criminal acts. How is he getting away with the last one is what ****** me off.

  29. I know this is beating a dead horse, but..
    If we had testing for up and coming talent, I think the grid would look very different. Bottas is a good example. He got Friday sessions last year and really lit it up. If testing was allowed and only drivers with little or no actual GP racing experience must be used, we would get to see the stars of tomorrow. Maybe even have all these “pay” drivers or people with sponsorship pay the smaller teams to test, it would help us all. We see more of F1. The small teams get an influx of cash, and new talent is showcased. It would be a win win.

  30. Ok Jaime I got a bunch of money which seat can I buy ?

Comments are closed.