Has Sargeant proved he deserves another season in Formula 1?

Debates and Polls

Posted on

| Written by

There is only one space left to be filled on the grid for the 2024 Formula 1 season.

Williams’ rookie driver Logan Sargeant is feeling the pressure as he strives to prove he deserves a second season at the team. But his team mate has scored every one of their 23 points so far, and Sargeant’s form has been conspicuously poor since F1 returned from its summer break.

He crashed in qualifying at Zandvoort, picked up a penalty at Monza, then crashed again in Singapore and Japan. Last weekend he spun out of the sprint race in Qatar and – to no discredit – had to withdraw from the race due to his ill health in the gruelling conditions.

In our driver ratings, five out of 10 is considered representative of an average performance. Sargeant’s scores over the past five rounds are three, four, four, two and four again.

While Williams have been patient with Sargeant so far, it remains to be seen whether that patience will extend to a second season. Do you think it should?


There has never been a harder time to be a rookie in F1. Not only has testing been trimmed back to a mere three days – so one-and-a-half per driver – but practice time during events has been cut back drastically. On a good weekend drivers get three hours, but that’s cut back to just one at sprint events (such as next week’s United States Grand Prix) and other format changes such as the Alternative Tyre Allocation have further cut into practice mileage this year.

Sargeant didn’t arrive in F1 with the benefit of a year’s testing programme as other rookies such as Oscar Piastri did. Nonetheless, he’d shown speed and potential, reaching Q3 for the first time at Zandvoort.

AlphaTauri may have tossed Nyck de Vries aside after just 10 races, but he was further away from his team mate’s pace, and Red Bull was eager to get Daniel Ricciardo back in an F1 car. Williams’ shouldn’t give up on Sargeant as quickly.


Had McLaren not pounced on the opportunity to sign Piasti he could have ended up a Williams driver this year. Sargeant’s performances compared to his fellow rookies must be leaving his team wondering what might have been.

Sargeant has not only failed to perform better than his predecessor in the role, Nicholas Latifi, he’s doing worse. Albon has the highest points tally of any Williams driver for six years, so for Sargeant to have contributed nothing is a problem.

Williams have a seven-point lead over Alfa Romeo, but they scored points with both drivers in Qatar. Team principal James Vowles has indicated he’s willing to give Sargeant time to come good, and his status as F1’s only American driver gives him obvious commercial appeal, but on the face of his performances so far they risk giving away points and positions in the championship if they keep him in the team for next year.

I say

This time a year ago Williams was shoehorning Sargeant into every practice session going in an effort to shore up his superlicence points tally and ensure he would be able to race in F1 this year. It didn’t smack of a driver who was fully prepared to make the step up, and it feels like they embarked on signing him prepared to accept a rough period at the start of his F1 career.

For the most part, his results haven’t shown the all-important trend in the right direction as he’s gained experience. At this stage in the season you’d expect him to regularly demonstrate he can be a safe pair of hands and bring the car home, but that is happening too infrequently. His improving qualifying pace counts in his favour, however, and surely is why Williams are keeping the faith in him for now.

As it stands, I’m weakly against Williams keeping Sargeant for next year. I would far rather see him produce the kind of performances he’s shown flashes of so far and make a cast-iron case for a second season. But unless he can keep his car out of the fence, that’s not going to happen.

The dilemma of needing to cut out mistakes without sacrificing speed is an enormously difficult one which has claimed drivers in the past – notably Mick Schumacher last year. Barring a breakthrough in the coming races, two of which he will contest on home ground, it’s starting to look like Sargeant may suffer the same fate.

You say

Do you think Williams should keep Sargeant for next year? If not, who should they replace him with? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments:

Do you agree Williams should keep Logan Sargeant for the 2024 F1 season?

  • No opinion (2%)
  • Strongly disagree (44%)
  • Slightly disagree (32%)
  • Neither agree nor disagree (10%)
  • Slightly agree (9%)
  • Strongly agree (2%)

Total Voters: 140

Loading ... Loading ...

A RaceFans account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed instead of the voting form.

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

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.

61 comments on “Has Sargeant proved he deserves another season in Formula 1?”

  1. Well it’s a fairly short debate, Murray.

  2. It all depends on who is available to replace him. I’d be happy to see Felipe Drugovich loaned out from AM, or Theo Porchaire, Victor Martin or another high flying F2 driver. But otherwise stick with him – at least he’s a likeable chap.

    1. Putting another rookie into Sargeant’s seat would just be another gamble. There would be no sense in that. Then they should rather stick with Sargeant, who already has some experience, rather than starting at the beginning again. Williams are not in the financial position to take a gamble.

      I only see two options, which are still somewhat of a gamble. Liam Lawson has proven he is fast and can keep the car on the road and Mick Schumacher, where the hope is that he has matured under the auspices of Mercedes.

      1. Well it all depends on the terms on which they could take said rookie. If they can strike a good deal for the use of Drugovich it would definitely be worth it. Don’t forget that there were a lot more promising drivers than Sargesnt in F2 last year. Choosing a ‘better’ rookie with some financial assurances does seem like a better choice than hoping their current driver might improve drastically.

      2. Signing a rookie might be a gamble.. but at least there’s an upside to it. Piastri is an example of taking a risk on a rookie that paid off. Sure, Oscar had a much more impressive feeder series record, but there are drivers who can rise to the occasion in F1 as well. Logan was given the opportunity and he failed to shine. Drugovich, Pourchaire and Lawson look like credible replacements for Logan.

        If they want an experienced driver… they would have have a chance to poach Hulkenberg or Perez, but that would only be in 2025. So, might as well take a risk on another rookie for the next season.

    2. Indeed Lee, that is a huge part of the equation we do not know – If they have a solid driver to replace him lined up, then go for it.

  3. Logan Sargeant wasn’t particularly impressive in F3 nor F2. I’m scratching my head why Williams were so keen to bring him into F1. There are so many clearly more talented racers out there. Give one of them a chance.

    1. He’d be a very deserving F3 champion if not for an unfortunate sandwich at Mugello. That said, others with even better pedigree have been ousted, it’s really about performing only.

    2. @shimks Because he’s their academy driver.

      1. That’s not how an academy driver programme works though, @jerejj.
        Teams hire/accept drivers who have potential but lack experience, and hope they develop further to become part of the (top) team. If they develop as expected then they can go all the way, but if they fall short then they will let them go. It’s like taking a option on those drivers.

        I think the rumours that Logan’s family pays (up to $30M) for the seat is more likely a reason he’s got, and might keep, the seat.

    3. He was only 1 point behind Lawson in F2. Lawson was also extremely disappointing in F2 though. So, not a very high bar.

  4. I would like to look at this a bit broader. Either you allow many more teams and we can continue training F1 drivers on the job or we keep just 10 teams but do no longer allow drivers to be trained on the job but demand/expect them to flawlessly enter the formula and deliver added value (so to also answer the question: no Sargeant should leave). This is always referred to as the pinnacle of Motorsport. If there are just 20 seats in the world you surely better fill them with worthy drivers. The current level of drivers in the sport is imho not good enough. Bringing back from retirement the likes of Hulkenberg and Perez demonstrated how poor the overall level is and that there is a need to somehow give many more the opportunity to grow in the lower formulas. F1 Academy should next to its applaudable cause to bring women forwards, also strive to give all a chance to prove themselves, also when their family doesn’t have the financial means. We currently just tap in from the pool of rich kids to bring talent forward. The group needs to be widened considerably to ensure the right level to get to F1.

    1. The current level of drivers in the sport is imho not good enough.

      I don’t know if it’s ever been different, but it’s perhaps more visible with how many racing people have access too. Even 10 years ago a lot of the current online broadcasts, highlights, summaries etc. were non-existent.

      It’s also a normal consequence of having a limited talent pool; there are inevitably going to be bigger gaps between the participants than in more accessible sports. There must be countless of potential race winners who never got out of karting because the money wasn’t there. And sure, even people with money have to do somewhat well to make it all the way to F1, but just getting that opportunity to race in junior single seaters is already a huge deal.

      Anyway, I’m all for a faster turnover rate in F1. While it can never have all the best drivers, simply because some prefer to race elsewhere (as hard as that sometimes is for F1 to accept), it should at least not get bogged down with mediocre ‘stable hands’. It’s also not a good look to have this entire FIA junior infrastructure geared towards F1 (a questionable decision to begin with) and then see junior champions cast aside because F1 for some reason must definitely have more of the same old, same old.

      No, Sargeant hasn’t shown he belongs at (what the FIA considers to be) the very top of motorsport. When you contrast it with great rookies, it’s immediately obvious that they do not need multiple seasons to get into the groove (this year that’s obviously Piastri). But it’s not just about rookies; neither Zhou, or Magnussen, or Stroll, or Lawson (although we can cut him some slack), or Hülkenberg, or Pérez, or Tsunoda have shown all that much to get excited about. And I’m not sure why Bottas is still clinging to his seat either, but Sauber is in a weird spot between Alfa and Audi at the moment.

    2. The Superlicense system also cuts out some quality drivers (Herta, Larson, etc) that could make an impact. Another reason F1 teams settle for veteran retreads like Hulk, K-Mag or Checo.

    3. Coventry Climax
      15th October 2023, 23:29

      Until some years ago, there were multiple routes into F1. (Yes, money was also one of them, but that has still not been solved, with Stroll being the top example.) But it would appear the FiA did’t really like people taking the ‘alternative’ routes, and shut the door on that. They may not have liked it, but the truth is, those alternative series often simply provided better schooling.
      Given the superlicense points structure and all, it seems about only F2 is the way to go now, and that’s just not doing a good enough job in preparing new drivers for F1.
      Drivers should switch to F1 when they’ve proven to be ready for it, not before, and not just because they’ve won the FiA rung below F1.
      And age and whatever series they may come from are irrelevant. Raïkkönen and Verstappen being ‘age’ examples, and the impossibility for certain Indy drivers to switch to F1 other series examples.
      If F1 is to truly be a world championship, than open up for drivers of all series in all continents. Let the teams decide and automatically expell F1’s bottom three or so, to free up space for newcomers.

      1. Given the superlicense points structure and all, it seems about only F2 is the way to go now, and that’s just not doing a good enough job in preparing new drivers for F1.

        That was frequently claimed by Herta-proponents, but it’s not really the case.

        A driver needs 40 points (and ignoring the covid-situation for the moment) they have to get these over the course of three years. So they ‘only’ need a rounded up average of 14 point per year to get there.

        You can get there by:
        – finishing the season 6th twice and 5th once in F2.
        – finishing the season 5th twice and 4th once in WEC Hypercar.
        – finishing the season 4th twice and 3rd once in Indycar and Formula E, and even in Formula 3.
        – finishing the season 4th twice and 2nd (since unlike the above 3rd only gives 15 points rather than 20) once in Super Formula.

        Or better, obviously. Winning the Indycar season is an instant 40 point haul and enough to qualify in a single season.

        The problem with Herta is that he finished the last few Indycar seasons in 10th, 10th and 5th and hasn’t done much outside of that (which would have been a good way to gather more superlicense points).

        1. Coventry Climax
          16th October 2023, 22:35

          OK, didn’t know those exact figures. They make it seem more ‘open’. But it doesn’t feel that way though, wonder where that comes from. Because most of these series are not really preparing drivers for F1 level racing? Because teams don’t seem to call on drivers from these (other than F2) series?
          WEC and E are more of an alternative series for drivers that never made it to or in F1, so these guys usually head the ‘opposite’ direction. Albon could be considered an exception, but he was called back from E before that season actually began.
          F3 to F1 is a step too far and too big. Who was the last example to have gone from F3 straight into F1? Verstappen? Who else?

          And then, F2, WEC, E and F3 are FiA run (rules wise) and sanctioned.
          What about the Asian and Australian series, not good enough? By whose standards?

          Anyway, I feel the main issue currently is that F2 is not a good enough school. Teams calling back old drivers and skipping fresh F2 drivers; that says a lot.
          The exception now and then does not take away the feeling I have about it all.

    4. Moreover, every great F1 driver has been very good from the word go. If a driver isn’t impressing as a rookie, the odds he’ll ever impress are extremely low.

  5. It’s very strange to see that raw performance counts the least when teams extend contracts:
    (-) Purely based on that, he delievered a below-average rookie year, regardless of what his teammate had to offer.
    (-) He is among the top3 drivers causing the highest damage-repair cost, nearing 3 million dollars.
    (0) Even if he could have scored the same amount of points as Albon has, it wouldn’t make a difference in the constructor’s championship as Alpine is out of their reach anyway. However, if Alfa Romeo delivers for the last five GPs, Williams could loose the 7th in the constructor’s and have to settle with massive millions of dollars less.
    (+) Being the only US driver in the more and more americanizing F1, starting with Liberty Media and the 3 grand prix weekends in the US, is surely beneficial marketingwise and financially for his team.
    (+) He brings a certain amount of backing to the table, which might be crucial for a privateer team like Williams.
    (+) He is a graduate of the Williams Academy, and sacking him after just a single season would cast shadows onto the quality of the academy.

    Despite all of this, I wouldn’t necessary be against retaining him for a second season. What I’m massively bothered about however, is that there are so many talented drivers stuck outside F1, hopelessly waiting for a chance to prove themselves, but they simply cannot because certain drivers “must” occupy certain cars. That’s why it would be more than necessary to bring in not only Andretti but another team as well, as an extra 4 seats could see promising drivers getting their deserved chance.

  6. I don’t think there’s a sunk cost fallacy to saying the faith Williams placed in Logan so far will be better rewarded by giving him more time. He’s clearly very stressed about his seat currently and is making more mistakes, which is the worst possible thing to do under the circumstances but also entirely understandable.

    In all honesty, although once De Vries had been dispatched the teeth that’d savaged him inevitably dug into the meat of Sargeant’s season, I don’t think any of the rookies this year have proven as unreliable, error-prone or non-progressing as several well-established drivers on the grid. If the only churn in terms of new opportunities is replacing like-for-like inexperienced drivers with an immovable layer of mediocrity above then other series will profit from the talent pool but F1 will be poorer.

    1. If the only churn in terms of new opportunities is replacing like-for-like inexperienced drivers with an immovable layer of mediocrity above then other series will profit from the talent pool but F1 will be poorer.

      Very true, and while F1 will probably always have an appeal to racers – if they have a nice long term contract in a series like IMSA, WEC, or Indycar it becomes much easier for them to envision a racing life without F1 (which for many had been their sole focus during their teens and early twenties).

    2. I don’t think any of the rookies this year have proven as unreliable, error-prone or non-progressing as several well-established drivers on the grid

      Your colleague @WillWood seems to disagree; Sargeant is the lowest rated driver over the GP weekends so far, and another rookie (De Vries) was just one place ahead.
      And (merely from memory) I think all other current drivers (including the ‘immovable layer of mediocrity’) had better rookie seasons than Sargeant.
      Thus, I wouldn’t hold my breath for Sargeant to become anything better than being part of that immovable layer.

      1. Facts&Stats Tsunoda was even more error-prone & inconsistent in his rookie season, so I wouldn’t go as far as claiming worse than any other current full-time driver in their respective rookie or first full season.

        1. As per yesterday’s round-up, being inconsistent can be a positive for those drivers. Sargeant seems to be consistently underperforming. Tsunoda had some bright spots; he even bookended his rookie year as a Star performer.

          Also Tsunoda wasn’t last in his rookie year ranking, let alone being outranked by a driver who lost his drive mid season.

          And let’s be honest, few see Tsunoda as the next big thing in F1.

  7. Absolutely he does. I firmly believe that Sargeant has untapped potential, and as a one-eyed Williams fan, I want him to stay. I think that Williams helping to develop a Williams Driver Academy member is preferable to allowing the team to become a “dumping ground” for junior drivers from other teams’ development programs with contractual obligations to return to that rival team, thereby wasting time, energy and resources in their development.

    Sargeant’s junior record, whilst not record breaking, was good. He won the CIK-FIA World Karting Championship in 2015, went on to finish 2nd in the 2016/17 Formula 4 UAE Championships with podiums in 15 out of 18 races, third in the 2017 British F4 Championship. I started following his career in 2020 when he finished third in the FIA F3 Championship just 4 points behind Piastri and 1 behind Pourchaire – a championship that he could easily have won if he wasn’t punted out of the final race of the season in which Piastri finished 7th to net him those 4 points. Sargeant scored three poles that year in a season where nobody else got more than one pole, and out of the 9 rounds, Sargeant qualified ahead of both of his teammates – Piastri and Vesti, 7 times.

    He stayed in F3 in 2021 due to lack of funding, went to an uncompetitive Charouz outfit where he scored 102 of the team’s total 127 points, scoring the team’s one and only win in FIA F3 to date, and completely demolished his teammates in the process.

    Last year in F2, he was the leading rookie driver, finishing 4th in the championship, one point behind teammate Lawson. Sargeant outqualified Lawson 10-4 that year, and in races where they both finished, their record was even – 8-8.
    Sargeant has the talent and the potential.

    This hasn’t been his greatest year, granted, but he’s a rookie, and jumping from F2 to F1 is a far bigger difference than any other promotion he’s had before. Albon has also come out on the record to say that this year’s F1 cars are much harder to drive than they were a few years ago.

    With the published support of Vowles, Albon and now Williams’ head of performance Dave Robson, I’d rather take the word of those within the team with access to data than those armchair critics – including those in the media, who have never driven an F1 car.

  8. Strongly agree because Williams promoted him to F1 with a clear long-term intention & rookies generally need time becaues of limited on-track testing.
    Yes, he hasn’t set the world on fire, but he hasn’t been a total flop like several other drivers.
    I especially couldn’t disagree more about the claim in the ‘Against’ portion regarding comparison to Latifi because Sargeant quickly proved to be an improvement from him & as a whole, has performed better, so replacing Latifi, who was a total flop last season, was definitely the right choice as he nothing but held the team back unnecessarily.
    Finally, going back to the rookie reference, people should remember that Tsunoda, for example, was even more error-prone & inconsistent in his rookie season.

      1. You clearly have something against me as you’ve barely bothered anyone else with remarks or other points in an attempt to make me people look silly or whatever regardless of how valid their points are.

    1. I didn’t notice before that the last two letters went the other way around with ‘because’ in the first sentence.

    2. By which metrics has Sargeant proven to be an improvement on Latifi?

      F1 2023 head to head stats: Williams
      Race: Alex Albon 14-2 Logan Sargeant
      Qualifying: Alex Albon 17-0 Logan Sargeant
      Points AA 23-0
      Best finish AA 7 – 11 LS

      F1 2022
      Race AA 15-4 NL
      Q AA 19-2 NL
      Points AA 4-2 NL
      Best finish AA 9-9 NL

    3. Tsunoda showed flashes of speed in his rookie year. Points on debut, 4th at the season finale. He also improved as the year progressed, unlike Sargeant

  9. I’m very sympathetic to rookie drivers in the last few years, but there’s been very little promising from Sargeant. Williams could well afford to pit him against some other hotshots in a shootout test like Williams did in the early 2000s I believe.

    1. Indeed, they wanted Montoya but he was tied in a contract, so they had their testdriver Bruno Junqueira do a direct 1v1 with Button for the 2000 seat. Amusingly, the shoot out was a bit failure thanks to constant engine failures, so they did it again shortly after. Button was marginally (very much marginally) faster.

      1. That’s the one! I imagine if Williams provided a pre-2022 car they could do something similar over the winter.

  10. I prefer rookies to have at least two seasons, so part of me thinks it’d be nice to keep him. And I can’t think of anyone to replace him off the top of my head (though, maybe that’s my declining interest in junior series talking).

    But on the other hand, he’s getting made to look silly by Albon. It’d be excusable if it was Alonso, or Hamilton, or Verstappen… but Sargeant is up against a driver who is a good, solid midfielder but not exceptional, and I think anyone deserving of a second chance would have looked a little better in comparison.

    I went slightly disagree.

  11. I’d much rather see the mediocre drivers like Tsunoda, Zhou, Perez, Botas, Hulkenberg, etc., clear out. They’ve all had several seasons to prove themselves and it’s pretty clear they aren’t going to suddenly become top drivers.

    I don’t think Sargeant is likely to become a top driver either, but giving him a second year seems reasonable, unless Williams has someone more promising to put in the car.

    1. Agreed, except for Hulkenberg. He’s still clearly in the fast/reliable, but not a star category. That’s a lot better than I can say for the rest on the list. And how can you list him without including Magnussen who fits mediocrity to a tee. BTW, I’m not a Hulk fan. Just can’t see any justifiable reason for targeting him, especially without including Magnussen. Magnussen and Grosjean. What an awful line up. lol

  12. Not really. He’s shown moments of competence but overall lacks pace & crashes much too often. If he stays, the only reason will be that he’s American & is probably pretty lucrative with F1’s expansion into America.

    1. I haven’t seen any major increase in William’s sponsorship this year, so I’m not sure his drive has helped the team financially. Is he paying to drive?

  13. Isn’t it a bit soon to be marking his season? He has to do the 3 USA races doesn’t he, and they can only add to his score one way or the other and give a better quality decision.

  14. We’ve had a few years where we got some pretty bad to mediocre rookies debuting together and getting multiple seasons to prove their worth. Ignoring Mazepin, there’s the likes of Mick Schumacher, Giovinazzi, Latifi, Lance Stroll. All of whom were clearly decent, but not good enough for F1, but got multiple seasons under the guise of “not enough testing” and “these cars are difficult to drive now.”

    But we ignored all the drivers before that did prove their worth in their first season. We ignored Verstappen, Sainz, Leclerc, Norris. We just have to give them a shot, right? No. This is F1, the supposed pinnacle of motorsport. It’s got to be sink or swim. Being cutthroat is fine, in this case. There’s 20 seats and we should have the best of the best in them. So yes, when De Vries sank, he was rightfully set aside. Sargeant should’ve been gone by now too. Latifi should have never made it past his first season. Sirotkin was rightly moved away after just one. Mick can be excused for having a season in an old car that didn’t get any development so it wasn’t clear to see if he had the stuff or not, but they were right to let him go the season after. Giovinazzi got three years in F1 and made just as much of an impression in his first and second season, as he did in his third: none.

    Sargeant has shown nothing, so yes, he should lose that seat and it should go to someone more impressive than him. Piastri has reminded us that talent shines, rookie or not.

    1. Sirotkin actually ‘left’ voluntarily rather than got sacked, or his management pulled him away from Williams.

      1. Fair enough, Williams wasn’t making decisions with anything other than their wallet at the time anyways. Still, I don’t think anyone’s sad that he’s gone and given he had zero offers from any other teams to drive for them, that speaks for itself.

        1. Indeed

  15. Every professional driver should earn their pay by generating more money by driving than what they get paid. Regardless of whether you are an F1 driver or a bus driver, truck driver, courier driver, etc, the money your employer gets by your driving should be more than what you get paid. My guess is Logan does earn more money for his employer than what it costs them to have him as a driver (although crashes don’t help), so I think he should stay at least for another season.
    If it is costing Williams more to keep him than the money he is generating then maybe it is time to get a new driver.
    Maybe there’s a case for teams (or at least drivers) with less Constructors’ Championship points to be allowed to have more current F1 car practice session time.

  16. Nope. He hasn’t outperformed anyone. This is what de Vries’ season would have looked like if they would given him more time at TR.

  17. With Piastri keeping Norris busy in Mclaren, the decision of Williams to bring in a rookie to pair with more experienced Alex Albon per se was not wrong. But to bring in Sargeant hastily to the seat was incorrect. Williams would be better off bringing an experienced driver that can develop the car if they want to truely make progress in the midfield.

    1. @pinakghosh If only viable ‘experienced’ drivers were available.

  18. I can’t help but feel that Logan would have performed better, particularly in the last couple of months, if Williams had made their mind up and given him a contract for 2024. It would have been given him much more confidence, taken the pressure off, so he wouldn’t have been literally driving for his career every weekend. It’s a lot of pressure for a rookie. I’m assuming that Williams will sign him for next year, mainly because there are not many other options out there and they don’t want their junior driver program to look ridiculous. They’re probably waiting for the US Grand Prix to make the announcement for maximum media coverage in the US market.

    1. I wouldn’t give my driver (if I owned a team) a contract only so I could, maybe, and just maybe, increase his confidence. It most certainly couldn’t improve his other stats. That’s what you do when you really believe in someone’s talent, if someone like Piastri, Norris or Leclerc have a poor season. Logan didn’t impress in F2, didn’t impress in F1, I think he got as much opportunity as he deserved, and then some. What he needs is to really, really impress in the next few races and actually do something to earn that new contract. Being slowest of all drivers weekend after weekend plus crashing your car twice a weekend, that’s not doing it.
      Sure, they could give him another year and lock their seat for a whole year. It could be even interesting to see. I wouldn’t gamble my own money like that though.

      1. I see what you’re saying. But at some point during the year they must have known that a. things weren’t working out for Logan, and b. there aren’t really many other options out there, and c. their commitment to their young driver program would look farcical if they fired him after one year. I agree that he’s underperforming and I don’t even see huge potential, but assuming they’re going to sign him for 2024 anyway, basically through lack of options, they should have just done it earlier.

    2. @dot_com I wholly agree & also view the US GP weekend as a possible or likely choice for formal announcement despite the words about waiting until the end with decision-making.

  19. Nah. I didn’t think he deserved to drive in F1 to begin with (he needed another season in F2, and then to at least fight for the title and win races). His level of performance is what I kinda expected, although I wished to be proven wrong (he seems like a nice guy, it’s hard to dislike him). I mean, how can we say that he deserves another season on merit, when Drugovich didn’t even get a chance to try (I don’t think he really impressed with his junior career either to be honest, but he won F2 eventually). I say, bring someone good from Indy instead of him (wishful thinking). And if F1 made any sense, Sargeant could do another F2 season, win a title (I doubt that he would, but…) and then, if so, he could make a strong case and try to get back into F1. Otherwise there are perfectly fine championships like Indy, endurance racing or I don’t know… FE if it must be.

    1. The point about deserving a second season is that as he already got a chance to race in F1, he should be given more than only a single season to showcase & improve over time.

  20. I’m in the strongly disagree camp. There were a lot of ambitious posters on here when he was announced, but I had seen nothing from his junior career to suggest he was an improvement on Latifi and that’s been proven correct. He is not F1 standard and feels like he was forced into the seat for the American audience, much to his own surprise.

    I understand the issues presented around a lack of testing, but frankly that is an excuse used by drivers who weren’t ready in the first instance. F1 is not a finishing school – if the sport wants the next generation to come through then the should give them not young driver only sessions. Piastri had time out to learn the workings of the team and the structures of the weekend and I think that will be the model for young drivers going forward.

    I feel the arguments for keeping Logan are arguments for rookies in general, but Logan wasn’t the class of the junior series before his entry and other drivers have come in without the same number of errors. Russell, Norris and Leclerc came up with highly limited testing too, not as severe, but still far from ideal.

    Promoting a driver who wasn’t ready when you know you have limited test time is poor management. However, Logan has to accept his performances in the latter half of the year have been abysmal and he’s not due another season.

    1. Actually, Norris had plenty of private testing

      1. Yup. Norris comes from one of the U.K.’s wealthiest families. Most of the top drivers in the junior formula rack up huge amounts of private testing time and it’s kept really quiet. The drivers getting extra mileage and those making money from the testing have no incentive to admit let alone publicize their testing. I remember Stroll’s extravagant testing regime the year before he debuted. It probably cost more than his seat’s per season fee. Also had a private karting track, which he would only go to if a helicopter took him despite it being a 15 minute walk.

        1. Wow I never knew that.

          How the other half live, eh?

  21. Strongly disagree. His performance is poor and he hardly shows any improvement. No way he should get another shot while guys like Lawson remain without a seat.

  22. I’m middle of the road, if he can bring the car home in 1 piece for remaining races he should stay – if he keeps put the car in the bin then time to go


Comments are closed.