Daniel Ricciardo, RB, Miami International Autodrome, sprint race, 2024

Marko defends Red Bull over handling of Ricciardo’s dismissal

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Red Bull motorsport consultant Helmut Marko has defended the team over criticism of its handling of Daniel Ricciardo’s dismissal last week.

Four days after Ricciardo’s tearful departure following the Singapore Grand Prix, his RB team announced he had been replaced by Liam Lawson with immediate effect.

During the event, RB team principal Laurent Mekies said the team would evaluate their drivers’ performance after the race weekend. However Ricciardo’s demeanour after the race indicated he already knew his fate, and Lawson revealed he was told the team’s plan two weeks earlier.

Marko defended Red Bull’s handling of Ricciardo’s exit, saying the announcement of his departure was postponed until after the race “for compelling reasons related to commercial agreements.”

Ricciardo “was informed in good time,” Marko added, “and – to put it in his own words – he is at peace with himself.”

Marko justified the team’s decision to drop Ricciardo, saying he was given the chance to demonstrate he was quick enough to replace Sergio Perez at Red Bull, but his performances were not up to scratch.

“He was given a second chance that no one else would have given him,” Marko told the Red Bull-owned publication SpeedWeek. “And that was under the premise that a return to Red Bull Racing was possible if he performed well enough.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Ricciardo returned to F1 with RB last year, when it was known as AlphaTauri, but was forced to miss five races after sustaining a wrist injury. Although he was dropped before the end of his first full season, Marko said his time at the team was “always intended as a stopover.”

“But the necessary performance only came twice, once with a fourth place in the Miami sprint [race] this year and last year in Mexico,” he said. “Otherwise that speed was not there, and the consistency was not there either.

“The whole performance that would have justified a promotion to Red Bull Racing was missing. But that was the whole point of the whole thing.”

Marko said the team did not understand why Ricciardo was not at the same level today as he was in 2018, when he left Red Bull.

“If we knew why the performance was not as good as it should be, we would have done everything we could to change that,” he said. “But the same killer instinct was simply no longer evident. He was famous for his uncompromising overtaking and braking at the last point. But that was no longer the case either.”

Three laps before the end of the Singapore race, which most drivers completed with a single pit stop, Ricciardo was brought in for a third change of tyres. This was widely seen as a successful ploy by Red Bull’s second team to take the bonus point for fastest lap away from Max Verstappen’s championship rival Lando Norris. Marko said Ricciardo’s fastest lap “was a fitting farewell performance.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Miss nothing from RaceFans

Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

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.

71 comments on “Marko defends Red Bull over handling of Ricciardo’s dismissal”

  1. Well, I mean, it would be weird if he didn’t defend Red Bull..

    1. It’s all people putting themselves and the brands behind them in the best of light, you do wonder what the point is to even have a conversation with him and ask questions about this or anything really.

      “We did everything right and Riccardo is fine, blah blah blah… oh and here are some obvious things that everyone knows already that I can waste your time with blah blah blah…” zzzzzzz

  2. How do you expect someone to perform when he’s beaten down psychologically like that. Maybe at Redbull, in a competitive car, with support behind him, he would rediscover his form. Redbull has plenty of experience in putting talented young drivers in their car, only to see them struggle like never before. So, why can’t the reverse also be true.

    1. Roy Beedrill
      3rd October 2024, 1:45

      If you can’t handle the pressure, you shouldn’t be there. Okay, could work as an excuse for a rookie. But as for him, they put him in the car because he’s an “experienced driver”, with some relevant expectations.

      1. He could handle the pressure, for three seasons people had been calling for his axing. There’s the pressure of doing your job, then there’s the pressure of constantly having to prove yourself after having spent your entire career proving yourself good enough to get there. McLaren totally mismanaged Ricciardo, they decided he was the issue and not their car then destroyed his confidence in his driving methodology and tried to coach him into a way of driving that suited the car. People keep saying he’s unadaptable but this year he’s shown that he can adapt to the car, early races were rubbish. By the end he was arguably the better performing driver.

        RBR have mismanaged the whole thing. They can’t firm up a plan and stick to it.

        1. And how exactly was the McLaren the issue? Norris managed with it, and Piastri is managing with a car with similar concepts. The issue is the driver

          1. Norris knew nothing different. Piastri is known for being super adaptable, and neither of them won in the McLaren until they rectified the issues that Ric complained about.

          2. @Ross

            This is what Ricciardo used to say. That he’s used to driving other cars and Norris, only Mclaren cars.
            Then he went to RB Junior team and the same thing happened against a driver who also only drove those cars.

            Is he going to use the same excuse again? I like Ricciardo and for sure did not enjoy his fall from grace, but how many excuses can people make for his bad performances when both the drivers who drove that car previously and the one who succeeded him did much better there than him? McLaren was never the issue, when you’re “in the wild” you have to be adaptable to drive different cars every couple of seasons, Sainz is, Hulkenberg is, turns out Ricciardo isn’t.

  3. Marko is a vampire and has destroyed more promising F1 careers than nurtured. There’s drivers in therapy because of him such as Jaime Algushati who have said his time in the Red Bull stable has caused him “trauma” that has seen him go through therapy with multiple people, to try and help him through the emotional turmoil.

    1. Even the response here is devoid of empathy. Vampire indeed

      1. While I wouldn’t call him a “vampire”, same as you I can’t find any fault with David’s observation.

    2. So he had to perform? Well, yeah. How is that either bad or a surprise? There are only two seats in any team, and they carry the work of hundreds. They are compensated handsomely, no, ridiculously, for this and if they can’t deliver then too bad, time to give someone else a go. This isn’t little league. This is the world stage.

    3. I have some ‘trauma’ from my 9-5 job, can I get some sympathy too? Along with the other untold billions of people just like me!

      1. I understand what you mean but It’s different when you are a young athlete in front of the world. Even LH this week went public with how he’s battled depression all of his racing life. I was once on an Olympic level team another life ago and I saw the pressure behind the scenes. It’s intense and some people can’t handle it. You nurture these people not throw them in the skip and then barrage them in the press to kill their careers.

        1. The advice that’s been given to me is, if your job is giving you ‘trauma’ just change jobs. I think this applies to racing drivers as well, or anybody. It’s quite simple really.

          Carry bricks all day or be a racing driver? I know which one would cause me less ‘trauma’!

          1. Just no, being a successful racing driver comes with a very high level of risk, dedication and statistically assured early retirement possibility. Guys like Alonso and Hamilton who race till in their 40’s are a rarity of late so saying its easy for them to stop doing something they have done their whole lives is just plain silly, what must they do, a desk job somewhere? Where they get skills for that? Hell even DC (David Coulthart) is still driving for a Redbull for a living!

  4. I know a lot of people don’t like marko and will complain no matter what he says, but this seems a pretty reasonable comment to me: his miami sprint and mexico performances last year were great and they wanted to see more of that, but it didn’t happen, so a promotion wasn’t possible, and in fact he’s been outperformed by tsunoda, who by their standards isn’t good enough for a promotion to red bull, which means they needed someone else who could possibly beat tsunoda, hence lawson.

    The only thing they seem to not have handled correctly was the timing of letting ricciardo know of that, it seems because of what lawson said, they had a couple weeks to let him know, and it seems like he only really knew 2 days before the race, I don’t get that, the commercial reasons don’t hold up if you’re just telling the driver in private.

    1. Yeah look, as a huge Ricciardo fan since he joined circulating in the pitiful HRT—it’s pretty hard to disagree with this take.

      He seems to have completely lost the raw pace and confidence to push the car. Granted, I also think the previous generation of cars better suited his driving style—driving by feel rather than numbers. He really struggled to click with the engineer-led driving-by-numbers which all the teams seem to have adopted (particularly McLaren).

      1. Yes, it seems quite clear from some analysis I’ve seen that ricciardo’s slump coincides with the new generation of cars in 2021, he was never really the same after that.

        1. Coventry Climax
          3rd October 2024, 16:13

          And exactly the same was/is said -and valid?- for Vettel in, was it 2014?, when he was being beaten to second driver level by none other than Ricciardo. That coincided with a change in engine formula and the arrival of KERS, if I remeber correctly.

    2. It’s OK that he wanted to ditch Ricciardo, but his comments here reek of self-servingness and the idea the announcement was made in “plenty of time” is a sheer joke. He made comments like this because it was Horner who wanted him back and because Horner made it clear it was Marko who wanted him gone. His comments make it sound as if he did DR a personal favor by giving him a chance at RB. Sure, Marko. Sure.

      1. Ah, true, it’s been made clear by now that it was horner that gave him the chance, and yes, this “plenty in time” is what I don’t understand, since it seems they purposefully waited till the last moment, instead of telling him when they told lawson.

  5. Marko really rubs me up the wrong way every time he speaks, and once again has missed the mark on the one. Dan is my favourite driver and I have no issue with him being removed, he just wasn’t performing. But Red Bull should have announced that before Singapore so Dan could do some donuts, have a few shoey’s with the other driver and got to say goodbye to the fans properly, as he deserved.

    IF Horner can get stability back at RBR he really needs get get rid of Marko. With with all the recent departures, especially Adrian Newey, it may already be too late.

    1. You’re hardly alone in that sentiment. Some try to excuse Marko by saying it’s just his Austrian bluntness coming through. I think may blunt Austrians would take exception to the idea that you can’t be blunt without constantly making obnoxious statements.

      1. notagrumpyfan
        3rd October 2024, 8:21

        Maybe it’s the commenters instead.

        I doubt many here would complain had Marko made this decision or uttered these words if announcing the departure of Stroll. Most here would probably have written that he was too late and too soft.

        Don’t forget that they gave Ricciardo a year-long global farewell tour when he didn’t deserve it based on his on track performance.
        And I say this as (also) a big fan of Ricciardo (as a person and based on his historical driving performance).

        1. They didn’t give him the chance because of how he had been performing. They gave him the chance because of the massive potential upsides with the potential costs if he didn’t being fairly low. They also knew he’d bring good sponsorship with him while costing very little. So, the idea this was some sort of charitable venture is just a backward way to look at it as is sarcastically calling his time there a farewell tour. I’m not saying he should have been kept for the rest of the season. Simply that he should have been told it was his last race for the sake of his fans as much him. Not a huge bar.

  6. Remember when Ricciardo was good? Me neither, since it was the 2010s.

    Remember when Ricciardo burned every bridge and leapt at every dollar sign? Yeah RBR, Renault, McLaren do too.

    Dude got extraordinary deference and a massive gift by Red Bull to not just let him die in a ditch after McLaren, but the DTS crowd needed a tea party and a parade.

    1. I’m not DTS party Dave, I’ve been watching F1 since I was 10, next week I’m 48. That’s a few races.
      In hindsight Dan should have never left Red Bull. But if you revisit what was happening, Horner and Marko were both saying they need to make Max the youngest World Champion. Hardly gives him confidence. So he bought into the premise that Renault sold him they could be title contenders & yes, took a huge pay day with it. Renault couldn’t deliver, and still cant, but as Dan said at the time he thought that was his best option.

      1. I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. He was presented with a challenge. He hasn’t done well since. Your assessment is correct, I just don’t understand what staged exit is expected for such a driver now.

        1. Coventry Climax
          3rd October 2024, 16:19

          Nor do I understand how ducking the challenge instead of taking it on with an attitude of “I’ll prove them wrong” is any help on how you’re perceived.

      2. While there’s an argument Riccardo should have stayed at Red Bull I think he knew if he did he would be forced into a #2 position as Red Bull had already started treating Verstappen as their new golden boy, not long after Riccardo was their golden boy after he supplanted Vettel. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reason the Verstappens fight so hard to keep Perez in the team is ‘cos they know Verstappen will be supplanted at some stage too.

        1. True Craig, Dan would have been Max’s no.2 by default over time just as Max is a better driver. I think only Hamilton & Alonso would have possibly been Max’s equal. Picking up podiums and occasional wins would be fine for most driver on the grid, but at the time Dan thought he still could be champion.
          I also agree keeping Checo may keep the Verstappen’s happy but also I think Max would like a rear gunner to help with strategy as the other top 3 teams seem to have more often. To me it seems RBR have chosen money over the contractors title, which to me seems strange.

          1. Realistically, he knew verstappen was better than him by the time he left red bull, so he must’ve known he would’ve needed a significantly better car, so unless he had managed to go to mercedes, it didn’t seem likely, and not just now cause we’ve seen how things went down, but it had been many years that only 3 teams were ever competitive, with ferrari always falling short and only merc\red bull possibly winning; if he could’ve replaced bottas, the move would’ve made sense, but it still would’ve meant beating hamilton in the same car, unrealistic for him.

          2. Coventry Climax
            3rd October 2024, 16:28

            @Esploratore1
            Yet where most deemed it unlikely he would beat Vettel, he did exactly that, and quite convincingly, I must say.
            Sure, in hindsight, there’s a couple changes that might have been responsable for it all, but still.

            I don’t know, maybe he realised he was not good enough to ever be WDC? A shattered dream like that explains why he went for the big money instead?

          3. Verstappen being “better” is debatable but once Red Bull gets the idea in their heads it’s hard to shake it, nor will they admit that’s the case (Webber’s “not bad for a number 2 driver” didn’t come out of no where, after all).

      3. This is a false assumption a lot of people make (about the money): it’s been stated multiple times by people in charge of red bull that the offer was pretty similar in terms of money between renault and red bull, and we don’t need hindsight now to think that one option gave you a pretty stable top 3 team and the other option gave you a team with a minuscule chance to make it back onto the top, plenty of us said it was a risk to leave a top team back then already.

        So same money and worse team, just to get a weaker team mate? That’s the choice he made to me.

    2. Ricciardo was good just a few years ago. But for the life of me, i don’t understand this talk about a “proper farewell”. When did this sport become so soft?

      That team is a frying pan for everyone not named Yuki Tsunoda. He was probably aware this could happen if he failed to meet their criteria to take Perez’s seat. It was a do-or-die deal.

      It is what it is. He’s a very rich man and was a successful driver. What’s sad about that?

      1. This sport has been as soft as jello for a long time now.

      2. So you don’t think a driver as storied as Riccardo deserves a simple “thank you and good bye” at his last race, or even telling it was his last race? Is simple courtesy really that much of an alien concept now?

        1. The thing I don’t like about this is it seems they lied to him, they knew 2 weeks before singapore about lawson replacing him and told lawson, but didn’t tell ricciardo until 2 days before the race.

        2. Do you know why it’s his last race? Because he’s been performing badly for a long time.

          They released him. He’s free to race wherever he wants. It would not be his last race if any other team was interested in his services. It turns out they aren’t, and they haven’t been interested since he left McLaren, so, in fact, Red Bull gave him a shot at redemption. How is this any worse than he not even having it?

          There was probably some goodbye internally, but celebrations for a driver who was never that huge hasn’t been performing well in a long time, and most importantly, was aware he was walking on thin ice, seems like a waste of time.

          1. So your answer to my question about courtesy is “yes”.
            I think Esploratore hit the nail on the head; he was ultimately lied to and I fear he’s not the first and won’t be the last driver under the Red Bull umbrella to be lied to in such a manner, likely with the same wordy excuses you’re throwing about.

          2. @Craig

            It doesn’t matter if they told him late man, he should be aware already. What was he expecting? To keep racing at the team they use to develop young drivers as a 35-year-old with 13 seasons under his belt?

            It was crystal clear he was not keeping that seat. And by his performances, it was crystal clear he was not taking Perez’s either.

            Other drivers were kicked out much more harshly and I don’t remember people like you being as touchy about it.

      3. Not sure why it’s soft. This “empty your desk and security will escort you out right now” stuff is not tough, it’s just boorish.

  7. Samdwhichands
    3rd October 2024, 1:41

    Not really defending the actual criticism, which is why a company who is primarily in the sport for marketing so fabulously mishandled an opportunity to give Daniel a decent farewell, show him some respect, and maybe even get a little promotion from it?

    Red Bull had a fella jump from space for promotion, but showing some respect to a beloved driver is apparently not possible.

    1. Horner’s handling of the drivers has been a real mess. A lot of what is happening at Red Bull only makes sense, which doesn’t mean it’s true – but it makes sense, in light of a protracted and (mostly) behind the scenes power struggle.

      Why bring in Ricciardo? Because he had one or two excellent races? Really? How is that credible? Hanging on to Tsunoda who was trounced badly by Gasly, himself dumped from the main team very quickly indeed. Bringing in De Vries and then dumping him after a few races. Going through years of ‘we believe Pérez will do better’ without any evidence that Pérez can have more than half a dozen solid – never mind excellent – races per year. Keeping young talent (Marko’s business) out of what is ostensibly the junior team, and on and on.

      1. The perez part is striking indeed: 6 decent races a year, how is that considered good when it’s 25% of the season nowadays?

  8. When even a non-issue like releasing an underperforming driver (something they’ve done numerous times in the past) gets this much attention you know things must be horrible inside that team.

    Now i believe Max may leave for a better work environment. They’re falling apart.

  9. It’s not what Red Bull did it’s how they did it. I would be ashamed if I let an employee go in this manner.

    1. I would be ashamed if I let an employee go in this manner.

      There lies the gaping hole between your/our moral standard and Horner

    2. Coventry Climax
      3rd October 2024, 16:33

      You’d be amazed at how often it happens, really. It’s daily, common practice.

      1. Hardly an excuse.

  10. ”compelling reasons related to commercial agreements” shouldn’t be an obstacle to making a formal announcement about a driver change immediately or shortly after making a decision/informing the relevant driver(s).
    Unfortunately, F1 organizations tend to wait quite long before finally coming out, for example, Jack Doohan got informed about his future full-time drive on the post-Belgian GP day, yet the formal announcement didn’t occur until the Dutch GP practice day.

    1. About Jack Doohan = never heard of due process then?

  11. Martin MORRIS
    3rd October 2024, 7:30

    Unfortunately I have to agree that Ricciardo was not performing well enough. What hasn’t been mentioned is that some of the strategies he was give were second rate as well. In Singapore, he was started on softs the same as Hamilton who complained that he was handicapped severely because of it. Not one mention of how it effected Ricciardo. The structure of RBR is one of the main issues. It is a general rule that there can only be one boss of an organisation and the buck stops with the. The question is, Who is the boss of RBR, Horner the “Advisor” Marko. As there is no delineation between them, it give Jos the opportunity to intervein and cause issues.
    Like it or not, Horner is the Boss and should be the one commenting on behalf of the team, not an “Advisor”.

    1. Horner is the boss of Red Bull Racing, Marko is the boss of Red Bull’s driver programme which encompasses all 4 drivers for both teams if I’m not mistaken, and the junior categories of course.

      I like your comment though and completely agree, it’s a mess. Horner should never have been allowed to be commenting on and making decisions about Torro Rosso drivers.

      FIA are being derelict in their duties to not ensure Red Bull and their sister team are separate and information isn’t being shared between them, as is obviously happening constantly between both Red Bull outfits.

  12. Marko justified the team’s decision to drop Ricciardo, saying he was given the chance to demonstrate he was quick enough to replace Sergio Perez at Red Bull, but his performances were not up to scratch.

    The thing is, Ricciardo did demonstrate he was quick enough to replace Perez; but that’s a rather low bar.
    From the performances in the same car, Lawson, Tsunoda and even de Vries meet that same standard.

    This whole thing reveals more about the internal politics of Red Bull than anything else.

    1. This whole thing reveals more about the internal politics of Red Bull than anything else.

      100%

  13. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
    3rd October 2024, 9:31

    I love Danny but there’s nothing to defend, it’s a youth team and they had Lawson sat on the sidelines for a stalwart that never looked like getting back to his best. It was very nice of them to take him back after his McLaren stint, you could argue that was sentiment and not the best option available at the time. Can’t hang on to the past, Danny was exceptional but he lost his powers at McLaren and they’re not coming back.

  14. I just don’t get it, an underperforming driver (for several years now) has been fired. Big deal, it happens in racing all the time, and has happened to numerous F1 drivers. Why is everybody reacting like Red Bull have committed some kind of horrendous hate crime?

    Yes he used to be a good driver, but that was a decade ago, since then he has been mediocre, by F1 standards. So what should they do, keep paying him ridiculous amounts of money to NOT perform as they expect, just to keep some social media commentators happy.

    1. Why is everybody reacting like Red Bull have committed some kind of horrendous hate crime?

      Ricciardo is a popular driver in F1. Yes, a lot of that is now ‘old news’ and his juvenile antics are wearing quite thin at age 35, but be that as it may – someone like that being dumped will always attract more attention and commentary than a guy like Sargeant did.

      1. Sargeant had already worn out his welcome and been end-of-season dropped for Sainz
        His mistake in practice was at a “somewhat dumber than a zero race/practice rookie level” mistake.
        You could pretty much see the commentators face-palming when listening to the radio.

        One mistake too many, and a top-of-the-bill-effort one at that. Was anyone really surprised when he was immediately replaced?

    2. There’s a clear hyperbole here on when ricciardo stopped being good: he was good as recently as 4 years ago, I’m not saying that’s little in f1 terms, but it’s not even half compared to what you said!

    3. I think you are spot on. Ricciardo seems like a wonderful guy and he wasn’t mistreated. He was given a lifeline few others would have received and he didn’t have the performance to earn the seat. You are talking about pro athletes at the highest level. It’s brutal in every sport at that level. This isn’t a bunch of 8 yr olds playing football.

      1. Sandwhichands
        3rd October 2024, 15:20

        Do you not think it to be in Red Bulls interest to celebrate the end of his F1 career? I don’t understand why RB was not mercenary about this and maximise the value of dropping him.

    4. Apart from the “he was good a decade ago” you’re spot on.
      They gave him a shot and delayed Lawson’s career for a full year because of that, it didn’t work out and somehow Red Bull is still in the wrong.

      What do these people want from them? To keep him around just because he’s a nice guy?

  15. Sandwhichands
    3rd October 2024, 15:28

    Reading through the comments I struggle with one major element, good business is maximises value from any situation. The handling of RIC is an obvious lost opportunity. Why is RB, a business that is so focused on marketing its product, missing this?

    1. Maybe they forgot, who knows?

      But it got funny already, they should have capitalized on the firing a driver. It doesn’t need even to be out of respect, he should have a proper farewell because it would be good for the brand. Everything seems to be acceptable other than releasing him as if he’s just another underperforming driver (which he is).

      1. “I know there’s been a lot of reaction negatively, people going, why was he not given that opportunity?,” Coulthard said. “But I’ve heard that he was given that opportunity and chose not to.

        “So I’m trying to kind of figure that out in my head, whether that’s just a personal thing, didn’t want to be distracted by that, or whether that’s some sort of media masterstroke, which will just gain even more mileage when I imagine he will or should turn up in Austin and Vegas. He’s big in America.

        “[Those are] two great opportunities for him to get a lot of airtime and make it all about him, where maybe it would have been mixed into a Grand Prix weekend in Singapore.”

  16. Why would Red Bull announce his leaving F1 as though he’s finished his Driving career, that decision and announcing such is up to DR, not Red Bull. For all we know he’s lining up drives in multiple categories such as Indy or even WEC.

    That’s his decision, and his burden to carry, just like countless drivers before him since F1 started.

    If nobody in F1 is approaching him for a drive then he himself knows his F1 days are over, but not his Racing Career. He also knows that his driving at Red Bull Juniors wasn’t up to scratch and his dismissal was his own fault.

  17. “Marko defends Red Bull over handling of Ricciardo’s dismissal”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_he_would,_wouldn%27t_he%3F

Comments are closed.