Phil wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:11 pm
NathanOlder wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 16, 2019 10:39 am
Funny thing about qualifying, over the 3 races so far, Leclerc is on average 0.025 faster than Vettel.
Apart from that though, the orders so far have been quite logical and not very surprising. As far as team management goes, cant fault Binotto for Vettels mistake in China and Leclercs reliability. Had that not been the case, Ferrari would have a win to their name, Hamilton one less and as a result, they’d be substantially ahead of Verstappen in the driver standings and closer to Mercedes. What will you criticize him for?
I wrote the following as a comment on a post on some website, and i am writing them also here because its rellevant to what you said.
Ferrari had THREE options.
1st option, Tell VET to follow LEC pace in a safe distance, while saving tires.
2nd option, Make the switch right away and let the slightly faster VET follow the mercs while his tires are ok.
3rd option, After you left your drivers destroy their tires following each other closely. At least understand ASAP that a one stop option won't work any more and commit to a 2 stop before others do.
If Ferrari was bringing in LEC for tires at the same time or earlier than RB, they would hold the upper hand on holding 3rd and 4th until the end, regardless if RB followed them on a 2 stop or not. Probably LEC would be again, ahead of VET after, but for sure they would have been 3rd and 4th.
But Binotto is trapped into a situation having to manage VET demands and ego(Backed within Ferrari), LEC ambitions and ego (backed from the Italian press) and the Italian press backlash that is looming on every wrong decision he makes.
So the fear of upsetting any of those 3 variables is making Ferrari slow and passive on strategy calls. That's why i criticize Binotto.
Let drivers destroy their tires on first stint and compromise strategy its plain stupid. A Ferrari fan that have no driver preferences and understand F1 would see the first part of the race as a really bad joke.