2019 Formula 1 Russian Grand Prix (Sochi) | Sept 27-29

Nicholas Newman2 said:Even if Ferkan has been a total mess in the past, I don't think they'd ask Sebastian Vettel to let the kid pass unless there was some kind of reason (a broken deal).

Whatever they talked about before the race or how far their imaginations went doesn't matter—though we could argue about it forever. I'm just convinced there was a reason for that request.
The proof is in the pudding: Charles Leclerc didn't even flinch when trying to defend first place.
And please, spare me the "he couldn't do anything" excuses. We know Charles. There is zero chance he’d just watch Sebastian drive by without something happening behind the scenes.

If there wasn't a deal, like some people on here claim (or wish), then that's actually a much darker scenario for Vettel.
Asking a multi-time champ and a highly paid driver to move over for no reason would mean Vettel is being phased out and the kid is being promoted to Number 1.

Who's claiming there wasn't a deal?
Every single person involved is saying there was one...
That's what Charles Leclerc, Sebastian Vettel, and Mattia Binotto all said...

The real debate is whether Charles Leclerc was overtaken because of that deal, or if he just got jumped because Sebastian had a killer start and Lewis Hamilton had a bad one (clearly due to those medium tires).

The only question is whether Charles let Sebastian through because of an agreement, or if he just blew it at the start regardless of any deal.

Charles clearly thinks he lost it because of the deal; Sebastian thinks he would've lost it either way.
Binotto is playing dumb, acting like both drivers are right and spinning fairy tales, claiming that if Sebastian hadn't pitted four laps later, he would've ended up behind Charles anyway.🙂🤣

All in all, this is the first real test of what kind of boss Binotto actually is, and so far, he's failing.
Instead of stepping up and being clear about how things work and who's right, he's trying to play nice with both drivers to stay neutral. That's not how this works.

copperdrifter26 said:It’s basically impossible to get into the DRS zone on this track.

Unbelievable for Charles Leclerc. 🙂
I have zero clue why the other drivers were even in the DRS zone if it was supposedly impossible.
Let's be real: Valtteri Bottas spent six solid laps glued to Carlos Sainz's gearbox inside the DRS zone. Doing that in a German car—which is notoriously difficult to handle when you're stuck in dirty air—is no small feat.
Even if Bottas tried, he couldn't pull this off. 😁

Look, the reality is that if you don't have the raw pace, even being in the DRS zone won't save you from getting overtaken. Being able to enter that zone isn't half the battle.
If Charles Leclerc had been right in the DRS zone and Sebastian Vettel had actually pulled away, you can bet Ferrari would have insisted on swapping them. But since Charles couldn't even keep pace with Seb like a professional should, there was zero point in trying to coordinate a position swap on track.
That would basically be a massive middle finger from Lewis Hamilton.

copperdrifter26 said:I’m bringing up Singapore because you won't shut up about that 4-second gap, even though Charles Leclerc was right on his tail within 1.5 seconds through lap 10. But back then, when Sebastian Vettel was sitting 3.5 seconds behind after the first pit stop? Suddenly everyone was all, "Oh, he's just saving tires."

First off, Vettel was stuck behind Hamilton. You weren't going to just breeze past him on your own—unless that’s how it works in your little fantasy analysis.
And he wasn't even four seconds back from the car ahead—he was actually within two seconds of Lewis Hamilton for pretty much the entire 20 laps. 🙂

Another thing: the pit window gap in Singapore was only one lap. During that single lap, Sebastian Vettel clawed back way more ground on an undercut than Charles Leclerc managed to gain over his entire four-lap undercut attempt.

Got anything else wise to say?

stormybadger8 said:The real debate here is just a tiny detail—did Charles Leclerc get overtaken because of that broken deal, or did he just lose out because Sebastian Vettel had a killer start while Lewis Hamilton struggled? It looked like a classic case of someone losing grip on those medium tires.

Basically, the only question is whether Charles Leclerc let Sebastian Vettel through because they had an agreement, or if he just missed his mark at the start regardless of any team orders.

🤦

It doesn't even matter why Charles messed up... since there was an agreement in place and Charles ended up in second, he has to let him through. If he doesn't, how can they ever trust each other to follow orders down the road?

He should have just let him pass and then tried to attack again later if he had the chance... I mean, it’s not perfect, but at least everyone stays on the same page within the team.

And honestly, if Sebastian Vettel intentionally held him up, I wouldn't even be surprised, haha!

I remember hearing about how Schumacher once intentionally blocked someone during a race in France when things weren't going his way.🙂

stormybadger8 said:Who's actually claiming there wasn't an agreement?
All the key players involved are saying the deal was definitely in place...
That’s what Charles Leclerc, Sebastian Vettel, and Mattia Binotto all stated...

The real point of contention is just a tiny detail: was Charles overtaken because of that agreement, or did he simply get passed because Sebastian Vettel had a killer start and Lewis Hamilton had a poor one (obviously just a bad day caused by those medium tires)?

And the only thing people are arguing about is whether Charles let Sebastian through because of the deal, or if he just messed up his start regardless of any agreement.

Charles clearly thinks he slipped up because of the deal, whereas Sebastian thinks he would have slipped up either way.
Binotto doesn't seem to know what to say, so he just rambles, acting like a fool and spinning fairytales by claiming that if Sebastian hadn't gone into the pits four laps later, he wouldn't have been placed behind Charles.🙂🤣

All in all, this is the first real test of what kind of boss Binotto actually is, and so far, it doesn't look like he's quite passing it.
Instead of being loud and clear about how things should be and who is right, he's trying to play nice with both drivers to stay neutral, but that's just not how it works...

You're being transparent and playing dumb here. Charles behaved 100% according to the agreement, while Sebastian failed to deliver even 10% of his part.

He took the tow, got Turn 1 (exactly as planned), and then started dragging his feet when it came time to hand over the position. Mind you, it's pretty obvious what he was doing. He knew Charles would just take him in the pits no matter what he did since he was ignoring team orders, but he wanted to give the impression that he was fast and didn't *need* to give the spot back—even though he'd happily give it back per the deal.

Charles also had a hell of a start and could have easily pulled a Valtteri Bottas 18' move, pulling alongside on the inside where Sebastian, if he actually wanted the tow, should have been positioned too. Now, to make an overtake from that inside line, he'd have to swing out to the outside, which isn't easy at all, especially since the inside line gives you the advantage.

At the end of the day, it all boils down to the fact that Charles followed the agreement 100% while Sebastian didn't, acting coy throughout the entire first stint when the kid was still within 1.5 seconds of him by lap 9. Sure, it's nicer to drive in clean air than to sit behind the same car for nine laps, but you can't use that as an excuse.

As for Singapore, Charles and Lewis Hamilton built a 1.5s gap within seven laps because nobody was really racing until lap 13. Now, you're asking Charles to pull Sebastian into the DRS zone (even though he'd been within 1.5s for nine laps), but Sebastian was 2s behind Lewis Hamilton and falling back, so he ended up in the pits.

Basically, Charles is 3.5s ahead of Sebastian; if he beats him in qualifying, does Sebastian just get him via the pits and better strategy? Sebastian was fast.

Charles sticks to the agreement 100% and lets Sebastian into Turn 1, shadowing him for the first 10 laps within 1.5s, only for Sebastian to fail to hold up and eventually drop 4s behind? Sebastian was fast.

If you don't know that, you're going to pay dearly.🙂

To be fair, you're overlooking at least two key facts here.

1. Charles Leclerc didn't even attempt to defend his position at the start.
2. If Charles Leclerc had been in clean air, he would have pulled away from Sebastian Vettel just the same.
3. By the time they called for the swap, Lewis Hamilton was sitting safely about two seconds back; he wasn't posing any threat to Ferrari.

Regardless, I am eagerly awaiting the rest of the season.

Mercedes-Benz has essentially secured everything. Mathematically, perhaps not yet, but the outcome has been clear for quite some time.

copperdrifter26 said:You're being transparently dishonest here—acting like you don't see what happened. Charles Leclerc followed the plan 100%, whereas Sebastian Vettel failed to deliver even 10% of his part.

He took the tow, got the T1 position—everything went strictly according to plan—and then he just started dragging his feet when it came time to hand the spot back. I mean, it was pretty obvious what he was up to. He knew Charles Leclerc would catch him in the pits no matter what he did since he ignored team orders, but he wanted to play it off like he was fast and didn't *need* to give the place back—even though he eventually gave it back willingly.

Charles Leclerc had an incredible start too, and honestly, he could have easily made it a Bottas 18 situation by hugging the inside line—which is where Sebastian Vettel should have been if he actually wanted that tow. To pull off an overtake from that inside line, he’d have to swing out to the outside, which isn't easy at all, especially since the inside line holds the advantage there.

At the end of the day, it boils down to this: Charles Leclerc stuck to the agreement 100% while Sebastian Vettel didn't, acting all stubborn throughout the entire first stint—especially since the kid was right on his gearbox within 1.5s by lap 9. Sure, driving in clean air is way nicer than tailing the same car for nine laps, but I guess you won't mention that.

As for Singapore, Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton built a 1.5s gap in just seven laps because there wasn't any real racing happening until lap 13. Now, you're asking Charles Leclerc to let Sebastian Vettel into his DRS—even though he'd been within 1.5s for nine laps—but Seb was already 2s behind Lewis Hamilton and falling back, so he ended up in the pits anyway.

Basically, Charles Leclerc is 3.5s ahead of Sebastian Vettel. You beat him in qualifying, and then this guy somehow overtakes you through the pits and a better strategy? And you're calling Vettel "fast"?

Charles Leclerc sticks to the deal 100% and lets Sebastian Vettel into T1, stays within 1.5s for the first ten laps, and then Sebastian doesn't hold up his end and ends up pulling away by 4s? And suddenly Vettel is the fast one.

Man, if ignorance were free, you'd be a billionaire. 🙂

It just shows how massive the crisis is when agreed-upon pit stops have to be hyped up like they're some legendary maneuvers... I mean, are you seriously suggesting Vettel passed Lewis Hamilton—mind you, a full car pass—within the first 10 meters? 10 meters... hahahahahahaha.
🤣🤣🤣 Life is just something else sometimes...

mellowtiger83 said:To be fair, he's forgetting at least two key facts here.

1. Charles Leclerc didn't even attempt to defend his position at the start.
2. If Charles Leclerc had been in clean air, he would have pulled away from Sebastian Vettel just the same.
3. By the time everyone was asking for a move, Lewis Hamilton was safely tucked about 2 seconds behind and wasn't posing any threat to Ferrari.

Either way, I'm counting down the days until the rest of the season starts.

Mercedes-Benz has pretty much secured everything; mathematically maybe not yet, but we all know how this ends.

You have to admit, Sebastian Vettel absolutely crushed poor Charles Leclerc in that psychological battle.

Back in Singapore, on what should've been his strongest track, he got outpaced in qualifying and had to start from second row. But through pit stops and a perfect undercut, he snatched the win and basically told the kid, "Hey, settle down... nobody is bigger than Ferrari."

Then in RT Russia, this guy outclasses him again in qualifying, and they essentially make a deal to let him through at Turn 1, giving him the PERFECT tow—meaning no weaving to break the slipstream. After that, Sebastian Vettel's engineer says, "Seb, let Charles through now," and instead of just doing it, he does something clever. He hammers the throttle to the end, and in clean air, he forces Charles Leclerc to chase him through the entire first stint just to prove he’s actually faster.

Of course, after lap 9, the tires are shot and he can't keep up with Sebastian Vettel in clean air anymore. So we end up right back where we started, with Sebastian Vettel worrying whether they'll ask him to pit ahead of or behind Charles Leclerc. He proved to everyone he was faster, but he did it by taking 100% of the benefit from the deal and then refusing to do his part (which would have been letting Charles Leclerc go and proving he could hold his own in dirty air).

It's funny, isn't it? When you're profiting, suddenly "nobody is bigger than Ferrari," but when it's time to pay it back, suddenly you aren't interested. It's interesting that despite getting beat nine times in a row in qualifying, he still gets all the fan sympathy.

Smart take, though I don't think we'll see a movie like that playing out in Suzuki. 🎉

stormybadger8 said:Who actually claims there wasn't a deal?

The real question is just whether Charles Leclerc

And the only thing up for debate is if Charles Leclerc

All in all, this is the first real test of what kind of leader Mattia Binotto is, and so far, it doesn't look like he's passing.

Nicholas Newman2 said:Even though Ferkan has been sloppy in the past, I don't think they would have asked Sebastian Vettel to let the kid through unless there was some sort of reason—a broken deal, so to speak.

What they discussed before the race or how much patience they have left is irrelevant, even if we could argue about it. I'm simply convinced there was a reason for that request.
The fact that Charles Leclerc didn't even flinch when trying to defend first place supports this.
Please, let's not hear people complaining that he couldn't do anything. We know Charles well enough to know he wouldn't just watch Sebastian Vettel pass him without something happening behind the scenes.

If there wasn't a deal, as some forum users claim—or rather, as they wish—then that would be a nightmare scenario for Sebastian Vettel.
Asking a multi-time champion and highly paid driver to yield to a teammate for no reason can only mean one thing: Sebastian Vettel is being phased out, and the kid is being promoted to Number 1.

You fall into that group I just bolded because you're playing the victim, so here's a clearer view for you.

Nothing here is controversial, except maybe to you and your favorite driver.

Binotto failed miserably. Whether you like Sebastian Vettel or not, he clearly showed the difference between himself and the likes of Christian Horner and Helmut Marko.

Like I wrote a while back, you're going to have a hard time on this forum because you won't drop your tactics, and your favorite driver keeps putting you in an impossible position with his driving.

copperdrifter26 said:You’re being transparently fake here. Charles Leclerc followed the plan 100%, while Sebastian Vettel failed to deliver even 10% of his part.

He took the tow, got the T1 lead—everything went according to plan—and then he just started dragging his feet on giving the spot back. It was obvious what he was doing. He knew Charles Leclerc would catch him in the pits regardless of his actions because he ignored team orders, but he wanted to look fast for the fans, acting like he didn't need to give the position back but would "gladly" comply with the agreement.

Charles Leclerc had a killer start too. He could have easily pulled a Bottas 18 and moved to the inside line, where Sebastian Vettel would have needed to be positioned if he actually wanted that tow. To make an overtake from that inside line, he’d have to swing out to the outside, which isn't easy there, especially since the inside holds the advantage.

At the end of the day, it boils down to this: Charles Leclerc respected the deal 100%, whereas Sebastian Vettel didn't. He played coy during the entire first stint while the kid was sitting right on his gearbox within 1.5s by lap 9. Sure, driving in clean air is nicer than tailing the same car for nine laps, but I guess you won't acknowledge that.

Regarding Singapore, Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton built a 1.5s gap in just seven laps because there wasn't any real racing until lap 13. Now, you're asking Charles Leclerc to let Sebastian Vettel into DRS range (even though he was within 1.5s for nine laps), yet Sebastian was 2s behind Lewis Hamilton and falling back, eventually ending up in the pits.

Bottom line: Charles Leclerc has a 3.5s lead over Sebastian Vettel. If he beats him in qualifying, does Sebastian just snatch it back through the pits and better strategy? Sebastian was fast.

Charles Leclerc sticks to the deal 100% and lets Sebastian Vettel into T1, stays within 1.5s for the first ten laps, then Sebastian fails to hold up and pulls away by 4s? And suddenly Sebastian is the fast one.

I'd pay a premium to know someone like you.🙂

There was no way Charles Leclerc could defend that position. Sebastian Vettel was practically on his tail after only 50 meters. Moving left or right wouldn't matter; he was going to blow past him before the braking zone without any trouble.

copperdrifter26 said:Basically, when things are going great, suddenly "nobody is bigger than Ferrari," but the second it’s time to pay up, everyone wants to dodge the bill. It’s pretty funny—even after getting absolutely wrecked nine times in a row during qualifying, he still manages to pull all this massive public sympathy.

He gets all that love simply because he’s such a sweetheart in interviews—total boy scout vibes. But as a driver? He’s honestly one of the most cutthroat guys out there.

History repeats itself with another 2+1 scenario. If Sebastian Vettel had simply let Charles Leclerc through immediately as planned, we wouldn't be staring at this mess.

With clear air, Charles Leclerc would have built enough of a gap during his stint to emerge ahead of Lewis Hamilton, even with the Virtual Safety Car factored in.

I am certain of it.

It is just as certain as my belief that if Sebastian Vettel had pitted earlier—assuming his car hadn't died on him and he’d maintained the lead—he would have also secured enough cushion to stay ahead of Lewis Hamilton despite the VSC.

Essentially, if Sebastian Vettel wasn't going to yield to Charles Leclerc, then they should have used him to block Mercedes from pulling off this exact maneuver.

To put it bluntly, Ferrari possessed the pace to pull five seconds on Lewis Hamilton during the first stint, and an earlier pit stop would have likely yielded another five seconds of breathing room.

Instead, by hesitating, they completely botched the strategy for both Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc simultaneously.

Clearly, they still haven't grasped how even a minor concession to Lewis Hamilton can shift the entire momentum of a race.

Absolute idiots.

James Roberts87 said:There was no way Charles Leclerc could have defended that spot. I mean, practically right after the first 50 meters, Sebastian Vettel was already breathing down his neck. Moving left or right wouldn't have mattered; he was going to get overtaken by the whole car before they even hit the braking zone.

He absolutely could have defended, especially considering how he handled Valtteri Bottas back in 2018.

https://streamable.com/lomtv

Would he have actually gone for it? It's hard to say for sure, but it's pretty obvious that everyone at Ferrari—Sebastian Vettel included—decided it was better to just secure that 1-2 finish. They figured if they didn't block the slipstream and let him pass Turn 1, they could just tear it up later in the race.

What if Sebastian Vettel had botched his start? Then Charles Leclerc would have just pulled away and everything would've been sunshine and rainbows. But nope, Sebastian had a great start, so he can basically say, "Broken deal! I started too well for that plan to work."

It’s like, if I have a bad start, the deal stands—give me the tow. If I have a great start, the deal still stands for you to give me the tow, but I'm definitely not giving up my position.

Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

Sebastian is playing this role perfectly... Back in China, he was demanding that Charles Leclerc move out of the way because he was faster, yet Mattia Binotto didn't budge when the orders came down for Charles to yield the position.

Kimi Räikkönen drove like he was fighting for the championship in the final race of the season in China, which ended up messing up the race for both himself and Kimi.

Now he’s trying to act all cool and nonchalant, but he’s really just doing it to win people over since he's sitting at -21 and there's no end in sight to his qualifying deficit.

I am seriously looking forward to Japan. Neither one of them is going to care about team orders there. And honestly, if Charles Leclerc starts on pole again, Sebastian Vettel might be better off not being on the second row at all, because there's no chance he's pulling an Indianapolis Motor Speedway repeat.

stormybadger8 said:What’s actually debatable here is whether it was some tiny detail—like if Charles Leclerc was overtaken because of a specific team agreement, or if he just got burned because Sebastian Vettel had a killer launch while Lewis Hamilton had a terrible one (clearly just a bad day caused by those medium tires).

And the only real question is whether Leclerc let Sebastian Vettel past because they had a deal, or if he just choked at the start regardless of any agreement.

Look, the start and the sprint toward the first turn is basically just a lottery mixed with pure psychology. Honestly, the pressure should be way lower, and if it were, someone might actually pull off a decent jump start... but it's not like they just started racing yesterday.

So, all this talk about "start tactics" doesn't really hold water for me. Yesterday, everyone seemed to have a better launch than Mercedes, and McLaren was already lagging behind after the first 50 meters. That German driver outpaced them all again and just vanished.

And then later, for the sake of "team strategy," they completely messed things up—though I doubt even Binotto remembers how badly they botched that...

Was there some secret handshake agreement to prioritize Charles Leclerc after his disaster of a race last time? Did they suddenly realize he’s sitting on more points than the other guy from those two sessions and decide to push him into the number one spot? But seriously, what the hell were they thinking, letting him slide back in the very first lap??? As soon as the green flag dropped, the chaos started—it's like they didn't even care about actually running a proper race.

cosmiccyclist8 said:Was there some kind of secret deal to let Charles Leclerc go ahead because he had such a rough race last time? Did they suddenly realize he’s got more points than Seb from those two previous races and decided to bump him up to the number one driver spot? But seriously, what the hell were they thinking letting him through in the very first lap after the start??? Things started getting messy immediately after the start—it's like they aren't even trying to run a proper race, what's their plan here?

Sebastian Vettel's engineer was actually the first one to say it, right away, that he should let Charles Leclerc past, because that was the agreement.

If Seb knew he was going to have such a damn good start, he would have just said "thank you," but he accepted the deal because it guaranteed at least 2nd place, and honestly, looking at how things went, 1st after Turn 1 was pretty likely.

If he hadn't agreed to it—if he had botched the start and Charles Leclerc swung to the right to give Lewis Hamilton a tow while holding the inside line through Turn 1—he might have ended up stuck in 3rd.

That was the dilemma for Sebastian. He wants to have his cake and eat it too.

cosmiccyclist8 said:Was there some sort of deal to let Charles Leclerc move up because he had such a rough race last time? Did they suddenly remember he’s actually ahead in points from those two podium finishes—maybe thinking about making him the number one driver? But seriously, why on earth would they let him pass in the very first lap after the start??? Everything started getting messy right away—it’s like they have no idea how to actually run a race if they're thinking like that.

You sound like you're watching F1 for the very first time... these things are settled the moment a deal is made, which is why they were supposed to let him through immediately... that's exactly why Charles Leclerc's engineer was asking for the pass right then—how else can they execute a strategy if they're constantly worrying about when the German driver will remember he isn't driving for Red Bull anymore...

Don't worry though, I'm sure Ferrari will get it sorted out...

mellowtiger83 said:It happened again—the classic "multi-21" mess. If Sebastian Vettel had just let Charles Leclerc through right when they agreed, we wouldn't be looking at this disaster.

If he had, Charles Leclerc would have had clean air to hammer out a pace fast enough to build a gap over Lewis Hamilton before the pit stops, even with the VSC.
...
Instead, they completely botched the strategy for both Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc at once.
Clearly, they haven't learned that giving Lewis Hamilton even a tiny opening can shift the entire race dynamic.

Absolute geniuses.

Calling them idiots might actually be too generous, even for this race.
My issue is that they failed to stick to the plan. After asking Sebastian Vettel to let Charles Leclerc ahead (honoring the agreement), all they got was hesitation and compromise—basically trying to play it safe in murky waters.
In a spot like that, you have to hold them to the deal. It seems the race engineer couldn't enforce it, though someone higher up surely should have.

Team trust and chemistry are built on mutual respect and acknowledging everyone's role in the hierarchy.
One race doesn't change much in the standings—especially for Ferrari right now—but it can leave long-lasting scars on the internal team culture.

If the race engineer (or the big boss) had pushed Sebastian Vettel to honor the agreement early on, they would have put him in a tough spot. Let him refuse if his ego is that big. At least then they'd know exactly where they stood and could move forward with a clean slate for the next races.
Even if he ended up being faster than Charles Leclerc while holding P2 instead of P1, you can always swap positions again later.

But look, I get that it wasn't an easy call. Sebastian Vettel absolutely tore through the field at the start and kept pulling away. As time went on, the decision became harder. From a Team Principal's view, they had a solid 1st-2nd and a likely win in the bag.
I can understand why things played out the way they did—they didn't abandon the swap entirely—and I’d say they played it decently. Still, I wish they’d shown a bit more backbone.

Roger Wright94 said:Calling them idiots feels like a bit of an understatement this time around regarding qualifying.
I really can't stand how they failed to stick to their own agreement. After asking Sebastian Vettel to let Charles Leclerc through (keeping their word), all they did was stall and try to play both sides of the fence. It felt very murky.
In a situation like that, you have to hold firm to the plan. It’s obvious the race engineer couldn't force the issue, but surely someone higher up the chain could have stepped in.

Team trust and chemistry are built on mutual respect and honoring the hierarchy and everyone's specific roles.
One single race doesn't change much in terms of the standings (especially for Ferrari right now), but the impact on internal team dynamics can be long-lasting.

If the race engineer (or better yet, the Team Principal) had insisted that Sebastian Vettel honor the deal early on, they would have put him in a tough spot. If he wanted to be difficult and refuse, fine—let him. At least then they’d know exactly where they stood and could head into the next races with a clean slate.
Even if he had been faster and taken P2 while leaving Charles Leclerc with P1 (which was totally doable), you can always adjust tactics later.

But look, I get that it wasn't an easy call. Sebastian Vettel absolutely dominated the start and then just pulled away. As time ticked by, the decision became even more complicated. From a management perspective, they had a solid 1st-2nd and a very high chance of winning the race.
I have some empathy for how things unfolded—they didn't completely abandon the swap after all—and I’d say they played it decently, though I wish they'd shown a bit more backbone.

Decent enough, sure, but Sebastian Vettel tried to make a gap between them in clear air just so it would look like he was the one calling the shots psychologically.

And he actually pulled it off, even though the agreement was different. He even said over the team radio, "I think I could have taken him anyway." He thinks he could, but Charles Leclerc didn't fight back or try to dive down the inside to break the slipstream; he just did exactly what was agreed upon.

Well, if that's how you feel, then you messed up when you agreed to that tactic in the first place. Now it turns out the logic is: "If I have a slow start, give me a tow; but if I have a great start, give me a tow and then I'll claim I could have beaten you with or without your help." 🙏

https://www.instagram.com/p/B3CTf36o...=1dgime79yyimv

Jerry Moore61 said:https://www.instagram.com/p/B3CTf36o...=1dgime79yyimv

No offense, but this is just nonsense. At least regarding this race.
You can't really predict a mechanical failure (usually).
If it wasn't for the breakdown in Sebastian Vettel's car, Ferrari would have walked away with a 1st-2nd finish.
They didn't exactly mess up the strategy either, since not swapping driver positions would have led to that same 1st-2nd result.

If they had shown a little more backbone, Charles Leclerc probably would've taken the win. Clearly, it's a lesson they haven't learned yet. IMO, they care more about team harmony than actually winning.