British GP (Silverstone) | July 1–3, 2022

This particular race served as a stark reminder that nearly half of the drivers on the grid seem to have absolutely nothing to contribute to Formula 1... 👎

Charles Leclerc failed miserably again this weekend, regardless of how much some people insist on praising him (I’m seeing ridiculous articles about it, like the one over at GP1)

The funniest part is how everyone keeps emphasizing that he was fast despite having a broken wing, as if that broken wing wasn't HIS fault—specifically, his stupid, insanely risky move on Sergio Perez. If it had been Max Verstappen, maybe I wouldn't complain, but risking everything just because of Perez? That's just insanity. Though, maybe he realized that Perez is the only driver who actually poses a threat to him. 😁
In any case, he got incredibly lucky that it didn't cost him the whole race, though he could have easily destroyed his entire weekend. Pure luck.
Secondly, all his issues this weekend—the fact that he's stuck behind Carlos Sainz—are once again his own doing, thanks to his poor qualifying and that mistake in Q3. Apparently, everyone forgot that pretty quickly.
And now they think Sainz should just back off because he might be a tiny bit slower right now, even though he earned that first place fair and square?! It’s not like Charles Leclerc is on a different strategy or is a full second faster, where you could say fighting is pointless and just a waste of time. No, he's just marginally faster; there is zero chance he overtakes him on track, leaving him with nothing to do but cry over the radio.
Worst of all, Ferrari clearly showed they are favoring Charles Leclerc, and they even had Carlos Sainz let him through at the end. Honestly, thank God universal justice stepped in and gave it back to him, even if it happened by accident.
At the end of the day, Charles Leclerc looks faster to superficial fans because he always drives on the absolute limit. But that kind of driving leads to a mountain of mistakes, which have been hard to count this season alone. He already had two this weekend, and he luckily escaped major damage from one of them.
Carlos Sainz is a far more stable driver, even if he seems slower sometimes because he doesn't take the same reckless risks as Charles Leclerc.
We saw at the start of the season that the car didn't suit him, and he dealt with an incredible amount of bad luck—probably still more than Charles Leclerc if you tally it all up.
They are roughly equal on points, and ever since that Charles Leclerc blunder in Italy, I've said that Carlos Sainz is the real choice for Ferrari this season, even though he was nowhere to be found then due to two straight DNFs. But Sainz has finally found his rhythm with the car, and the result is that the last time Charles Leclerc was ahead of him was in Miami, which was six races ago.

There is absolutely no reason for Ferrari to favor Charles Leclerc. Let's be real: without a car that is at least half a second faster than Red Bull, neither of them has anything to hunt for against Max Verstappen, and it feels like things aren't going well in that department. This year, the car has been noticeably faster in qualifying and generally quicker in race pace, but those are margins of a few tenths that Max's class, driver errors, car unreliability, and sloppy pit stops can easily overcome.
The worst takeaway from this race is that, for the first time since Italy, it felt like Red Bull had the better race pace. Before Max Verstappen's mishap, the impression was that he would cruise to an easy win, and even Sergio Perez was solid throughout. I stayed somewhat optimistic because, despite Max's dominant wins, it usually felt like the result of a driver error, a strategic blunder, or a mechanical failure. The car looked great in terms of pace the whole time. Here, that optimism died; Red Bull clearly brought an upgrade, and hey, even Mercedes is starting to join the fight.

darkmarlin16 said:I still don't get why idiots think Carlos Sainz should be a number two driver.

Last year he actually outscored Charles Leclerc and landed more podiums than him...

k

👍
I guess some people just started watching F1 this season.

So, how exactly did Ferrari favor Charles Leclerc? Is it just because they don't have the guts to actually pull off team orders like Red Bull or Mercedes? Or even the "old school" Ferrari from back in the Schumacher and Barrichello days?
By leaving him stuck on those hards right at the end of the race while deciding to give Sainz the advantage of the fresher, softer tires?
The only thing Sainz has over Charles Leclerc is a better sense of strategy from inside the cockpit. When it comes to that, Leclerc is way too passive and leans way too hard on Ferrari. If he were driving for Red Bull or Mercedes, maybe he could get away with it, but with these specific strategists? No way.

The whole point wasn't that Sainz isn't allowed to be first... the point is that Ferrari fans could have been celebrating a 1-2 finish if they had just executed a decent double stack. But no, Ferrari claims there just wasn't enough time. All that crucial time was wasted on making excuses.
And then what? Should Sainz be the number one driver just because he finally grabbed his first win after nearly 150 races?

Word on the street is they had a solid six-second window to make the call to bring Charles Leclerc into the pits, and just as we all witnessed, they didn't... even though there was plenty of time to make it happen...

Richard Ross11 said:Supposedly they had like 6 seconds to decide whether to bring Charles Leclerc in, and just like we saw, they didn't... and there was plenty of time...

Not surprised at all by that "democratic" decision-making—I mean, did you guys see how long it took them to "agree" on whether Carlos Sainz should let Charles Leclerc through first? Between the lap times and all that back-and-forth, the time just slipped away😬. It’s kind of wild how much "democracy" takes over in a sport where thousandths of a second actually matter. You gotta react instantly, even if you mess up. I still don't quite get how Charles Leclerc could be that much faster than Carlos Sainz during that part of the race. It feels like if Ferrari dialed back the downforce just a bit—they mentioned losing some points or whatever regarding downforce—they might find even more speed on tracks like this.

Richard Ross11 said:Apparently, they had a solid 6-second window to decide whether to call Charles Leclerc into the pits, and just like we saw on screen, they didn't... even though there was plenty of time to make the call...

Brundle mentioned 11 during the broadcast

darkmarlin16 said:I still don't get why idiots think Carlos Sainz should be a second driver.
Last year he beat Charles Leclerc both on points and podiums.
This year he’s ahead on podiums, and we aren't even halfway through the season yet...

When you say idiots, are you talking about Ferrari or just people on this forum?
Sainz isn't a second driver, at least not based on how the race orders look.
The only time it happened was when Charles Leclerc was slightly ahead, so he got the priority.

darkmarlin16 said:Why pass up a chance to win? Why
Vamoos ...

It's probably a good thing he didn't listen to the pit wall, because that math was totally off.
Basically, Charles Leclerc played the buffer for him and made things easier. The real question is how it would've gone if Sainz had Sergio Perez breathing down his neck right behind him.

So, was Russell the one who caused the wreck?
He cut left right when Gasly was already there—had at least a third of Russell's car ahead of him.

Brian Garcia24 said:Charles Leclerc failed miserably again this weekend, regardless of how much some people want to praise him (I’ve even seen some ridiculous articles about it over at ESPN).

Why did he fail miserably?
He actually had a solid weekend. It didn't go his way, sure, but if there hadn't been an SC, he would have won. He would have won convincingly because his pace was simply untouchable compared to everyone else.

Brian Garcia24 said:What I find funny is how everyone emphasizes that he was fast despite having a broken wing, as if that damage wasn't HIS fault—specifically, his stupid and insanely risky move against Sergio Perez. If it had been Max Verstappen, maybe I wouldn't complain, but risking everything just to get past Perez is just reckless. Then again, maybe he realized that Perez is really his only true threat. 😁

If we're comparing him to Carlos Sainz, he was faster even with the damaged wing.

Brian Garcia24 said:Secondly, all his issues this weekend—like the fact that he got stuck behind Sainz in the first place—are his own fault due to poor qualifying and that mistake in Q3. Apparently, everyone conveniently forgot that.

He was only 0.315 behind the leader in rainy conditions.
So he wasn't first, but what's the big deal? Even Max Verstappen wasn't always on pole during qualifying, yet he still went on to win races.

Brian Garcia24 said:And now Sainz is supposed to back off because he might be a tiny bit slower right now, even though he earned that first place fair and square?! It’s not like Charles Leclerc is on a different strategy or running a second faster per lap, which would make a fight pointless. No, he's just slightly faster; he has zero chance of overtaking him on track, leaving him with nothing to do but cry over the radio.
Worst of all, Ferrari clearly showed they were favoring Charles, and they even had Sainz let him through at the end. I suppose karma caught up with them eventually, even if it happened by accident.

Personally, I wasn't bothered that he didn't move out of the way. The issue is that when Ferrari goes wheel-to-wheel, their top speed isn't much different from anyone else's. In fact, Charles Leclerc could have sat behind him for another 20 laps and still wouldn't have passed. There was a delta there—Charles was consistently faster, just not fast enough to make the move.

If you want proof that Charles was actually quicker, look at what happened during the swap. In the following eight laps, he pulled ahead by 4.2 seconds.

So why didn't Carlos Sainz pull away by 4.2 seconds while Charles was stuck behind him?

That strategy was a mess. They absolutely screwed over Charles.

Mattia Binotto claims they weren't sure about a double stack. Fine, but what was the alternative?

If they had gone for the double stack, Carlos would have lost maybe a second or two at most, potentially coming out behind Lewis Hamilton.
Essentially, they would have had a 1-3 for Ferrari on the SC restart, both on soft tires. How is that worse than having one Ferrari on fresh softs and another on hards who is guaranteed to drop back? Charles was already at risk of losing positions to Fernando Alonso...
It basically came down to this choice:
1. Carlos loses a maximum of one position but stays on fresh rubber.
2. We leave Charles on old tires and risk him dropping to 5th or 6th.

They chose option 2.

How is that anything other than favoring Carlos's strategy?

Brian Garcia24 said:Regardless, Charles can seem faster to casual fans because he’s always driving right on the edge. But that style leads to a mountain of mistakes, which have been hard to count this season alone. He even had two just this weekend, though luckily one didn't cost him too much.
Carlos is a far more consistent driver, even if he looks slower sometimes because he doesn't take the same risks Charles does.
At the start of the season, it was clear the car didn't suit him, and he dealt with an incredible amount of bad luck—likely even more than Charles if you tally it all up.
He’s roughly on par points-wise, and after that blunder Charles made in Italy, I actually said Carlos was the right pick for Ferrari this season. Even though he was nowhere to be found then due to those two straight DNFs. But Carlos has finally found his rhythm with the car, and the result is that the last time Charles was ahead of him was in Miami, six races ago.

Can you actually list these mistakes he's made all season?
Imola?
The contact with Sergio Perez the other day?
What else?

And you say the last time he was ahead of Carlos was Miami?

He was first in Spain, and he would have been the worst possible second-place finisher if it hadn't been for that mechanical failure—he was beating Carlos.
In Monaco, his strategy ruined him. He was the fastest man all weekend—qualifying, and in the race up until the first pit stop, sitting 4.7 seconds ahead of Carlos.
In Canada, he recovered five spots from the back, finishing just three behind Carlos. It's such a shame that Charles wasn't right behind Max Verstappen during those last ten laps.

United Kingdom, again, his strategy let him down.

I guess Mattia Binotto didn't have the guts to try a double stack—didn't want to mess things up even more. For some reason, they gave Sainz the priority, maybe because his wing was damaged (or whatever excuse they cooked up).

Maybe Sainz didn't want to hold up Lewis Hamilton during the SC, fearing Charles Leclerc would snatch the win from him. He practically lunged at Leclerc right after the restart instead of playing nice and holding the line.

It was supposed to be Sainz's moment—he's been waiting forever and finished second more times than I can count. Still, he just isn't on Charles Leclerc's level this season; he lacked that extra gear, especially when being hounded with that broken front wing—unless, of course, that somehow helped his tire management.
He also choked under pressure while Max Verstappen was breathing down his neck. That mistake would've cost him the race entirely, if Max hadn't picked up debris from an AT car and trashed his floor.

Mercedes-Benz is back.
They might not be quite at the level of the top two yet, but Lewis Hamilton was actually fighting for the win during the whole race.

It didn't happen as fast as everyone predicted, but at least they have reliability—something Red Bull Racing and especially Ferrari can't say.

graniteharbor502 said:Honestly, this race just proved that half the grid doesn't belong in F1 at all... 👎

I couldn't agree more—I was thinking the exact same thing while watching the race unfold.

wiredseal7 said:I don't think Binotto even had the guts to attempt a double stack to avoid messing everything up. For some reason, Sainz ended up with the advantage—maybe because he didn't finish his front wing (or whatever they were thinking).

Maybe Sainz didn't want to slow down Hamilton when the SC came out, fearing Leclerc would snatch the win from him instead. It looked like he went straight after Leclerc right after the restart rather than playing it cool and holding him up.

It was Sainz's moment; he’s been waiting for this for a long time after finishing second so many times. Still, he just hasn't shown the same level as Leclerc this season. He lacked that extra bit of pace, which was obvious when he was struggling under pressure with that damaged front wing (unless that somehow helped his tire management).
He also made a mistake under pressure while being hunted by VER. That could have cost him the victory entirely if VER hadn't picked up a piece of debris from an AT car and damaged his floor.

But honestly, they messed up even more by not asking Leclerc.

They only had one driver capable of fighting for the win. If they had consulted Leclerc, Ferrari would have had a legitimate shot at a 1-2 finish.

Binotto screwed up, but he's trying to frame it as if Sainz would have lost 10 seconds in the pits, whereas he would have only lost maybe a second or two.

At the end of the day, Leclerc was leading on track, so he should have been the priority.
Instead, Sainz got the edge and Leclerc is the one losing out.
If they had gone for the double stack, the total loss to the team would have been much smaller than what happened by skipping it.

wiredseal7 said:I don't think Binotto even had the guts to try a double stack to save things. For some reason, Sainz got the priority—maybe they didn't finish the wing or whatever excuse they cooked up...

The Ferrari brass just ran out of time.
They operate like NASA using 486 processors because they love "reliability," while everyone else is running current-gen tech.

It’s systemic. It isn't just one bad call; it's the entire framework.
They lack backbone when the pressure hits.
And I can't point a finger at one specific person because Binotto always covers for them. At the end of the day, he's the boss, so the buck stops with him.

I like him as a leader, but their race strategy is their Achilles' heel. That's a massive stain on his reputation as a manager.

That was a hell of a race. Intense from start to finish, and honestly, there’s more to talk about than just the podium results.

- For Sainz, this is win number one after 150 tries. Let's just hope it isn't his last, at least not while wearing this kit.
- Sainz also becomes the second Spanish driver ever to take a win.
- Alonso clocked up the most kilometers driven during the race.
- Russell finally lost that streak of finishing inside the top five.
- Max actually finished off the podium.
- Mick Schumacher finally grabbed his first points.
- Hamilton ended up with an FL.

That was one hell of a race. 🙏

They say a picture is worth a thousand words:

Mick finally grabbed his first point. He probably would've walked away with another position too, if he hadn't run straight into Max. Once Max shuts the door, there isn't even a crumb left for you...

Mick vs Max

Someone actually had the nerve to call that a good move:
Charles vs Lewis - Copse

It seems quite clear that neither the Ferrari team nor their drivers possess the necessary caliber to secure a championship. One might even say, if one were feeling particularly cynical, that they are a match made in heaven for failure.