It's lots of things but I obviously voted Whitmarsh. I think they're going to go through a bit of a slump in the next few years, they've lost sponsorship recently, and sort of taken on a pay driver in Perez (they'll almost certainly have a Mexican title sponsor next season in my opinion). Their partnership with Mercedes is drawing to a close. They've lost a lot of key personnel recently, I don't think they'll miss Lowe to much as his cars always seem to be ****. Losing Hamilton is a big blow. Button's really the weakest lead driver they've had in decades when you look at the quality of drivers they've had; Hamilton, Alonso, Raikkonen, Hakkinen, Senna, Prost, Lauda. They've always had a great driver. That said they still have Mercedes engines next season, and with Goss in charge they should have a better chassis. I don't think they'll challenge for the title though.
Without wishing to sound like Cosicave (actually, it would be a good thing to sound like him), i think the blame lies squarely with Sam Michael. He managed to take Williams towards the back of the grid, and now he's doing the same with McLaren that he did with williams. He's just not very good at his job, and if i were McLaren, i'd have a look at James Allison.
well I really hope they are enjoying having more development potential than the top teams, they must be really laughing at them right now.
Thanks for the compliment, Kyle. You obviously know my opinion of that man! However, questions must be asked about a hierarchy which did not realise that slugs and snails leave a trail of slime. I should also say that whilst I appreciate Martin Whitmarsh's difficult situation, I now question whether his 'softly-softly' style is really what is required now. On top of that – and to some extent in defence of Whitmarsh (but not Michael) – it is easy to look above them both and point fingers at a lack of harmony at the top which seems to have roughly coincided with Mumtalakat's desire to steer a ship they know very little about, as well as Ron Dennis' decision to take a backward step from the F1 side of things.
Should have kept your mouth shut there Jenson , but he been saying that constantly for years for some reason. That's a quote from the end of 2011 so i can take solace that he's also responsible for the '27
I think a drivers job is to drive around the problems (within reason) but the fault of the car comes down to the ones who designed it. I imagine driver feedback is limited to preference, i.e. 'yeah that feels drivable' or 'its fast but on a knife edge' etc. I imagine most of the data on how good a car is comes from sensors and lap times, the driver simply tells the engineers how easy that performance is to use.
Still trying to figure out why they made such massive changes from last year when the car was bloody quick.
Yes, I think this is the key question that baffles everyone: who was responsible for this and why was it deemed a good idea? Someone, somewhere must know the answer...
I think mclaren pride themselves on being innovative, so using a hybrid of last years car is not good enough. Maybe they should stop being clever and be a real racing team?
Yeah, I agree but it kind of beggars belief that on top of all the changes coming next year, they decided to make a wholly unnecessary overhaul with this year's car too, and one which has so spectacularly backfired.
