(Motorsport-Total.com) – “Great waste of time here, folks.” – “Are you using me as a guinea pig?”: The choice of words and especially the tone – quite sarcastic – were perhaps indeed over the top. It is therefore not surprising that Lewis Hamilton did not really like these radio messages when he listened to them again after the race in Zandvoort.
Read more Qatar fights for Grand Prix: «Has been certain for several months»
He apologized and emphasized that he usually has better control of himself. But he was not the only one who had reason to reflect after Zandvoort. Ferrari finished the race in fourth and fifth places behind both Mercedes – on a weekend when the race pace actually seemed better than that of the main competitor.
Frederic Vasseur admitted this afterwards and at the same time acknowledged that the operational execution at Ferrari was not good enough.
However, this does not mean that the team made glaring mistakes.
The running gag about Ferrari’s strategy does not always correspond to reality. There are plenty of examples where the Scuderia made the right decisions – including Hamilton’s win in Barcelona a few weeks ago.
And even in Zandvoort, it was not necessarily about missed opportunities. The race result was primarily the consequence of a (compared to the competition) weak qualifying. Sending both cars off from the third row on a track where overtaking is extremely difficult is simply not a recipe for victory.
This likely contributed to Hamilton’s frustration, as being stuck behind slower cars is about as nerve-wracking as trying to carry a bag without handles and a goldfish bowl at the same time.
Clear communication missed
But it was apparently not just the pure disagreement with the plans of the Ferrari strategists that made Lewis feel like a guinea pig, but a complete lack of clear communication.
Vasseur provided a plausible explanation afterwards as to why Ferrari did not give Hamilton the desired information. The plan before the late Virtual Safety Car was possibly to run his tires until the end of the race. However, Ferrari deliberately did not want to reveal this over the radio to avoid giving valuable information to the competition.
Understandable.
However, Ferrari did not necessarily have to explain in detail what they intended. The team only needed to convey to him that they had the race situation under control.
And that is exactly what makes the difference.
Perhaps not all his questions could have been answered. But a clear, definite answer might have been enough to prevent him from prematurely concluding that the race was slipping away from him while the pit wall appeared clueless.
Trust must be built
Of course, it would be a gross exaggeration to reduce Max Verstappen’s successes in Formula 1 purely to the perfect teamwork with Red Bull and Gianpiero Lambiase. However, anyone who attentively listens to the radio dialogues between Verstappen and “GP” immediately recognizes the subtle difference to many other driver-engineer pairings.
Verstappen can get angry. He can be sarcastic. He can disagree. He can be all of that at the same time. But Lambiase is not afraid to contradict him just as firmly. And neither of them feels the need afterwards to apologize for anything.
Ferrari shows special design in honor of Michael Schumacher
The trust relationship between the two is at a level where they no longer need to explain anything to each other after the race. Max simply knows: GP does not back down unless there is a good reason.
This kind of trust takes time.
Hamilton had a similar dynamic with Peter Bonnington at Mercedes. He could still claim that his tires were done – and at the same time knew that “Bono” could better judge whether that was actually the case. Bono was also not there to agree with Lewis on everything.
And this is probably what is still missing between Ferrari and Hamilton.
Can Carlo Santi be “Bono”?
His second Ferrari season is going significantly better than his first, and the relationship with the team has noticeably grown. He has even called Carlo Santi his “Italian Bono.” But calling someone Bono does not replace a relationship that has grown over more than a decade.
There is also another factor: Santi is not working with the same Hamilton that Bonnington found at Mercedes in 2013. He is working with a seven-time world champion, the most successful driver of his generation, and someone who operated for years in a team that won eight consecutive constructors’ titles.
Read more Ralf Schumacher: Kimi Antonelli «will sit in a Ferrari someday»
Imagine being the person who now has to tell this driver that he is wrong – or at least: “We know better.”
Zandvoort: Driver ratings by Marc Surer and the editorial team
Therefore, this relationship cannot develop further just by Ferrari learning how Hamilton wants to be managed. Hamilton must also enable Ferrari – and especially his race engineer – to challenge him.
And this is where his apology comes into play.
Hamilton did not have to apologize for demanding more from Ferrari. His explanation immediately after the race was simple: “I am here to win.”
Hamilton needs pushback
Ferrari should not want this trait to disappear from him either. A driver who has won seven world championships and still gets immensely upset about losing valuable seconds in the fight for third place is probably much more valuable to a team than one who shrugs off such things.
That does not mean he is always right. The team at the pit wall will always have more data during the race – and it must ensure that he knows this data is being used sensibly.
What Zandvoort showed is that both sides have not quite reached this point yet.
Even with the knowledge of Vasseur’s later explanations, questions about the implementation at Ferrari remain open. He himself admitted that the team missed the chance to get Leclerc past George Russell with an undercut – and subsequently failed to extend his stint to create a sufficiently large tire delta for a comeback. Charles was also not instructed to let Hamilton pass.
Whether a single decision ultimately cost Ferrari the podium is debatable. What is beyond question: From Hamilton’s cockpit, it really looked like complete inaction.
Combined with the lack of communication, this was the last straw. And that, even though there was actually a decent plan at the pit wall – if Hamilton had known it, much of the sarcasm would probably have been spared.
That is exactly why both the events on Sunday and the subsequent review were so important.
Both sides should have high standards
Hamilton’s frustration sent a clear message to Ferrari regarding the standards he holds. If he is here to win, his team must also be satisfied with nothing less. His apology sent a second message: Demanding these standards does not mean turning every disagreement into a confrontation.
He will not stop being demanding. Ferrari should not ask that of him either.
Dream marriage in red? Lewis Hamilton’s long road to Ferrari
And even if some radio messages in Zandvoort were misplaced – or based on false assumptions – they were a good reminder that he is still hungry and motivated. It was also a clear hint at where Ferrari needs to improve.
Because Hamilton does not just need Ferrari as a listener. He needs a Ferrari that has no problem telling a seven-time world champion that he is wrong sometimes.
Read more Planned to start in Formula 2 and Formula 3: Lando Norris founds his own racing team!