SofaF1

He took full responsibility for a crash that Martin says he could have easily blamed on somebody else. Is he taking too much from Mark Webber?

Steve said, “and now describing the qualifying” not “commentating“. A small but interesting difference.

Also I’m upset that Martin didn’t say the joke I was willing him to do at the end of his commentary (maybe he’ll do it tomorrow), I thought he’d say about Alonso: “Well I guess that’s put a dampner on his birthday”.

Oh well never mind.

Really loads of excitement in the Qualifying. A great improvement. It was genuinely exciting as a qualifying session, so you’d have to say it was easy. But James, has been less than exciting in exciting sessions before. But today he was great – I’m not ashamed to say. He even properly corrected an incorrect call about a car being Kimi rather than De La Rosa from Martin.

Although obviously the point that Nick picked up on was an important mistake by James I thought he did do better.

James made a comparison during commentary for qualifying that was totally inappropriate. He related how Schumacher had had a 17 point deficit to Hakkinen at the half-way point of 1998 chamiponship, but by the last races had reduced it to only a few points.

Firstly, one should point out the phenomenal increase in reliability since then, and the fewer races on the calendar, but more imortantly, we should point out that the whole system of scoring changed between then and now. The reason Schumacher could close Mika down was because of the huge difference between the points awarded for first and second, and that they then only went to 6th place. Now, of course, it is so much harder to close down a big gap.

What would the situation be like if we had the old scoring system? Michael would have 67 and Alonso 86. The margin is only two points bigger, but much easier to close down.

Is Ferrari on the up? Will Renault’s new package push them back to the front? Or is it all about the tires, and in that case whose?

McClaren are talking really strongly about their race chances this weekend but they haven’t been anywhere for a while. Pedro de la Rosa had the fastest lap last race but where is that pace in qualifying. You’d have to say that unless we see them on the front row of the grid on Sunday we aren’t going to see a win.

In all of the confusion Honda are going backwards which leaves the serious possibility that they could be overtaken by Toyota and BMW by the end of the season. This would spell big trouble for Honda racing management as not only is their arch rivalry between Honda and Toyota but also BMW have only been in formula one for a year so that might look really bad.

If it is the tires that are helping Ferrari then expect Toyota to have the edge. Especially as BMW may be on the back foot after their aero ban.

But at the front Michaels on a roll and he needs to keep it going. Massa’s been getting stronger and seems like a great team player and he’ll really need to be because Michael can’t win the championship by simply winning all of the races any more.

But will Renault be spooked by the enforced changes to their cornering system? Will Alonso be able to keep it together. And what of Fisi? When things are difficult for Alonso sometimes Fisi will just come along and really put the boot in. And he most certainly isn’t as nice a team player.

There won’t be any more testing for the next three races which might turn out to be very significant.

In the game of chicken Renault are bravest. Ferrari brought their new updates to France so they could do something about them if they didn’t work. But Renault are waiting for Germany to bring the update hoping that it will simply work and that nobody will have any testing time to counter it.

There are two other factors that the FIA have thrown into the mix. One is providing a last minute backwards step for BMW by banning the vertical fin (no not Kimi when he’s not driving) which they had only just introduced.

The second is perhaps more crucial. The classification of the advanced dampening system unit as part of the aerodynamic system seems crazy at first but also answers a number of questions. It now seems obvious that this was the way in which Renault dealt with the V8 engines rather like the Ferrari flex wing. Which is why they were very happy to see that banned at the beginning of the season. It seems to me that a change in this crucial cornering area might well be critical. Apparently the ban has affected Ferrari in some way too but it seems to be in a far lesser extent than Renault. So how much difference will it make to lap times? It’s difficult to say of course. But it might also affect reliability. Now that might really change things.

I was in Italy for the French grand prix this year. And despite being assured by the restaurant I was in that the grand prix would be shown in the end the manager seemed against it so I ran back to my hotel room and watched it there. Despite this being upsetting because it had made me miss the atmosphere which I assumed would be pretty good (especially when Ferrari won) there was one big advantage.

Part of our remit here is to criticise the itv team and I mean that impartially I mean that we wish to review and rate not damn. We hopefuly try to be balanced in our criticism and praise the things we like and ridicule the things we don’t.

One of the things that comes up often is the race commentary as you might have noticed. The problem for me is that whenever I criticise it I’m minded of the comments by Martin Brundle who effectively suggested that if you wanted to find out how really difficult commentating is then you should dip the sound the next time a race is on and see how far you get before you repeat yourself or make a mistake. It’s a clever point because it reminds you how difficult the thing is to do but is something not many people would actually do. I never want to dip the sound while watching the race because you might miss something vital. And of course if you watch a video with no sound then you’re cheating.

But being in my hotel room in Italy provided me with the chance to try it. I had a big disadvantage over the commentators in that I did not have access to the timing screens, I did not have info being passed to me by my producer and I did not have a co-commentator to talk to, also I didn’t make any notes and for some reason they didn’t show the number of pit stops screen for a long time at a rather crucial part of the race when knowing who had two or three stopped would have been helpful. I spoke for the entire length of the race except for when they went down to the italian version of Louise for the interviews with the drivers. And during that time I didn’t pause, repeat myself or make too many mistakes that I noticed anyway (although I did come to realise that I can’t really recognise those back markers from their helmets as well as I thought). And at the end of the race I’d hardly touched on the Montoya story because there was so much going on although apparently according to James it was a boring race. It was difficult to do but with the assistance they have it would have been easier and I found that whenever I couldn’t add some insight I would keep talking by simply describing what I could see rather like a football commentator or who was that guy again? Oh yeah Murray Walker.

So yes it’s tough but in the end James shouldn’t be given too much slack because with no warning, with no notes, no help and no timing screen I did a better job and had fun doing it.

I think it’s almost impossible for us as outsiders to know if someone like Rosberg is going to be great. Even if we were given all the telemetry that the teams have we probably wouldn’t know how to read it correctly. So, our predictions are more guesses based on the little information that we have more than anything else…

Nonetheless, I have a feeling that determination is a key factor in making a champion. Every driver on the grid, except the pay-as-you-go ones, are exceptionally talented. What separates them, I believe, is that quiet, but fundamental, determination both that they are the best, and that they will show everyone they are the best. I think it’s a strange combination of humility and belief, honesty and delusion, that makes Alonso and Schumacher great – at times one or the other element will eclipse the other, but it is the balance that is important (and that’s what Webber doesn’t get right).

Like Stew says it’s normally the best car that wins, but I think great drivers also have an ability to motivate a whole team, and thus make the car better. This is where I think Raikkonen fails. I’ve always liked him, but have in the last year or so begun to doubt his greatness – and it’s this ability to motivate I think he lacks.

Maybe all of our theories added together expain what makes a driver great, but even more interestingly what makes a great sportsman foul up, like Zidane in Berlin, and Schumacher at Monaco?

If you want to know what Webber would look like as a McLaren driver (as has been speculated by someone I think) take a look at de la Rosa, the similarities are uncanny!

The MON MOY MOT graphic was used much sparingly in the race which pleased me greatly, only twice I think and both times to show positions relative to pole.

The biggest rant from the Sofa over the weekend though came during qualifying. Once again sparked off by a commentator.

Jenson Button had failed to make it through the first qualifying session ending up 18th or something which provoked the nearest thing you might get to a torrent of abuse (from commentator A) directed to towards Honda, something like “Take a look at yourselves Honda, take a look at yourselves” presumably because they hadn’t provided Button with a car that would go very fast.

Just as he was saying this though, Rubens in a presumably identical Honda slipped in a lap which moved him out of the first session drop zone.

Nothing wrong with a bit of emotion, indeed in these very pages it has been encouraged in recent months, but in this case it seemed to me to be completely misplaced.

Now I don’t want to appear to be having a go at Button but blaming Honda is probably not fair. Sure they’ve got plenty of work to do, but the fact is that Rubens made it go fast enough in that session and for whatever reason Jenson didn’t.

I’m glad you have expounded your thoughts on this particular subject Al. I have for a while now been attempting to drag a few scattered elements along a similar line together but always seem to end up having a rant about something!

Generally (I think) history will show that the world championship winners were driving the dominant car. This what you would expect of course, much is always said about having the right package, engine, chassis, tyres, driver etc and you do need all these elements to consistently win and score points over the long haul of an entire season. Sometimes though people will almost dismiss the role of the driver and say things like “well he was in the best car though” if he does well.

Again generally, I think drivers from lower formulas show some talent, win races and championships and get a break into F1 with a midfield or lower team.

They then have the chance to prove that they can cut it in F1 and if they do show ability then chances are a top team will sign them after a year or two, and usually even if that top team doesn’t have the dominant car at the time it will still be capable of winning in some situations, and won’t be long before the team get the edge again.

Even as recently as 2003, all four top teams, Williams, McLaren, Ferrari and Renault won races and Williams, McLaren and Ferrari were all in the hunt for the drivers championship.

But I digress…

A good driver though, can still show that they are good even in a bad car. All the drivers on the grid must be have some talent to get there in the first place, but they don’t all show that extra sparkle of greatness. All the cars are fast too and in the old days to qualify for the race all the cars had to lap within 107% of the pole position time. I’ve not heard this referred to recently and I assume it doesn’t directly apply now with the fuelling situation in qualifying. Please correct me if I’m wrong!

I think the point I’m trying to make is that even the slow cars are fast enough for a great driver to upset the grid or the finishing order a bit. All the historical greats were able to find grip where seemingly there was none, especially in the rain, and consequently haul a car round faster than expected. Maybe with the aerodynamics these days it isn’t that easy, but truly great drivers will still be able to make a difference.