Great news for Mark, better prospects with a Newey designed car, especially with the new regs coming into force soon. Ferrari's top brass have said Perez is too young/inexperienced for them, so now Webber is confirmed with RBR, who do we think will replace Massa?
Seeing as everyone and their dog has been linked to the seat, I don't think it's going to be long until the phone rings here and they offer it to me.
In all seriousness, JB had been linked, but has signed a long term contract. Hamilton won't be allowed there because Fernando has a say in who it will be, can't see him putting up with equal treatment. I suppose, with Domenicali unhappy that there aren't any Italians around these days, they could get Fisichella or Trulli back for a short while until Perez is "ready" in their eyes. Mind you, given Trulli's performances they'd be better off sticking with Felipe.

I'm yet to be convinced Massa will be replaced for 2013. His performances have improved dramatically, and only Ferrari and Massa know if this is purely down to the driver or includes favourable changes to the car. Retaining Massa offers stability, cost effectiveness and a benchmark against which the performance of the car can be measured. Not to mention, I very much doubt Alonso is dissatisfied with his current choice of team mate.

The only reason I can think of to relieve Massa of his position, would be if his performances were so bad that the WDC and WCC were put in serious jeopardy. Whilst that may have been the case in the first few races, there's nothing to suggest it is now.

Maybe Ferrari telling Webber that a seat is not on the cards is the reason he's signed for Red Bull?

Succession to whom? Alonso isn't making any noises and Ferrari in modern times have always been content to have a number 1 and number 2 driver scenario. Neither Massa nor Alonso are getting so old as to be time limited in the near future in being able to competitively drive an F1 car.

Ferrari have shown that they don't consider it necessary to nurture World Champions from scratch, having poached Schumacher, Raikkonen and Alonso to lead the line since the mid 90s. In other words, when they feel the need to replace Alonso, they will simply grab the one they want (and can get hold of). If they don't need to replace Alonso, there is no worry.

Certainly no 'succession' required.

Am I alone in thinking that DiResta doesn't seem quite ready to head I to a team like Ferrari, et al? I would have thought the likes of Kobi, Heikki, would be a better fit?

Ferrari do have a succession program. They have Sergio Perez, Jules Bianchi amongst others on the books.

I wouldn't be surprised if Massa and Perez stay put next year and then Ferrari put Perez in as number 2 to Alonso in 2014 for a couple of years like Ferrari did with Massa and Schumacher.


I agree that Massa is improving this year, he seems to have some confidence back.

No need to change him for someone else just yet.







Similarly, I don't see Di Resta going to Maranello. He's surely the shoe in (no pun intended) for Schumacher at Mercedes.


I predict that Schumacher will stay on next year too.

I suppose this means that Hamilton will stay at McLaren now then. Highly doubtfull he will go to Ferrari to play second fiddle to Alonso and I don't think Lotus / Renault or whatever they are called this week are much of an option.

I think the only threat of Hamilton leaving McLaren was for Webber's Red Bull Seat

He's going to replace Schumacher at Mercedes.

Even though he lived in Melbourne for a year, we weren't neighbours. Ever since his second year of formula ford, he has always talked himself up. This is fine, except for the fact since then he has put in ordinary performances and never been held accountable. Whether it was himself, his entourage or the specialist press, his mediocre driving has always been glossed over. Since then, he has always played the victim.

Pre-F1, he was always sooking about not getting enough funding and it was made out like if he never carved out a successful F1 career, it would be a travesty, like he was some kind of special talent that would go unfulfilled. How many of you have had David Campese donate $500,000 to complete a seson of F3? How many of you were doing ok in domestic fford, then as a result of starting a relationship with fford pr manager, she directs what would be funding for the fford series (Yellow Pages) for your own benefit?

Was his results, pre-F1, ever analysed? No. In aus fford, he drove a Van Dieman RF95 and ended up 4th. Two guys that finished ahead of him also had RF95 and the other drove a RF94. In 96 british fford, he he drove for the best team (factory Van Dieman) and ended up second, to his team mate. He, somehow, gets a Merc junior contract for the 98 GT series and, of the 4 guys that were hired in a two-horse race that year, he was easily the leaat effective driver. Ricardo Zonta would be considered a spud by most "experts", but that year he was miles ahead of Schnieder Ludwig, who were both more effective than Webber.

01 F3000, driving for the best team (Supernova), in his second year, the favourite for the title. He ended up a distant second. Were these reaults ever analysed? No.

This notion of being unlucky that is perpetuated by him or that it's always the cars fault for his lack of results/winning. What is the single biggest reason why he got a F1 contract? He was an Australian. Paul Stoddart wouldn't have offered him a contract otherwise and Paul has done SFA for Australian motorsport since. Speaking of being unlucky, compare how many times in his career, Webber was leading/dominating a race when his car broke down to how many times it's happed to Vettel.

He has always complained he never has any good cars. "Pigs" I've heard him describe on Australian radio (the cars he drove before 09). From 03 to 08, sure he didn't have any race winning cars. But the relative competitiveness of those cars were such that, if he was any good, I think an average of at least 2 podiums finishes a year (12 poduims finishes) is a fair expectation. How many did he get? A pissy 2. The worst part is, those minimal results he does get, are lauded and justify his talking ****.

It's not unlucky if you're ****.

Firstly, I was talking about the specialist press over here and those that have funded him.

"but your post (the quoted part, in particular) is nonsense." Instead of coming up with a conclusion, how about telling me why? Otherwise, your conclusion is nonsense. I grew up having to read his ****.

"otherwise he would not be hired." That is a assumption. He may be hired becasue he fulfills the minimun requirement for Red Bull. There was no such justification for a contract extension after last seaons performances. Embarrassing.

"Top teams who can afford the best driver rather than the best funded driver do not hire them without knowing what they're getting." You just said he wasn't a top 5 driver on the grid.

"As for Webber's excuses- they're no different in content or voracity to any other racers' on grids of all formulae." That's why I think he's ****. Not only that, so far he hasn't been able to live up to his own hype.

Yeah, thanks for that. I given you actual reasons why I think the way I do and you come up with that ****.