Sebastian Vettel

[Muzzer79]

janesmith1950 said:

I don't believe Hamilton would walk into any other seat, because I doubt anybody but the top 3 could afford him. No reason to believe he'd drop his price to such an affordable level to cruise around the midfield. Equally, he and Mercedes might be the best match in the world, but if he asks for more than they're willing to pay and they can't meet in the middle, it's bye bye Lewis and hello somebody else (either the team or the driver decide to split).

See Damon Hill 1996, Button 2009 and Sebastien Vettel 2020 for examples.

Not sure your examples are too relevant to money

Damon Hill had no contract for 1997 and the team had already signed Heinz-Harald Frentzen (after Hill's poor 1995 season) and Jacques Villeneuve. Hill didn't get the opportunity to argue about money - he was just told he didn't have a drive.

Button went to McLaren in 2010 for less money than he was offered by Mercedes to stay. He didn't feel Mercedes would have a race-winning car after the lack of development by Brawn in 2009 (he was proved right) so went to McLaren who he thought would have a faster car.

Vettel, it's too early to say. I don't think he demanded (x) money, I think this is more about length of contract on offer and the clear shift of focus to CLC.

I think a more relevant example is Nigel Mansell in 1992. He wanted more money in recognition of his championship, Williams had already signed Prost so told him accept the drive on offer alongside Prost or to do one, which he did.

[Sa Calobra]

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Muzzer79 said:

I think a more relevant example is Nigel Mansell in 1992. He wanted more money in recognition of his championship, Williams had already signed Prost so told him accept the drive on offer alongside Prost or to do one, which he did.

Mansell was out on his ear because Prost had say on who was his number 2 and didn’t want him.

[HTP99]

Williams have always had a poor reputation with regards to how they have treated their drivers in the past, even their star ones, they've seen them as kind of indispensable and just another employee who can be replaced, I guess in their hey day they could afford to be like this.

[Bo_apex]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Mansell was out on his ear because Prost had say on who was his number 2 and didn’t want him.

Prost certainly didn't fancy racing a hard charger like Mansell in an equal car.
He also discovered just how difficult it is to succeed at Ferrari !

[Muzzer79]

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

[Muzzer79]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Muzzer79 said:

I think a more relevant example is Nigel Mansell in 1992. He wanted more money in recognition of his championship, Williams had already signed Prost so told him accept the drive on offer alongside Prost or to do one, which he did.

Mansell was out on his ear because Prost had say on who was his number 2 and didn’t want him.

Prost only had a clause prohibiting Senna as his team-mate, nobody else.

He knew he had the measure of Mansell from his days at Ferrari so had no issue with them being team-mates at Williams.

It was Mansell who refused to have Prost as his team mate due to fears of Prost manipulating the team around him, as he did at Ferrari in 1990.

[ralphrj]

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

[Muzzer79]

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

[HighwayStar]

Muzzer79 said:

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

Yep, that was basically it. Damon had the car to get the job done and was fast enough to do it. His race craft was the problem, he threw away race from strong position. Crashing into Schumacher at the British Grand Prix is a perfect example. Instead being patient and planning his move he lunged down the inside. You could see the outcome long before it happened.
The ‘96 season it all came together. Frank & Patrick didn’t see that coming and Hill was already gone... he just didn’t know it.

[thegreenhell]

Muzzer79 said:

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

They also bought into the hype that Frentzen was as good as or better than Schumacher, having been faster than him when they were teammates in the Mercedes sportscar team.

[anonymous-user]

thegreenhell said:

They also bought into the hype that Frentzen was as good as or better than Schumacher, having been faster than him when they were teammates in the Mercedes sportscar team.

Well they did have similar taste in women, too.

[ralphrj]

HighwayStar said:

Muzzer79 said:

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

Yep, that was basically it. Damon had the car to get the job done and was fast enough to do it. His race craft was the problem, he threw away race from strong position. Crashing into Schumacher at the British Grand Prix is a perfect example. Instead being patient and planning his move he lunged down the inside. You could see the outcome long before it happened.
The ‘96 season it all came together. Frank & Patrick didn’t see that coming and Hill was already gone... he just didn’t know it.

I definitely wouldn't deny that Hill (and Coulthard) made bad driver errors in 95. I just take issue with the idea that the FW17 was a car that should have won the title - it just wasn't reliable enough for that in a close championship battle.

No doubt that Williams and Head made their decision to drop Hill based on him making 4 driver errors in a 17 race season but they probably glossed over the fact that the car broke down in 4 of the remaining 13. Would Hill have made those errors if he hadn't lost so many points earlier in the season through poor reliability? Would the car have actually made it to the end of the race if he hadn't crashed?

In the first 11 races of the season (stats for both cars):

22 starts
2 dnfs from driver error
7 dnfs or points lost from breakdowns


In the final 6 races of the season:

12 starts
5 dnfs from driver errors
1 dnf from breakdown

The car had a 1 in 3 chance of breaking down in the first 2/3 of the season. After that the drivers made a series of mistakes but by that point Hill was already trying to make up a 15 point deficit.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Muzzer79 said:

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Muzzer79 said:

I think a more relevant example is Nigel Mansell in 1992. He wanted more money in recognition of his championship, Williams had already signed Prost so told him accept the drive on offer alongside Prost or to do one, which he did.

Mansell was out on his ear because Prost had say on who was his number 2 and didn’t want him.

Prost only had a clause prohibiting Senna as his team-mate, nobody else.

He knew he had the measure of Mansell from his days at Ferrari so had no issue with them being team-mates at Williams.

It was Mansell who refused to have Prost as his team mate due to fears of Prost manipulating the team around him, as he did at Ferrari in 1990.

It’s a long time ago, I recall it differently but I may be wrong...

https://youtu.be/qFZKkK6odgY

(56 seconds in)

[Teppic]

HighwayStar said:

Muzzer79 said:

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

Yep, that was basically it. Damon had the car to get the job done and was fast enough to do it. His race craft was the problem, he threw away race from strong position. Crashing into Schumacher at the British Grand Prix is a perfect example. Instead being patient and planning his move he lunged down the inside. You could see the outcome long before it happened.
The ‘96 season it all came together. Frank & Patrick didn’t see that coming and Hill was already gone... he just didn’t know it.

Didn't Hill find out that he had been dropped only by seeing the headline on the cover of Autosport? I seem to recall that FW and PH hadn't even told him at that point, and it was only confirmed after he asked them after seeing the headline. I might be mis-remembering though.

[Sa Calobra]

He found out indirectly yes. I'm not sure if it was that specific title.

They went downhill from the following season onwards.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Teppic said:

HighwayStar said:

Muzzer79 said:

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

Yep, that was basically it. Damon had the car to get the job done and was fast enough to do it. His race craft was the problem, he threw away race from strong position. Crashing into Schumacher at the British Grand Prix is a perfect example. Instead being patient and planning his move he lunged down the inside. You could see the outcome long before it happened.
The ‘96 season it all came together. Frank & Patrick didn’t see that coming and Hill was already gone... he just didn’t know it.

Didn't Hill find out that he had been dropped only by seeing the headline on the cover of Autosport? I seem to recall that FW and PH hadn't even told him at that point, and it was only confirmed after he asked them after seeing the headline. I might be mis-remembering though.

Just my opinion, but Williams don’t and in my lifetime never had had the ability to support a driver.

Same reason I give VET a pass in the hybrid era, Ferrari didn’t look after him.

[HighwayStar]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

Teppic said:

HighwayStar said:

Muzzer79 said:

ralphrj said:

Muzzer79 said:

Sa Calobra said:

Damon Hill finished second in 1995. How was that poor?

He then won the title.

Williams are up for sale. Good riddance I say.

The Williams was widely considered as the fastest car in 1995 - Hill and Coulthard scored 12 poles between them.

However, Hill let Schumacher and the press get to him mentally (he mentions this in his book) so he wasn't as fast as he should have been in races and made some significant mistakes (see British GP 1995 as example)

It was during this year as a result that Head and Williams lost faith in Damon and signed Frentzen for 1997. They didn't expect Hill to get it together so successfully in '96.

The Williams may have been faster than the Benetton at various points over the season but it had poor reliability.

Hill retired from the lead in Brazil with suspension failure, dropped from 2nd to 4th on the final lap with gearbox problems in Spain, retired with gearbox failure in Canada and crashed as a result of driveshaft failure in Germany.

Coulthard retired with electrical failure in Argentina and retired with gearbox failure in Spain, Monaco and Belgium!

Both drivers were certainly guilty of making errors that cost them races but whilst the FW17 was a fast car it was not a good car as a result of its crap reliability.

Hill also:

Drove into Schumacher in an ill-judged move at the British GP
Drove into Schumacher again at the Italian GP (which earned him a suspended race ban)
Had contact with Alesi at the European GP, resulting in damage. He then spun off trying to recover.
Spun off at the Japanese GP (having received a penalty for speeding in the pitlane)

Hey, I'm a Damon fan and I think he was massively hard done-by in being dropped. Adrian Newey agrees.

But the errors are why Head and Williams did what they did, coupled with the Williams belief that a driver is just another component that can be exchanged.....

Yep, that was basically it. Damon had the car to get the job done and was fast enough to do it. His race craft was the problem, he threw away race from strong position. Crashing into Schumacher at the British Grand Prix is a perfect example. Instead being patient and planning his move he lunged down the inside. You could see the outcome long before it happened.
The ‘96 season it all came together. Frank & Patrick didn’t see that coming and Hill was already gone... he just didn’t know it.

Didn't Hill find out that he had been dropped only by seeing the headline on the cover of Autosport? I seem to recall that FW and PH hadn't even told him at that point, and it was only confirmed after he asked them after seeing the headline. I might be mis-remembering though.

Just my opinion, but Williams don’t and in my lifetime never had had the ability to support a driver.

Same reason I give VET a pass in the hybrid era, Ferrari didn’t look after him.

It wasn’t so much not having the ability, they didn’t have the Inclination. I remember reading they felt they had Thee car, gave it to the driver. He simply had to go out and bring the championship home.
If they had shown loyalty to drivers and especially Newey, they‘d likely be in way better shape today.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Any news on Seb?

[HustleRussell]

Ferrari put together a video message featuring both drivers saying how excited they were for the season to start. Charles Leclerc first- a bit wooden. Vettel's demeanor suggested that he was delivering the message at gunpoint from the comfort of the gulag.