[PapaofGags]

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/136898...th-leclerc

"Ferrari is ready to replace Kimi Raikkonen with rising star Charles Leclerc in its Formula 1 driver line-up for 2019, Autosport has learned."

"Autosport understands that Ferrari considered replacing Raikkonen with current Red Bull driver Daniel Ricciardo, who is out-of-contract at the end of 2018.
It ultimately decided that the cost of hiring the Australian would be too high when combined with Vettel's existing salary.
That left it with a choice between Raikkonen, who is still Ferrari's most recent world champion but is yet to win a race since rejoining the team in 2014, and Leclerc, who is contesting his rookie F1 season with Sauber."

A final decision has not been made but Ferrari is understood to be leaning towards promoting Leclerc to a race seat.

He would be its first graduate to make it to a Ferrari F1 race seat.

[Monster Hesh]

As much as we'd all miss Kimi, this could be viewed as a favoured option with Charles performance. Too see another young up'n'coming driver in a top team soon can only add to the spectacle, as Max has done in RB. If it does happen, I hope the Tifosi don't over pressure him, leading to him not performing.

[PapaofGags]

If it does happen, I hope the Tifosi don't over pressure him, leading to him not performing.

Forza said the same, i'm really hoping this happens, would be great for the sport & hopefully bring in more younger fans.

[Jody Barton]

I saw this coming a fair few races ago once he'd calmed down and got the hiccups out of his system. They always wanted Leclerc to make it. They thought it might take a few seasons, but it's been clear from Baku he's the real deal. So why go for Danny Ricciardo, when you can have potentially the next star of F1? I personally rate him as good as any we've seen come through into F1 in the last ten years or so. Ricciardo's options are shrinking by the day. He dilly dallied and now he's left with McLaren or Red Bull so it seems.

[PapaofGags]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferra...31/?nrt=54

Ferrari has stepped back from open threats to quit Formula 1, with its new CEO Louis Camilleri saying he is confident a deal can be reached to keep the Italian team in the sport beyond 2020.

Camilleri has taken over at Ferrari from Sergio Marchionne, who died last month as the result of complications following surgery.

While Marchionne's aggressive management style resulted in him openly threatening to pull Ferrari out of F1 if he felt future rules were not suitable, Camilleri has adopted a more conciliatory approach.
Holding his first press conference since taking over at Ferrari, Camilleri said on Friday at Monza that he believed a way forward could be found.

[NeilP]

I think it was always a bluff from Ferrari, its all about your negotiating position. Ferrari know the only way to go for them in the monetary side of the sport is down, I think they are just trying to create as strong a position as possible.

We need to share the wealth amongst all the teams I have said it before no team should lose money, we need midfield teams, we need back markers. To my mind right now we are at least 2 and probably 4 teams short of the ideal.

[PapaofGags]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/louis...77/?nrt=54

First impressions mean a lot in Formula 1 – especially when you have just been handed one of the sport’s most important jobs at perhaps its most important team.

Relatively unknown outside of the team – despite Camilleri's long connections with Maranello and its title sponsor Philip Morris – the fact he has come in as successor to the larger than life Sergio Marchionne has increased the fascination around him.

Marchionne was known for a brutally aggressive approach to management and business, demanding total commitment from those who worked for him, and was combative when it came to dealing with the opposition.
The no-nonsense approach was clear to fans, obvious to the team and was well known to F1’s chiefs – who had been on the receiving ends of Marchionne’s threats to pull Ferrari out of grand prix racing if it didn’t like future rules.
Within a few seconds of Camilleri’s appearance, though, the contrast between Marchionne's aggressive style of leadership and the new CEO’s style could not have been clearer. The shift has been from glass half empty to glass half full.

Asked if he followed Marchionne’s desire to see the smiles from the faces of rivals wiped away, Camilleri responded intriguingly: “I prefer to see the smile on the face of our fans."

[LotusLover]

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32420/1...s-mistakes

Interesting view again by Mark Hughes

[Jody Barton]

LotusLover there is clearly something not quite right with the Ferrari / Seb combination. While I don't doubt some of what Mark Hughes is saying here, the Vettel not being error prone prior to joining Ferrari isn't quite right. In junior formula he made similar brain farts, he made mistakes of judgement both at Toro Rosso and Red Bull. It's also worth noting in many respects there was less pressure at Red Bull notably because the car was dominant. Driver errors tend to recede when drivers are given clearly the best car on the grid. However, his point about Vettel feeling the need to micromanage Ferrari are spot on, and he's not the first F1 journalist, or fan to spot it. It was evident right from his debut in Red. Part of me thinks it's his desperation to emulate his hero Schumacher, whatever it is the relationship seems tense, certainly from his side.

Also, on the flip side I'd argue Lewis is also managing the team quite often at Mercedes, he criticises their calls often, as in Austria this year a long with Australia, China and Baku. Plus he has outright ignored them in Germany and Monaco, and was right both times to do so. So his central premise doesn't really stand up there, I think the main difference between Mercedes / Hamilton and Ferrari / Vettel is in how Mercedes handle Hamilton psychologically, they let him sound off and have his rants and in the case of Austria and China apologise when they get it wrong. Now look at Seb and Ferrari, even when Ferrari have clearly screwed up they tell Seb in grumpy terms to "calm down Seb, calm down". There's also the Ferrari can do no wrong attitude, which doesn't sit well with Seb. Red Bull shouldered the blame when they cocked up, and shielded Seb from the media fall out when he did. Ferrari don't do that.

It's certainly an interesting piece, and there are elements of truth to it, but I feel it's just not the whole picture.

---

Also make the point that Ferrari right now seems to talk about "the team" and their "drivers". There is clear compartmentalisation going on, "the team" have done their job and given "the drivers" a winning car. Whereas at Mercedes they're always talking about how they're all a team and they win together and lose together. Take Austria, the apology to Lewis as he rolled to a halt, and Lewis' response of essentially it's OK guys we win together and we lose together, we'll come back stronger. Those are two very different philosophies, and the Merc philosophy is the one all the great teams that have dominated the sport have had.

[LotusLover]

LotusLover there is clearly something not quite right with the Ferrari / Seb combination. While I don't doubt some of what Mark Hughes is saying here, the Vettel not being error prone prior to joining Ferrari isn't quite right. In junior formula he made similar brain farts, he made mistakes of judgement both at Toro Rosso and Red Bull. It's also worth noting in many respects there was less pressure at Red Bull notably because the car was dominant. Driver errors tend to recede when drivers are given clearly the best car on the grid. However, his point about Vettel feeling the need to micromanage Ferrari are spot on, and he's not the first F1 journalist, or fan to spot it. It was evident right from his debut in Red. Part of me thinks it's his desperation to emulate his hero Schumacher, whatever it is the relationship seems tense, certainly from his side.

Also, on the flip side I'd argue Lewis is also managing the team quite often at Mercedes, he criticises their calls often, as in Austria this year a long with Australia, China and Baku. Plus he has outright ignored them in Germany and Monaco, and was right both times to do so. So his central premise doesn't really stand up there, I think the main difference between Mercedes / Hamilton and Ferrari / Vettel is in how Mercedes handle Hamilton psychologically, they let him sound off and have his rants and in the case of Austria and China apologise when they get it wrong. Now look at Seb and Ferrari, even when Ferrari have clearly screwed up they tell Seb in grumpy terms to "calm down Seb, calm down". There's also the Ferrari can do no wrong attitude, which doesn't sit well with Seb. Red Bull shouldered the blame when they cocked up, and shielded Seb from the media fall out when he did. Ferrari don't do that.

It's certainly an interesting piece, and there are elements of truth to it, but I feel it's just not the whole picture.

All junior drivers have brain farts, hell rookies have brain farts, Lewis in Canada was a classic one, but i think MH has a valid point RBR for all the dislike around them are a very strong team and well oiled team, especially comparing them to Ferrari, same at Mercedes they are really on top of their game. I don't think Mark Hughes is saying that is the whole picture he attributes some ofVettels 32 point loss to Vettel alone, so for me he does paint a fair picture, I agree with you on the calls "on the ground" in terms of Lewis but look at Ferrari at Monza they in hindsight should of made Kimi tow Seb in final lap of Qualifying for pole, it may of changed the outcome it may not but they did not create that opportunity. personally i don't see Seb "emulating" MS i would say he is pretty much his own driver, he has 4 titles and as MH states it was in a car and team that were running in synchronised harmony, no different to Mercedes today. Seb had no issues and was never out in front the whole time. Anyway its a balanced article in my view and is food for thought.

---

LotusLover there is clearly something not quite right with the Ferrari / Seb combination. While I don't doubt some of what Mark Hughes is saying here, the Vettel not being error prone prior to joining Ferrari isn't quite right. In junior formula he made similar brain farts, he made mistakes of judgement both at Toro Rosso and Red Bull. It's also worth noting in many respects there was less pressure at Red Bull notably because the car was dominant. Driver errors tend to recede when drivers are given clearly the best car on the grid. However, his point about Vettel feeling the need to micromanage Ferrari are spot on, and he's not the first F1 journalist, or fan to spot it. It was evident right from his debut in Red. Part of me thinks it's his desperation to emulate his hero Schumacher, whatever it is the relationship seems tense, certainly from his side.

Also, on the flip side I'd argue Lewis is also managing the team quite often at Mercedes, he criticises their calls often, as in Austria this year a long with Australia, China and Baku. Plus he has outright ignored them in Germany and Monaco, and was right both times to do so. So his central premise doesn't really stand up there, I think the main difference between Mercedes / Hamilton and Ferrari / Vettel is in how Mercedes handle Hamilton psychologically, they let him sound off and have his rants and in the case of Austria and China apologise when they get it wrong. Now look at Seb and Ferrari, even when Ferrari have clearly screwed up they tell Seb in grumpy terms to "calm down Seb, calm down". There's also the Ferrari can do no wrong attitude, which doesn't sit well with Seb. Red Bull shouldered the blame when they cocked up, and shielded Seb from the media fall out when he did. Ferrari don't do that.

It's certainly an interesting piece, and there are elements of truth to it, but I feel it's just not the whole picture.

All junior drivers have brain farts, hell rookies have brain farts, Lewis in Canada was a classic one, but i think MH has a valid point RBR for all the dislike around them are a very strong team and well oiled team, especially comparing them to Ferrari, same at Mercedes they are really on top of their game. I don't think Mark Hughes is saying that is the whole picture he attributes some ofVettels 32 point loss to Vettel alone, so for me he does paint a fair picture, I agree with you on the calls "on the ground" in terms of Lewis but look at Ferrari at Monza they in hindsight should of made Kimi tow Seb in final lap of Qualifying for pole, it may of changed the outcome it may not but they did not create that opportunity. personally i don't see Seb "emulating" MS i would say he is pretty much his own driver, he has 4 titles and as MH states it was in a car and team that were running in synchronised harmony, no different to Mercedes today. Seb had no issues and was never out in front the whole time. Anyway its a balanced article in my view and is food for thought.

Edit you are definitely right there is something not quite harmonious with the Seb/Ferrari combo, but the percentages of the disharmony would in my view probably fall to Sebs errors but not all.