Why F1 musn't become a rookie training school

Written by Alex Norton - 1 Comments

In the highly unstable game of musical chairs which constitutes the Formula One driver market, year after year a similar pattern emerges, that of the experienced, wise drivers being dragged kicking and screaming from the garage and immediately replaced by a well moneyed younger man. This year that well worn storyline has surfaced once again, and this time it is Williams stalwart Rubens Barrichello who is fighting for his career. Of course, he's not the only one awaiting such a fate: the likes of Mark Webber, Michael Schumacher, Kimi Raikkonen, Jarno Trulli and Pedro de la Rosa now face a similar chant. You've had your go, give someone else a chance.

It is a mantra that I, for the large part, disagree with. Let us take the case of Barrichello. After nineteen seasons in the sport, he is faced with banishment to his Sao Paulo abode with thirteen victories to his name. Why is that? He appears to be quick. He proved himself at Brawn in 2009 with two stunning victories, and largely trounced highly rated rookie team-mate Nico Hulkenberg in 2010. His motivation is higher than that of any other driver - nobody wants their seat as badly as Rubens, even after the most torrid year imaginable. His fitness remains terrific for a forty year old athlete, and on the eve of his twentieth anniversary in the sport he's got technical feedback coming out of his ears. And yet his wallet isn't plump enough and his hair is receding, and so he faces replacement. Sutil, Senna and Bianchi have all staked a claim to the Brazilian's place.

Take Bianchi. Many fans, faced with a straight out choice between Barrichello and Ferrari Academy star Bianchi, opt for the latter. Time for Rubens to move over, they say. Time to let someone else have a shot. But why? Does Bianchi, talented though he undoubtedly is, deserve the seat any more than Barrichello? The Brazilian has proven himself again and again at this level and maintains the enthusiasm of any rookie, whilst Bianchi is largely unproven at the very top. Yet, because he is fresh and young, we are prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt and give him his chance to shine. Now I'm not arguing that F1 should field twenty-four old timers. However, we must avoid change for the sake of change. Barrichello is more than competent, and yet he may still be deposed by the risky young hotshot with the gold bars and a winning smile.

The factor here is money - Williams need it and badly. But the case remains: on pure merit, he deserves his seat as much as any of the new prospects on the horizon. His years in the limelight should not automatically exclude him from future competition. The same applies to Schumacher, to de la Rosa - yes, they're in their forties and have had multiple bites of the apple - but they, by virtue of their technical skills (and in Michael's case, past success too) have earned their place in the sport. No rookie has the automatic right to selection just because "they deserve a chance". Wherever possible driver selection must be made on merit alone, and not the whimsical desire to give every driver a crack at the wheel.

What Formula One must not become is a rookie training school, as Toro Rosso team boss Franz Tost describes his team. The vast majority of training must be done in the lower ranks. Formula One is the best of the best, and if it becomes a driving school then the best is diluted by the likes of Sakon Yamamoto, Karun Chandhok or Lucas di Grassi, whilst men like Raikkonen, Schumacher and Barrichello are packed off simply because their turn is over. My point is this: the Formula One grid would, in a perfect world, be awash with talent. That means that Barrichello gets to keep his seat, because he can develop a car and he can still race very well. Should we turn away rookies? No. We'll never find the Hamiltons and Vettels if we do so. But to earn their place at the top table they must prove extraordinary in every aspect in the feeder series, and only then can they rightfully argue that they deserve any given seat more than the veteran occupying it. This is where the best, regardless of age, come to do battle. And that's why Barrichello and co. deserve to stay a little longer.

Like this article? Then be social, share it with others...

About the Author

Alex Norton has been a passionate F1 fan for as long as he can remember, catching the motorsport bug in the nineties after he was presented with his own kart. In higher education he met Felix Morris-Duffin, and together they founded F1Lite. The comprehensive Twitter feed was a success, and has grown to enjoy more than six thousand followers, expanding to provide a more analytical service on their dedicated website. Even though the project consumes huge amounts of time, Alex still attends races whenever possible. Alex has journalistic ambitions, particularly in the field of sports and politics. However, in his spare time he prefers to relax by cycling, playing badminton, eating out and reading - a world away from the high octane thrills of motorsport. He hopes to go on and study a journalism/media based course at university next year.

1 Comment on "Why F1 musn't become a rookie training school"

  1. bobbydazzler Wednesday, January 11, 2012 15:59:17

    I agree about the point that F1 is supposed to be the crème de la crème of motorsport. So when you have team's like Toro Rosso that exist purely as an academy to RedBull Racing, it diminishes the sport in my view.

     

    I really like Rubens, I think he is a create personality to have around the sport. Does he derserve another go this season? Based on past-performance and future potential, no.

Leave a Comment

You must provide your name and email if you are not logged in. login