Perhaps the only thing that 'always' applies to F1 history - being as it is such a varied thing - is that we should 'always' be sceptical if someone claims something was 'always' the case.
 |
| Photo: Octane Photography |
And this again has been useful again recently. When to some surprise and/or consternation Ferrari confirmed during the Silverstone weekend that Kimi Raikkonen was being kept on for another season, many sought to explain the decision by stating it was in keeping with how Ferrari had 'always' been. That it's always sought to have a strict number one and number two relationship in its pilot pairing, and it's always been conservative in its driving selection.
But as I explain in my latest article for
Grand Prix Times these people need to brush up on their history, as if anything the opposite is true. And therefore the reasons for Kimi's retention likely lie elsewhere. You can have a read of it here:
http://www.grandprixtimes.com/news/id/12516
No comments:
Post a Comment