I don't think this is true. Alonso had already decided to leave - all Mattiacci (and Horner, when he revealed Vettel was going to Ferrari) did was screw up Alonso's planned exit.

I certainly didn't set any bar of calling things crap. Not that it surprises me that you refuse to even take responsibility for your own behavior.

With regards to Vettel's comments; I think he's a bit on the defensive with all of the criticism that he has received. There's nothing whatsoever to suggest that he didn't have the car to be champion in 2018. Not that I don't sympathize. I can't imagine what it's like to face that much public scrutiny but the fact is that blaming the car for his season is absolutely making excuses (and poor excuses no less).

What you think and what actually happened are two different things.

"Hence Alonso’s meeting with Mattiacci between the Singapore and Japan races. But going into that meeting there was a vital piece of information Alonso and his manager did not possess, but Mattiacci did: Sebastian Vettel – who had a long-term informal agreement that he would give Ferrari first call on his services should he leave Red Bull – had a clause in his Red Bull contract that would allow him to leave a year earlier than its full term (which was until the end of 2015) if he was below third in the championship before a specified cut-off date. That contractual window was about to close shortly after the Japanese Grand Prix. Alonso and Briatore incorrectly assumed that Vettel was committed to Red Bull until the end of 2015."

"Instead Mattiacci contacted Vettel and told him that if he was ready to sign, so was Ferrari. Red Bull announced at Suzuka that Vettel was leaving and Red Bull’s Christian Horner revealed that “Ferrari had made Sebastian a very generous offer”. It was only at this point that Alonso finally had all the pieces of the jigsaw – and further words were exchanged between him and the team boss."

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... real-story

But nobody is blaming his car for his season

That article doesn't support your position that Mattiacci fired Alonso. He tried to get Alonso to agree to a deal until 2016, and when Alonso wouldn't do that he agreed to honor the previous deal between di Montezemelo and Alonso letting the contract be terminated at the end of 2014.

"Mattiacci – a man used to having control over his employees, not forming partnerships with them or being dictated to by them – did not find any of these demands acceptable. Rather than giving yourself get-out clauses, he suggested, I’d like to see more commitment, not less. By this he meant extending beyond ’16. Fernando – who has given incredible commitment to a less than fully competitive Ferrari for five years – did not like the suggestion of him being less than fully committed. He reacted angrily. Mattiacci said that if he did not wish to continue either on his current contract or an extension of it, Ferrari would now honour the agreement made by Montezemelo, i.e. Fernando was free to leave, without either side owing the other. Briatore suggested Alonso sign the memorandum of understanding for the release, believing Mattiacci would then back down. He didn’t."

That is not Mattiacci firing Alonso. That's Alonso leaving because he didn't want to commit to a longer deal.

Other than him

Is he? Where did he blame his car for his season?

Him trying to suggest the car wasn't quick enough is blaming the car. The car was certainly more than quick enough to win a championship and HIS car was totally bullet-proof (although Kimi had some failures on his).

That's not what he said, though. He was contesting the claim that the Ferrari was the quickest, or even dominant. He's not making excuses that it wasn't quick enough to compete, just that Ferrari didn't have an advantage.

But again, the relevance to the discussion is if he felt the car wasn't the quickest then that may have encouraged him to overdrive and/or take risks. Doesn't matter whether he's right or wrong since it's giving a possible explanation for the driving errors and in that scenario it only matters how Vettel perceived it. And then excuses don't come into it

that's not what he said, though. He was contesting the claim that the Ferrari was the quickest, or even dominant. He's not making excuses that it wasn't quick enough to compete, just that Ferrari didn't have an advantage.

But again, the relevance to the discussion is if he felt the car wasn't the quickest then that may have encouraged him to overdrive and/or take risks. Doesn't matter whether he's right or wrong since it's giving a possible explanation for the driving errors and in that scenario it only matters how Vettel perceived it. And then excuses don't come into it

Claiming that the car wasn't the fastest (when it was) and then blaming this supposed lack of speed for his mistakes is, in my opinion, a form of making excuses. If you don't see it that way, so be it. For me it's as clear as day. Blaming the car in a year where you had the best car is pretty clear cut for me.

Claiming that the car wasn't the fastest (when it was) and then blaming this supposed lack of speed for his mistakes is, in my opinion, a form of making excuses. If you don't see it that way, so be it. For me it's as clear as day. Blaming the car in a year where you had the best car is pretty clear cut for me.

I just wonder how this will affect Ferrari's annual threat to quit F1. Will it be come sooner or later as a result of the changes?

Will it come before or after RB's annual threat?

They're kind like the Waldorf & Stadler of F1 aren't they? Always whinging about the show but they continue roll up year after year.

It's your opinion he had the best car. It's his that he didn't. And despite it being explained you're entirely missing the point that in a discussion involving reasons for (poor) performance it's his opinion that's the important one. And it's not an excuse because the motivation doesn't excuse the fact that mistakes were made. You're confusing reasons with excuses but since the reasons don't actually absolve any blame excuses don't even come into it

No, actually I'm not confusing anything. Him trying to characterize the season as one where he had to push like crazy just to keep up is making excuses IMO. He's trying to spin his mistakes as the result of over-driving to keep up with a superior machine. For me personally, that's BS. It wasn't that type of season by any stretch of the imagination. He had the top car on the season IMO and even if you disagree, he at worst had the equal best car by any reasonable assessment. Trying to add that slant to his errors is purely something he's doing to defend himself.

not really, because you're turning it into a blame thing, when really that's completely irrelevant. You keep bringing up excuses which I suppose would be more relevant if we were discussing how good a season he had, but we're not. We're talking about where it went wrong for Ferrari and even if - for the sake of argument - Vettel's deluding himself it still offers a valid reason into why he may have taken some of the risks he did

No I don't think so. It wasn't about taking risks; it was about making mistakes. His crash into Bottas in France was just a mistake. He wasn't taking any special risks; he just got it wrong in the braking zone. Likewise in Germany, he just made a mistake while all by himself in the lead on the track. IN Baku, he was ahead of Hamilton during the restart but made a mistake into the braking zone. In Monza, he was ahead of Hamilton at the start and just screwed up. I don't see mistakes being made as he scrambled to keep up. Most of these errors are being made from a commanding position on track. I don't see this as valid reasoning at all. For me, it's just making excuses.

you talked about gross misrepresentation earlier but what you've just written contains examples that paint a somewhat less than accurate picture. At Monza, for example, it's a little misleading to simply say he was ahead of Hamilton - Hamilton overtook him around the outside into the second chicane and Vettel ran wide and hit him. They were fighting for position at the time and it could be a straightforward error or it could have been down to Vettel being desperate not to let Hamilton past as he felt he wouldn't be able to take the place back again. Not saying that's a cert but it's certainly possible and not something you can dismiss out of hand.

Anyway, you're free to interpret it as an excuse but it doesn't matter. You don't know for sure so you can't rule it out, that's the bottom line. And if Vettel does believe it then the explanation stands

One could argue that Ferrari got faster once Vettel stepped in. James Allison is a commodity in F1 and that's why Mercedes snapped him up.
His departure was rather suspicious as it occurred after it was speculated Allison might replace Arrivabene as TP. Quite noteworthy IMPO.

Vettel is just as good as Alonso & Hamilton.

Things between them at this level is absurdly close and ANY of them can make mistakes. Let's not forget Hamilton spun himself out and made mistakes a few times in critical moments so let's not jump to criticize Vettel and even suggest the notion he's not an elite driver because that is preposterous. Alonso also made his share of mistakes so he wasn't this perfect machine many make him out to be. In the same car all 3 of them would be taking wins off one another with perhaps Hamilton edging them out.

Even Mario Andretti (the greatest race car driver of all time) said that Vettel is the right man for Ferrari and I value his opinion more than anyone's, and it just so happens that I feel the exact same way.

The fruits of Mattiacci's work paid off and that's all that counts. As for decisions Arrivabene made while "leading" the team, I'd love to hear them.
I honestly still have no idea what he brought to the team outside a rather awesome Italian accent and a stronger tie with their title sponsor.

Nope. That's not how it works. You can't simply make an assertion and then "it stands" simply because you claim to believe it. It must be supported empirically on some level on order for it to stand.

Di Montezemolo says: "He came to my home with a very nice box of Swiss chocolates, because he lives in Switzerland.

"It was before the start of the season, and to make the story short, he told me, 'Listen, if this season, as I suspect, I do not win the championship, I want to come to drive for Ferrari.'"[/i]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/46238233

No, actually I'm not confusing anything. Him trying to characterize the season as one where he had to push like crazy just to keep up is making excuses IMO. He's trying to spin his mistakes as the result of over-driving to keep up with a superior machine. For me personally, that's BS. It wasn't that type of season by any stretch of the imagination. He had the top car on the season IMO and even if you disagree, he at worst had the equal best car by any reasonable assessment. Trying to add that slant to his errors is purely something he's doing to defend himself.

Slightly off-topic, so just a little thank you to dizlexik. I never knew Vettel expected a tough 2014 even before it started. This is significant to me; as it may help to explain some of the problems Vettel had last year. His explanation of his car feeling different when alongside another, may be an honest report rather than just excuses. Both Webber and Ricciardo were able to take the upper hand when Vettel's car was not how he needed it to be at Red Bull, and last year's car may indeed have been the lesser, compared to the Mercedes. And indeed more towards what Räikkönen needs, however comparable their requirements may be.

Thanks for that titbit, dizlexik! Back to Arrivabene.

I'm cautiously optimistic that this is, at least, not a bad move. Time will tell if it's a good one. Binotto appears to be at least highly competent in what he's been doing so far, but running the entire team may prove to be a different matter. I do think that having a team principle with a lot of technical know-how is best, so that's likely to be an improvement.

Other than him

Ah, the "best car" thing again. Please remember that it is your opinion that the Ferrari was the best car last year, not irrefutable fact. Was the Ferrari competitive..certainly, was the Ferrari the best car for race at times...certainly, was it the unquestioned "best car", much less the dominate car...not at all. It has been Frequently debated in this forum with with no indisputable conclusions. just stating it as fact does not necessarily make it true, no matter how many times one says it.

he also disagreed with the idea that the Ferrari was the equal of the Mercedes, so if you're going to reference him you need to take the full context. He at least felt the Mercedes was the better car. Whether he's right or not is another story, but that was/is his position, which means when he says that from his perspective he was always playing catch up

If he felt like he was playing catch up at Monza then that's only because he crashed in Germany, if he had won the race then it would have been Hamilton playing catch up, that was on Vettel not Ferrari.

I believe what we are debating is Vettel's claims that the Mercedes was the best/fastest car.

Back on track, https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/21213

This mentions that it was not Arrivabene who really put the media ban, rather it was Marchionne. It generally vilifies Marchionne and makes Arrivabene look a bit nicer. Not sure about this

link appears to be blocked for me.

I can believe it, tbh. Marchionne was by all accounts a pretty forceful character and I can't imagine something like this happening without at least his approval

Nobody's claiming that all the blame is on Ferrari.

We're talking about Vettel's state of mind (among other things) and in that the only relevance is what he thought. The very quote of mine you just posted makes it clear by saying whether he's right or not is another story..."

Anyway, we've been asked by the Mods to cease this line of reasoning, so probably best to draw a line under it.

Just let's gloss over some of Vettel's glaring mistakes which were the main reason he was having to play catch up as you called it.

There seems to be a narrative of saying Vettel made mistakes because he was having to play catch up.

If he felt like he was playing catch up at Monza then that's only because he crashed in Germany, if he had won the race then it would have been Hamilton playing catch up, that was on Vettel not Ferrari.