You might not consider the following outburst a picture of restraint. It is not. But it was entirely called for. And it should not be the end of George Russell’s rigorous holding to account of his Mercedes team this week.
First, here is what Russell belted out over the team radio when his Belgian Grand Prix was condemned to end on the first lap, his pace falling off precipitously on Spa’s Kemmel Straight and leaving him to entangle himself with Lewis Hamilton.
‘I’m out,’ he screamed. ‘What the f*** happened with the SOC (state of charge) down the straight? Guys, unacceptable, unf***ing acceptable this whole weekend.’
Too right. Russell experienced two problems, which his Mercedes team-mate Kimi Antonelli entirely or partly escaped.
First, he ailed with a mysterious problem going back two races, concerning deployment from his battery. He talked of this after qualifying on Saturday, noting that not only was the issue unremedied but undiagnosed. The best his technical whizzes could do was rule out driver style as well as every other conceivable cause: tyres, excused; setup, excused; the whole scientific spectrum, excused. Thanks, guys.
Then, in Sunday’s race a separate gremlin, though one again attributed to a battery deployment limitation. Hence his reference to SOC, another acronym that might as well stand for the absurd complexity of these part-electric engines introduced so damagingly this year.
George Russell’s outburst at Spa should not be the end of his rigorous holding to account of his Mercedes team
Russell’s Belgian Grand Prix was condemned on the first lap, his pace falling off precipitously on Spa’s Kemmel Straight and leaving him to entangle himself with Lewis Hamilton
The bare fact is that Mercedes owe Russell an explanation for his problems in the lead-up to the Hungarian Grand Prix this coming weekend. His very title hopes are in the balance, the urgency of which situation his team principal Toto Wolff did not appear to grasp keenly enough in his post-race press conference in Belgium.
‘You have to understand that a driver is very emotional when these situations happen,’ said Wolff. He then added a gentle rebuke: ‘But as a Formula One driver you are part of a very elite group. And it is quite an honour to drive for Mercedes.
‘Sometimes we let ourselves down. I hope the numb feeling (Russell had disclosed he was numb to disappointment, so regularly had he experienced setbacks this season) goes away. We will try to recreate optimism and positivity.’
Perhaps behind closed doors, Wolff is incessantly urging his engineers to sort out the problem. If so, that is OK as far it goes. But making that clear to a wider audience would have conveyed a more uplifting message to Russell’s psyche, which is bruised by his falling 50 points back from world championship leader Antonelli, who has registered six wins to his two.
Yet, as is so often the case with the Austrian’s commentary on Russell, he could not bring himself to offer unequivocal backing.
Contrast his mealy-mouthed comments of Sunday night with how he sounded the trumpets for Lewis Hamilton, especially when he required some tender loving care in early 2022 as he recovered slowly from the trauma of missing out on the title to Max Verstappen in Abu Dhabi a few tormenting months earlier. Indeed, no half-decent Lewis drive passed without a gush of refulgent praise from Wolff. He applauds Russell’s achievements but with caveats strictly attached.
The manner in which Russell’s contract extension dragged on last year reflected this lukewarm pattern of half measures. He was kept dangling as Wolff toyed with signing Verstappen. He might instead have plumped for Russell from day one, and instead made Antonelli alone sweat it out for his place, the Italian being untried and prone to youthful mistakes. He could not bring himself to do that, and that tells us a lot.
Fast forward to this year. Antonelli has found his form and his confidence has soared. He is a talent and a half. But look at how much more enthusiastically Wolff and his deputy Bradley Lord salute Kimi’s latest reminder of his burgeoning strengths as they peer at the screens in the Mercedes garage. He seems to be their favoured project in a way Russell does not. The smiles are broader, and the fist clenching heartier.
Kimi Antonelli (left) seems to be the favoured project of Mercedes and Toto Wolff (right) in a way Russell does not
No half-decent Lewis drive passed without a gush of refulgent praise from Wolff. He applauds Russell’s achievements but with caveats strictly attached
As is so often the case with the Austrian’s commentary on Russell, Wolff could not bring himself to offer unequivocal backing
I do not believe for a moment that Russell is being sabotaged from within, whatever his most ardent online warriors may suggest – yet, for a moment, imagine the cacophony of doubts that would have been aired from vocal Hamilton blowhards if he were now in his successor’s predicament.
Deliberately undermined, no. But, still, George must cultivate the team for himself and not rely on what he recently told me, namely that he knew he must be being treated fairly because all 1,000 staff at the factory are on a bonus if they clinch the constructors’ title (standard at all teams), regardless of who wins out between him and Antonelli. Why, he argued, would they therefore care which driver prevails?
The logic is sound as far as it goes. But, of course, it is not that simple. Teams pull one way or another based on the relative performance of their drivers and by whichever of the pair plays the leadership game more adroitly off the track.
John Watson, who won five grands prix including from further back at Long Beach in 1983 than any winner in history, could race a bit. But he told me: ‘I thought it essentially came down to how you drove the equipment you had.
‘Niki Lauda understood what I did not realise early enough in my career, which is that you had to get everything and everybody in the team working for you and, by whatever means available to you, build the car absolutely as you wanted it to be. My failure to see this clearly cost me in the end.’
There is a lesson in those sage words for George, who can at least help himself even if others are reluctant to do so.
Mosley and his shady, anti-democratic coterie would never rest
Poor old Max Mosley. The former president of the FIA dedicated the last years of his controversial life to muzzling a free Press to no avail, before blowing his brains out while dying of cancer in 2021.
Embarrassed by his exotic orgies creating front-page news, he not only sought to close the News of the World (successfully) for publishing their expose but also to bankrupt the Daily Mail.
Sir Ron Dennis, McLaren’s then owner and chairman, who was mercilessly tormented by Max Mosley, hit the nail on the head of the former FIA president
Mosley (right) bankrolled the Hacked Off zealots – a pointless waste of money his fascist father Oswald (centre) handed down, partly accrued from the family’s Nazi friends
This month’s High Court judgement entirely clearing the Mail of phone hacking, blagging and all other nefarious practices, rendered his demented bankrolling of the Hacked Off zealots a pointless waste of money his fascist father Oswald handed down, partly accrued from the family’s Nazi friends.
Mosley, I can reveal, was not always disdainful of this newspaper and once asked me at a black tie event in Monaco if I could arrange a dinner with our then-editor Paul Dacre, whom he described ingratiatingly that night as the ‘Dean of Fleet Street’. I never got round to Mosley’s request to break bread.
Would a Mosley-Dacre summit have cleared matters up before an oil slick of preening lawyers filled their bank accounts in a frothing crusade against the Mail? I categorically doubt it. There was a vengeful single-mindedness to Mosley behind his veneer of high-born urbanity.
In typically stiletto form, he once convened a lunch on Lower Regent Street to lampoon Sir Jackie Stewart as a ‘certificated halfwit dressed up as a 1930s music hall man’.
He was never going to let his vendetta against the Press rest, instead willingly writing out cheques for Hugh Grant and his shady coterie of anti-democratic conspirators.
I remember Sir Ron Dennis, McLaren’s then owner and chairman, who was mercilessly tormented by Mosley, asking me rhetorically once: ‘Do you honestly think it is possible that Max is only sadistic in his private life?’
And, with that observation, Dennis closed his case for the prosecution.
Catch on, Lando
Who is invading whose privacy is the first question that came to mind when Lando Norris complained of cameras tracking his recent nocturnal excursions.
Lando Norris (left) was none too happy about being papped leaving a London nightclub with influencer Alix Earle (right)
The world champion most strongly objected to a paparazzo tracking him across London by day. One understands this might be unnerving. There are rightly laws in place to protect an individual’s privacy and they should be enforced.
Yet Lando is surely not so wet behind the ears, or so far up an ivory tower, as not to contemplate the notion that hanging out with, and possibly dating, a glamorous American influencer comes with attendant risks.
Alix Earle, for it is she, can hardly carp about close attention. After all, publicity is the oxygen of her existence. She inhabits a make-believe world in which self-promotion is everything. Her curvaceous pictures on Instagram hardly dispel such views.
Is it, therefore, beyond the realms of comprehension that she or her ‘team’ tip off photographers about her whereabouts, and thus Lando’s too? It is a question he might care to consider.
