Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 5 votes

Is it time for Ferrari to replace it's management?


  • Please log in to reply
400 replies to this topic

#51 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 March 2012 - 15:57

Agree 100%.

As I previously said I give the design team the benefit of the doubt.. Dome and LDM on the other hand, I wouldn't mind a change.


If the design team succeeds spectacularly, even if late, it would be really difficult to blame Domenicali :)
(Regarding LdM I don't have any more to say than I did above)

Advertisement

#52 Claudius

Claudius
  • Member

  • 2,309 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 07 March 2012 - 16:03

Posted Image


:lol:
Haha, I've been away from the forum for a while and it shows.
I was a bit sceptical about Ferrari2183 post but I still didn't realise he was being sarcastic...



#53 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,880 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 07 March 2012 - 21:43

domenicali must be in grave danger.

lets be honest. its a while since ferrari have been the quickest car on the circuit. last yr they were third and by all accounts are even further behind this yr. regardless of whether they will improve over the season its still catch up.

ldm is bullet proof but I predict domenicali will have lost his job before season is out. ldm has laready signaled that results need to be seen. if testing is confrimed by 3rd race in the wanted adds will be out.

#54 Victor

Victor
  • Member

  • 441 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 07 March 2012 - 22:14

Ok thanks, I didn't know Ferrari could veto other teams from building or using tracks. That's one big advantage they had before then.'


You forgott the driver aids. Apparently only Ferrari could use that.

#55 shonguiz

shonguiz
  • Member

  • 1,843 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 07 March 2012 - 23:48

Since four seasons, i was against it but now it's the time for SD to go. He fired a lot of people presumably to ending up with an "unbeatable" team, it turned out to fiasco, so now mr accoutant it's your turn to leave.

#56 ahpadt

ahpadt
  • New Member

  • 3 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 08 March 2012 - 00:05

Talk about knee jerk. Ferrari and McLaren have won the same amount of championships since 2009. Race wins are small comforts for teams that aspire to win championships. Having to redesign side pods because not enough air is getting to the back of the car, is not a design problem led by incompetent aerodynamicists. Their software tools and wind-tunnels is spitting out the wrong information. Renault famously took 1 year to sort out the wind tunnel problems. If Ferrari does look for new staff to lead the team, what is expected of them? Instant results or their heads are on the chopping block? How long was Newey at Red Bull before they came good? I'd give Domenicalli and co one more year to get things right.


From 2009 to 2011, McLaren have won 13 races, Ferrari 7. Last year McLaren had 6 wins, Ferrari 1.

Edited by ahpadt, 08 March 2012 - 00:06.


#57 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 00:51

From 2009 to 2011, McLaren have won 13 races, Ferrari 7. Last year McLaren had 6 wins, Ferrari 1.


Yeah, but this means that in 2009 and 2010 McLaren won 7 races and Ferrari 6; and Ferrari was in WDC contention in the last race of 2010 (although of course RBR would have walked it if not for their reliability problems). From that perspective, except for 2011 these two teams were approx. on the same level, of course with RBR far in front.

2011 was the terrible outlier, Domenicali removed what he considered those responsible, and installed a new design team - the first car of whom has not even raced yet. I still say let them show what they can do over the course of the season, or at least the first half. (Usual caveats about facilities, etc., still to be considered: it would be unfair to axe Fry over faults which predate him in Ferrari's insufficient simulation and tunnel, and even more importantly a new face would fail as well under these circumstances).

#58 itsademo

itsademo
  • Member

  • 408 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 08 March 2012 - 01:02

IMHO its really rather simple.
Those at the top have have made changes, as such they should be given time to show those changes are for the better.
However if within an reasonable time limit (perhaps as long as 1.5 seasons but no longer) they fail to show significant improvements then the buck should stop at the top.
For it will be their (the people who made the changes) failure in putting in place the right tools to ensure improvements.

#59 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 01:11

IMO Ferrari will not recover from their decline until they have replaced Montezemolo at the head of the company. The competitors and the general public know his reputation for cutting exclusive deals with FiA and FOM at the disadvantage of the sport as a whole. He is a dinosaur who belongs to the past when Ferrari got away with such shady manoeuvres. The only way to rescue Ferrari is putting a new vigorous man at the top who will have the respect of his peers and re builds Ferrari's reputation and capabilities by fair and hard work and not by back room politics.

Advertisement

#60 Jaybools

Jaybools
  • Member

  • 260 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 08 March 2012 - 01:17

I have nothing against domenicali but I think it would be great to see Flavio as TD.

#61 ViMaMo

ViMaMo
  • Member

  • 5,139 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 08 March 2012 - 01:34

Im not holding Newey as the target, but whats so radical about this car? Pull rods? Havent other teams pulled off pull rod suspensions in the last two years?

Last year's car wasnt a gem either and they shifted their focus to the 2012 contender earlier than other teams. The first few races should let us know where we stand. IMHO they should start thinking about race wins rather than the championships, not that it helps much, but its a more realistic target.

Is SD the cause? Maybe. If 2012 is dud, he should make way.

-------------

Well, well. They are going for a new crash test because its going to sport RB style exhausts? They spent months on the present design and now... :rolleyes:

Edited by ViMaMo, 08 March 2012 - 01:56.


#62 Lazy Prodigy

Lazy Prodigy
  • Member

  • 2,458 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 08 March 2012 - 04:21

Stefano must go. He has a been a disaster the 2nd he came in. He couldnt handle Kimi and adjust when Kimi had problems, bad calls when Massa was fighting for the title. Bad cars strategy... etc

#63 AlexS

AlexS
  • Member

  • 2,568 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 08 March 2012 - 04:54

Well Domenicalli should have been out long ago. He doesn't have a racing culture.
I don't know why the Aero problems aren't fixed and that ball doesn't go only for Domenicalli. So i would replace him and the aero department. After all this they realize they don't have enough downforce at rear so big that is noticed so easily?!

#64 TeamSideways

TeamSideways
  • Member

  • 647 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 08 March 2012 - 06:58

wont judge ferrari till FP2 not FP1

#65 Pilla

Pilla
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 08 March 2012 - 08:08

Based in historical fact.

They should employ a few New Zealanders*, never has F1 needed 'on the run' thinking as now with the lack of testing.

*The amount of New Zealanders per capita engineering in F1 and top level motor racing successfully is amazing.



I'll send them my CV.

#66 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 March 2012 - 08:46

IMO Ferrari will not recover from their decline until they have replaced Montezemolo at the head of the company. The competitors and the general public know his reputation for cutting exclusive deals with FiA and FOM at the disadvantage of the sport as a whole. He is a dinosaur who belongs to the past when Ferrari got away with such shady manoeuvres. The only way to rescue Ferrari is putting a new vigorous man at the top who will have the respect of his peers and re builds Ferrari's reputation and capabilities by fair and hard work and not by back room politics.

Respect and reputation does not win you races and titles... Bending over and accepting what others throw at you, on the other hand, is a sure way of losing.

Montezemolo is one of the greats when it comes to Formula 1 and business in general. That he can negotiate sweet deals for his team is only bonus and it is not his problem if his peers lack the clout or guile to do similar.

Funny thing in all this is that you are sounding more and more like a politician yourself.

#67 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 7,410 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:13

I don't think Stefano is the problem, the problem is inside the design team, they are the ones who design the car, Stefano is a victim of the F1 cycle, now the cycle is on RB side and Ferrari has to suffer, like they did in the past, and the same goes for McLaren.

I really believe that if you put "hard" guys like Briatore or Todt in the current Ferrari, they will get the same results as Stefano.

#68 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:33

I don't think Stefano is the problem, the problem is inside the design team, they are the ones who design the car, Stefano is a victim of the F1 cycle, now the cycle is on RB side and Ferrari has to suffer, like they did in the past, and the same goes for McLaren.

I really believe that if you put "hard" guys like Briatore or Todt in the current Ferrari, they will get the same results as Stefano.

I don't even think it is the design team. These guys have proven track records... It is becoming evident that Ferrari simply lack the correct tools under these regulations whether it be the wind tunnel or CFD. Apparently their whole sidepod design gave them great results using CFD but the track results say something else.

Before they even think of dismissing staff, they have to give these guys the appropriate tools and it is Domenicali's job to make sure that they get it. I said in the beginning that I can tolerate a failed car because you threw everything at it but what I won't tolerate a failed car because the wind tunnel and simulation tools are once again giving correlation issues. Ferrari is not short on cash reserves, so they should upgrade the facilities which are lacking.

#69 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,423 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:35

wont judge ferrari till FP2 not FP1


How considerate.

#70 havocas

havocas
  • Member

  • 75 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:38

saying that LDM should be replaced is really naive

he isnt just responsible for the motorsport division but also the Chairman of the WHOLE company.

Which when i last checked is doing pretty well..

#71 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 3,824 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:41

People who talk about changing the management now are CRAZY! The season's about to start - they're in enough strife as it is without having to deal with the management all being fired and who would replace them? Most top technicians etc are already with teams at the moment, the majority of which would have long gardening leave clauses built into their contracts. Ferrari need to get their heads down - hope it's tight enough at the top so no one runs away with it and sort out the car. They need to work out what went wrong first with this years car - if it is systems such as wind tunnel, cfd then they need to think about ways of fixing these things. Let's face it, if SD was seeing great numbers on the simulations then why whould he not believe them, wouldn't any TD believe the resources the team has available? It's not as simple as it seems - chopping the head of will leave a chicken running around splurting a lot of red everywhere, generally making a nuisance of itself but not getting anywhere fast.

#72 davegp3

davegp3
  • Member

  • 1,820 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:29

What stopped the other teams from building a track behind their factories so that they could do unlimited tests?


Local government. Always blame THEM.

#73 Reinmuster

Reinmuster
  • Member

  • 668 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:45

They should give up now, and start targeting the 2013 or better, the 2014 as Fernando gonna be there until 2016 at least, and the new engine rules will play into their hands once again.

#74 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,448 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:49

too early to call for blood, for any team

#75 Big Block 8

Big Block 8
  • Member

  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 08 March 2012 - 11:16

The biggest factor in Ferrari 2000-2004 success was the tire development from 2000 onwards, resulting in tailored Bridgestones for Schumacher's liking and soon after that a mass escape of the other teams to have shared Michelins instead. Without that weapon Ferrari has been more or less on par with the other big teams, so it's a bit unfair to expect them to perform as well as they used to.

#76 wrcva

wrcva
  • Member

  • 1,044 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 12:38

I could be wrong but it is hard to imagine Dom credibly pressing some issue in some meeting with the likes of Bernie, Max, Todd, Brawn, Ron, Martin, Charlie, Marko, Flav... without LdM's presence. He is too light-weight. He probably is a nice and passionate guy who can successfully run a department but not Ferrari racing, let alone providing leadership to the motorsport world (historical role of Ferrari)... Look at the power of FIA which has been established during Max's leadership as an instrument of Bernie's configuration. In reality team's are their clients, but from the balance of power perspective you would think FIA is the primary revenue generator... that power shift is directly offset wiith the loss of power on the team side thanks to rookie administrators like Dom getting OJT (on the job training)... when you put a hot shot MBA who cannot tell the difference between disk and drum bakes in charge of Ferrari racing what do you expect?

With Todd and Brawn, who were pretty high powered expert leaders with good size egos, I think LdM felt like he lost control, regardless of success Ferrari experienced. He thought the solution was to bring in a loyal home boy (yes-man) without paying any particular attention to qualification or credentials so his decisions are not challenged, I guess. Prior to this role, Dom's background and experience was in HR, logistics, and track management -- all are tactical administrative roles, not strategic leadership roles or experience running a world class, r&d centric racing organization.

Maybe this issue should be looked at from another angle... Think about why Horner has been successful (same generation as Dom) after starting from scratch... then think about Dom's results after taking over a WC winning operation --- in many ways Dom's job was easier because all he had to do was to maintain already winning operation... what did he do first? piss under every tree to mark his territory, question everything from Todd era, and install solutions without identifying or defining the problem. Chance management is and was a part of the Ferrari business and racing configuration -- so rule changes, technology changes, or divine powers of Newey are all BS excuses... for justifying status quo... As they say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" plus, retention of talent is more important, and cheaper than recruitment...

Ferrari needs a high-powered leader who knows the business and comfortable in his own skin... instead of a rookie apprentice getting bullied internally and externally, cannot empower his highly technical labor force, some with huge egos, nor install an accountability structure to figure out & fix the weak links in the system. I would imagine even DC would do a better job running Ferrari as he was smart enough to provide strategic advice to RBR and Horner -- keeping in mind the fact that Horner was also smart enough to listen, collaborate with his bosses (Mateschitz & Marko) without overlapping division of labor and most importantly execute the plan... I would have never thought that a juice company would beat the $hit out of legendary F1 teams, and auto manufacturers...

you cannot win every year but you surely can keep the organization on the edge of innovation and productivity to take advantage of weaknesses of competitive environment, keep regulatory channels in check (so as to make sure the cart is not ahead of horses), and nurture your talent base to make that leap at all times.

Senna once said "2nd place is the 1st place for losers" -- that should be the mentality of the business, designers, engineers, drivers, and mechanics...and only the leadership can provide that type of competitively productive environment... there is no trace of that in Dom's leadership other than just talk, and searching for fall guys. This is year 5 under his watch after taking over a WC winning team, and looks like it ain't happening...


#77 Coops3

Coops3
  • Member

  • 1,617 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 08 March 2012 - 12:55

In my opinion way too much noise is being made of Ferrari's supposedly poor car, that hasn't even raced yet. As others have said, let's wait and see how bad it really is before discussing replacing the management.

#78 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 08 March 2012 - 13:06

Ferrari needs the old team back: Ross, Schu, Todt, Byrne....

Yeah, or perhaps a new set of people to take it over and run it like some other team. With those great facilities, Ferrari could be great again! :smoking:

#79 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 March 2012 - 13:25

In my opinion way too much noise is being made of Ferrari's supposedly poor car, that hasn't even raced yet. As others have said, let's wait and see how bad it really is before discussing replacing the management.


Suppose for a moment that in Australia Ferrari get a 1-2 with one lap ahead of the fourth. Nice victory but What would you think about Ferrari management and engineers?
They should go to take the 2013 Accademy Award or they are so stupid that they even know they have a rocket so you do not know if they really know how to build a winning car. You should take an action with the team any way.

Advertisement

#80 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 March 2012 - 13:42

Suppose for a moment that in Australia Ferrari get a 1-2 with one lap ahead of the fourth. Nice victory but What would you think about Ferrari management and engineers?
They should go to take the 2013 Accademy Award or they are so stupid that they even know they have a rocket so you do not know if they really know how to build a winning car. You should take an action with the team any way.

They know the performance of their car, although it fell short of their targets. What they don't know is the performance level of the opposition which will only become apparent in Melbourne.

So, things can be good if their initial targets were higher than the opposition, really bad if their targets were lower or somewhere in between.

Fry, has a rough idea based on the historical fuel loads McLaren used in testing and he said as much in the interview but he is far from certain.

#81 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 13:46

You got a beautiful straw man there to bash.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 08 March 2012 - 13:49.


#82 WhiteBlue

WhiteBlue
  • Member

  • 2,138 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 14:06

Red Bull are winning on the strength of their engineering team and not based on political machinations. That is the difference to Ferrari. Being competition minded does not mean to systematically get unfair advantages like more money and more resources or a secrete veto with the governing body. It means to work harder and smarter generating more competitive advantages from the same resources. Ferrari will not have that inner strength until their top leadership is exchanged. Montezemolo is the type of guy who cuts the corners and lives of the success created by other people. His contribution to Ferrari's successes in the last 15 years is vastly overestimated. It were Todt, Brawn and others who have pulled Ferrari out of the mire and given it the touch of excellence. Since the day Todt left Ferrari is effectively in decline and even the talent of Alonso cannot compensate for the management deficiencies. Ferrari can afford to hire the best of the best in engineering and management talent but they will not get them! Why is that so? Because the people feel the basic dishonesty of Montezemolo and know that he will not reward them according to their achievements. It is the Italian rot again as Lauda has once put it. The fish stinks from the head. The Ferrari owners can only hope that Montezemolo vanishes into Italian national politics and find a suitable guy in the mould of Mateschitz who can replace him. With a credible and respected leader in place Ferrari will find it much easier to hire the right people who work smarter and harder and they will eventually win championships again.

#83 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 08 March 2012 - 14:10

Holy hyperbole Batman!

#84 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 March 2012 - 14:10

They know the performance of their car, although it fell short of their targets. What they don't know is the performance level of the opposition which will only become apparent in Melbourne.

So, things can be good if their initial targets were higher than the opposition, really bad if their targets were lower or somewhere in between.

Fry, has a rough idea based on the historical fuel loads McLaren used in testing and he said as much in the interview but he is far from certain.


I`m sorry but WE do not know, Fry&Co should know the full potential of F2012 (if not what they did in the tests?) and can guess the capacity of the others.
If they see the others are worst, they can be afraid that they are sandbagging.
If they see the others are better they are cooked.
So the error for Fry&Co should be believe be better than what they are. And they are not.


#85 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 March 2012 - 15:08

Red Bull are winning on the strength of their engineering team and not based on political machinations. That is the difference to Ferrari. Being competition minded does not mean to systematically get unfair advantages like more money and more resources or a secrete veto with the governing body. It means to work harder and smarter generating more competitive advantages from the same resources. Ferrari will not have that inner strength until their top leadership is exchanged. Montezemolo is the type of guy who cuts the corners and lives of the success created by other people. His contribution to Ferrari's successes in the last 15 years is vastly overestimated. It were Todt, Brawn and others who have pulled Ferrari out of the mire and given it the touch of excellence. Since the day Todt left Ferrari is effectively in decline and even the talent of Alonso cannot compensate for the management deficiencies. Ferrari can afford to hire the best of the best in engineering and management talent but they will not get them! Why is that so? Because the people feel the basic dishonesty of Montezemolo and know that he will not reward them according to their achievements. It is the Italian rot again as Lauda has once put it. The fish stinks from the head. The Ferrari owners can only hope that Montezemolo vanishes into Italian national politics and find a suitable guy in the mould of Mateschitz who can replace him. With a credible and respected leader in place Ferrari will find it much easier to hire the right people who work smarter and harder and they will eventually win championships again.

:rotfl: Todt and Brawn not political... They are as political as they come when it serves them.

Ok, I tell you what. Let's have the FOM monies divided equally between the teams regardless of constructors points and while we're at it take the team with lowest amount of sponsorship revenue and set that as the ceiling for all teams. That way everybody has the same resources and we see what the sport comes to in the name of fairness. More importantly let's see if Red Bull are competitive under these conditions and able to afford their engineering team. Seems you have forgotten that Red Bull has probably outspent even Ferrari in the last two years.

Furthermore, Montezemolo has been through it all... The success and the drought so I can't see how removing him will change their fortunes other than benefit your kind because you don't like him. Give me a break.

#86 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 22:39

So Autosport agrees with Yellow Helmet, like me. This is from a recent issue.

Posted Image
(thx to CrucialXtreme in the F2012 thread for the scan).

Seems to me that it supports my point from earlier that if Fry after his arrival and after surveying the state of the tools at the Scuderia told the team that as far as simulation abilities are concerned they need to catch up to what he has seen at McLaren, he should be in the clear wrt to job safety for the time being.

Now, some may say that it's at least Domenicali's fault that they still haven't caught up, and IIRC have said so in this thread. As a reminder, here is the timeline:
  • Before 2007 season: Bridgestone becomes exclusive tyre supplier and FIA announces testing restriction to 30,000 km, only one car during the season, and mainly at 8 FIA-sanctioned 3-day tests in-season.
  • In November 2007, Domenicali becomes team director.
  • 2008 season: test restrictions stay the same.
  • 2009 season: complete ban on in-season testing and restriction on wind tunnels. CFD and simulation reigns supreme.

While the decision on the first testing restriction was prepared in 2006, and during the 2007 season, Jean Todt still was the F1 Team Director. Any failures to ramp up simulation capabilities in anticipation of (2006) and in response to (2007) this restriction, can therefore not be blamed on Domenicali. I would not simply blame Todt either, as I said Ferrari probably started from a worse point than other teams due to having a test track, and because of the unfortunate coinciding of such a big change in F1 with an unstable period within Ferrar, but if blame is to be placed, it's on Todt and his team. (Especially, BTW, as Todt agreed to the unanimous teams' decision to bring forward the test restrictions by one year from 2008).

Domenicali has had 4 years as the director. It's certainly open to debate and depends on personal preferences whether this should have sufficed for a turnaround, or not. In the end one cannot say for sure without in-depth knowledge of how far their abilities were behind to begin with. I would argue that the 2008 campaign was only partially in Domenicali's hands as the car had been designed largely before his ascendancy. And I'm sure everyone will agree that at least part of the year 2008 he will legitimately have needed to settle in and start to build the team to his liking. Leaving 2009-2011, 3 years.

3 years is not unheard of for the overhaul of an organisation that was apparently ill-prepared (to an unknown extent, but obviously significantly) for changes forced upon it, and which had to catch up to the state of the art - inside and outside of F1. If WhiteBlue wrote in a post further up that Domenicali had been "pissing" everywhere to mark his territory and thus wasted time and resources, I would on the contrary argue that these were needed changes to bring the team into the new era, both regarding leadership and technically (plus, had he not done this, WhiteBlue and others would probably have accused him of not owning the team and not making the necessary adjustments).

Make of this what you will. I think 2012 is the first year Ferrari is approaching what Dom had in mind. The transition may not be finalized completely, and you will blame Dom for it if you want to. I believe the state of transition can be called reasonable - again depending on how much they were caught out by the testing changes, which I cannot really know. Can't wait for the racing to start, then we'll see.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 08 March 2012 - 22:53.


#87 glorius&victorius

glorius&victorius
  • Member

  • 4,327 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 March 2012 - 22:52

Stefano should be moved to the road car division asap.

Giorgio Ascanelli would do a much better job.

#88 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 March 2012 - 23:18

So Autosport agrees with Yellow Helmet, like me. This is from a recent issue.



Seems to me that it supports my point from earlier that if Fry after his arrival and after surveying the state of the tools at the Scuderia told the team that as far as simulation abilities are concerned they need to catch up to what he has seen at McLaren, he should be in the clear wrt to job safety for the time being.

Now, some may say that it's at least Domenicali's fault that they still haven't caught up, and IIRC have said so in this thread. As a reminder, here is the timeline:

  • Before 2007 season: Bridgestone becomes exclusive tyre supplier and FIA announces testing restriction to 30,000 km, only one car during the season, and mainly at 8 FIA-sanctioned 3-day tests in-season.
  • In November 2007, Domenicali becomes team director.
  • 2008 season: test restrictions stay the same.
  • 2009 season: complete ban on in-season testing and restriction on wind tunnels. CFD and simulation reigns supreme.

While the decision on the first testing restriction was prepared in 2006, and during the 2007 season, Jean Todt still was the F1 Team Director. Any failures to ramp up simulation capabilities in anticipation of (2006) and in response to (2007) this restriction, can therefore not be blamed on Domenicali. I would not simply blame Todt either, as I said Ferrari probably started from a worse point than other teams due to having a test track, and because of the unfortunate coinciding of such a big change in F1 with an unstable period within Ferrar, but if blame is to be placed, it's on Todt and his team. (Especially, BTW, as Todt agreed to the unanimous teams' decision to bring forward the test restrictions by one year from 2008).

Domenicali has had 4 years as the director. It's certainly open to debate and depends on personal preferences whether this should have sufficed for a turnaround, or not. In the end one cannot say for sure without in-depth knowledge of how far their abilities were behind to begin with. I would argue that the 2008 campaign was only partially in Domenicali's hands as the car had been designed largely before his ascendancy. And I'm sure everyone will agree that at least part of the year 2008 he will legitimately have needed to settle in and start to build the team to his liking. Leaving 2009-2011, 3 years.

3 years is not unheard of for the overhaul of an organisation that was apparently ill-prepared (to an unknown extent, but obviously significantly) for changes forced upon it, and which had to catch up to the state of the art - inside and outside of F1. If WhiteBlue wrote in a post further up that Domenicali had been "pissing" everywhere to mark his territory and thus wasted time and resources, I would on the contrary argue that these were needed changes to bring the team into the new era, both regarding leadership and technically (plus, had he not done this, WhiteBlue and others would probably have accused him of not owning the team and not making the necessary adjustments).

Make of this what you will. I think 2012 is the first year Ferrari is approaching what Dom had in mind. The transition may not be finalized completely, and you will blame Dom for it if you want to. I believe the state of transition can be called reasonable - again depending on how much they were caught out by the testing changes, which I cannot really know. Can't wait for the racing to start, then we'll see.



You count 2008 as not in charge of Domenicali, on the contrary I count 2007 as a year of transition where the voice of Domenicali should be taken in count. Maybe 2008 car is Todt´son, buteverybody knew that he was leaving the position and Domenicali taken it. They try to do a seamless transition.

For the same reason, you cannot blame Todt for not prepare the future, he was leaving the tem after the mos glorious decade. Which could be his interest in what will happen in thre or four years, that should and is Domenicali problem.

I would forgive Domenicali all his errors and faults, what make me think he deserves be fired is that he always personalized the errors an thought that changing people is the way to solve the problems. To be coherent with himselve he should fire himselve.

Edited by Enzoluis, 08 March 2012 - 23:21.


#89 freya

freya
  • Member

  • 1,585 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 23:28

You count 2008 as not in charge of Domenicali, on the contrary I count 2007 as a year of transition where the voice of Domenicali should be taken in count. Maybe 2008 car is Todt´son, buteverybody knew that he was leaving the position and Domenicali taken it. They try to do a seamless transition.

For the same reason, you cannot blame Todt for not prepare the future, he was leaving the tem after the mos glorious decade. Which could be his interest in what will happen in thre or four years, that should and is Domenicali problem.

I would forgive Domenicali all his errors and faults, what make me think he deserves be fired is that he always personalized the errors an thought that changing people is the way to solve the problems. To be coherent with himselve he should fire himselve.


You say that stuff like you know SD fired those people.

#90 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 987 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 March 2012 - 23:35

You say that stuff like you know SD fired those people.


If SD do not fired that people is another reason to be fired, he is in charge or not?

Edited by Enzoluis, 08 March 2012 - 23:51.


#91 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 08 March 2012 - 23:42

I think we should deffer all considerations of this kind till August. I have bone feeling that Dom's days are numbered, but right now there is not much to go by.

#92 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 March 2012 - 23:54

You count 2008 as not in charge of Domenicali, on the contrary I count 2007 as a year of transition where the voice of Domenicali should be taken in count. Maybe 2008 car is Todt´son, buteverybody knew that he was leaving the position and Domenicali taken it. They try to do a seamless transition.


As I wrote, it's down do personal preferences, and would be even if we had all the facts. We don't, and so I tried to make it clear what my position is and that this is based on guts and preferences, while others may have a different one.

For the same reason, you cannot blame Todt for not prepare the future, he was leaving the tem after the mos glorious decade. Which could be his interest in what will happen in thre or four years, that should and is Domenicali problem.


What more can I do than write, "I would not simply blame Todt either, as I said Ferrari probably started from a worse point than other teams due to having a test track, and because of the unfortunate coinciding of such a big change in F1 with an unstable period within Ferrari, but if blame is to be placed, it's on Todt and his team."? (Edit: I hope in context it was clear that I only meant any blame for the state of Ferrari's CFD and simulation capabilities up to and including 2007).

I think this is why a cyclic nature of F1 *does* exist to some extent. People build up successful teams, but inevitably the people change or leave, the premises change on which the teams were built in the first place, even the best of guys may have problems quickly adapting to a fundamental change like the one to CFD and simulation, etc. And sure you want to do seamless transitions, but rarely ever are they really seamless, and after the flame was handed over, the new guys will still have to do things their way and take some time. It's not as if the Whitmarsh era started without any hiccups, just as one example.

EDIT: But I think the Autosport article can serve to establish as fact (as far as possible) that Ferrari was indeed far behind in the CFD and simulation area, and even if Todt/Brawn/Byrne had remained, continued success like they had enjoyed before probably would not have come, because they would have had to make the transition as well. They may have had it easier because other things would have remained stable, but they could not have installed all the missing capabilities by magic either. (And look at Brawn now at Merc, it's not as if he could fix that team overnight)

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 09 March 2012 - 00:42.


#93 eff1fan

eff1fan
  • Member

  • 302 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 March 2012 - 17:33

Montezemolo hopes Fry's no-podium predictions are wrong... Domenicali hopes for late surge...

This is getting old... the same re-run of a yearly comedic farce.

Me? I just hope that someone high enough realizes that Ferrari's F1 top management needs to go.


#94 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 March 2012 - 17:41

Montezemolo hopes Fry's no-podium predictions are wrong... Domenicali hopes for late surge...

This is getting old... the same re-run of a yearly comedic farce.

Me? I just hope that someone high enough realizes that Ferrari's F1 top management needs to go.

There is a thread for this already and the season hasn't even started yet.

And if you'd actually read the articles you would notice that those are just headlines.

Edited by Ferrari2183, 10 March 2012 - 17:42.


#95 eff1fan

eff1fan
  • Member

  • 302 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 March 2012 - 17:45

There is a thread for this already and the season hasn't even started yet.

And if you'd actually read the articles you would notice that those are just headlines.


and your point is?

#96 Ferrari2183

Ferrari2183
  • Member

  • 9,475 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 10 March 2012 - 17:59

and your point is?

The media outcry is based on an initial statement made by Fry with regard to internal targets and instead of posting the crux of the articles you go and post the sensational headlines publications make as basis for your judgement.

Kind of ironic you calling it a comedic farce it it not...

#97 freya

freya
  • Member

  • 1,585 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 10 March 2012 - 21:11

If SD do not fired that people is another reason to be fired, he is in charge or not?


I am pretty sure LdM is in "charge", ultimately.

#98 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 10 March 2012 - 21:53

From 2009 to 2011, McLaren have won 13 races, Ferrari 7. Last year McLaren had 6 wins, Ferrari 1.


So what you are saying is that 2011 wasn't a good year for them. :stoned:

Edited by Dolph, 10 March 2012 - 21:54.


#99 Dolph

Dolph
  • Member

  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 10 March 2012 - 21:54

I have nothing against domenicali but I think it would be great to see Flavio as TD.


Flavio as testdriver. That's brilliant! :p

Advertisement

#100 ScuderiaSV1

ScuderiaSV1
  • Member

  • 109 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 10 March 2012 - 23:34

It is quite difficult, IMO, on who is to blame. To try to pick one person isn't fair if we refer to the time period of Domenicalli as team principle.

Are there instances where Domenicalli should be heavily at fault? I certainly believe there are. I was not a fan of how the blame was laid on Dyer for what transpired at Abu Dubai in 2010. Just as I also think Domenicalli greatly mis-managed his drivers in 2008.

Back on topic: I think the major fault of Ferrari right now is a lack of correlation between off-track simulations (CFD, wind-tunnel calibration, etc..) and what transpires on track. We've heard it from Montezemolo in the past, and we heard it again this past week: how Monte wishes F1 didn't have a 'huge' reliance on aerodynamics. I personally believe he says this for a reason. And it's because his squad has failed to deliver from the aero department. Ferrari have the money to buy the best simulator. And to buy the best wind tunnel. But are they 'behind' in their approach? I'm not one who studies all of the engineers and individual achievements. But my mind would lead me to believe Ferrari could attract the best. I understand there is only one Adrian Newey. But it does take a team of engineers to nail the concept. It's hard to imagine that Ferrari lack the 'brain'-power, from an engineering standpoint, to the rest of the competition. So this leads me to believe the gap in performance comes from their inability to achieve sufficient aerodynamics with their cars.

Is it time to change their management over this core issue? I don't believe so. I am not a fan of Domi. But I think he has had other reasons in the past to be sent to the sword. The current belief that the 2012 challenger will be behind in Australia goes beyond his scope, IMO. Regarding Monte: I'm not so sure he deserves to go either. He seems to give Ferrari all of the resources that he can provide. The addition of Hirohide Hamashima was a brilliant move IMO. But again, I think Ferrari have inherently less downforce than their major competitors. And Hamashima can not correct that. So is the attention now turned to Pat Fry? Did Ferrari go after him to be chief technical officer because they needed a man with the know hows to correlate data from off-track simulation to on track? IMO, yes. And that is an answer that won't be completely solved in 2012. We may get a glimpse of that answer as the season progresses. If Ferrari can bring strong developments and build a solid platform for 2013, this would be a step in the right direction. McLaren have out-developed Ferrari over the past 3-4 years, IMO. And Red Bull made a strong case for being able to out-develop Ferrari last year (amazing job by the team to bring upgrades to Monza/SPA - two track RB have been notoriously bad at in the past and were able to deliver victory later in the season).

I personally think Tombazis will be fired if Ferrari fail to deliver a championship this year. Fry is too new for him to go anywhere. I also have a strange feeling Domi is safe.