Petrov's comments about Renault [Archive]

ioan

19th November 2011, 12:13

Checked but didn't see anyone being interested in this topic even though it has been reported quite a few days ago already:

Vitaly Petrov hits out at Renault over lack of progress - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96306)

"Unfortunately I cannot say anything bad about the team, it says so in my contract," said Petrov. "But many things have already been written about [it] in the media.
...
"But I couldn't say in interviews that we lost it with the pitstops, and I cannot talk about that now either. But I can't keep silent any more - it is over. I can't keep everything inside any more."
...
"At the beginning of the year, for the first five or six races, we looked really strong. We could not fight with Ferrari, Red Bull or McLaren, but we were quite close to Ferrari and much faster than Mercedes.

"It was very easy for us to pass from Q2 to Q3 using one set of tyres. We didn't even used all the potential or push 100 per cent to get into Q3 - in the first six races it was rather easy.

"But when the windtunnel developments came, the new parts, because of the front exhausts, they didn't work. We worked on the front wing, the rear wing, the diffusers, the floor - but whatever we changed it was useless.

"For about 10 races we didn't have anything, so in fact we have had the same car with which we started the season."

This pretty much proves that Heidfeld was also right, and he was sacked for other reasons than his performance.

PS: I used Renault in the title, maybe it would have been more appropriate to use Genii or Lotus.

ShiftingGears

19th November 2011, 17:14

It's been mentioned in threads around here, but indeed - probably worth its own thread. If the money he brings for Renault next season doesn't speak louder than these comments, I think his career with Renault, and perhaps F1, is over.

jens

19th November 2011, 17:35

In retrospect indeed amusing, how Heidfeld was criticized for lacking "leadership skills".

Robinho

19th November 2011, 17:36

I think the money brought by Petrov has been overstated, apparently Lada wasa tie up with Renault and there is only a russian vodka sponsor extra. Plus Lotus are sticking in a load of cash now, and if Boullier is to be believed, there are sponsors in the wings who wouldn't commit until the name thing was sorted. I doubt the Malaysians are too bothered about a Russian in the team.

My thoughts are that there is adecent chance that Petrov will get moved on, and if he does maybe he could find his way to the actual Russian team, (Marussia Virgin), although I think they have Glock and Pic signed up, maybe Pic is not guaranteed a race drive.

That would clear the way for Grosjean to come in, and they could hang in to Senna until Kubica proves one way or the other is he is coming back. That would solve the 4 into 2 won't go problem that Lotus (nee Renault) seem to have.

I personally think Senna is somewhere close to Petrov, so they don't lose much if anything there, and Grosjean (despite his previous troubles) i rate as a decent prospect, he was just hopelessly under prepared last time.

ioan

19th November 2011, 18:17

Plus Lotus are sticking in a load of cash now, and if Boullier is to be believed, there are sponsors in the wings who wouldn't commit until the name thing was sorted.

From what we saw to date he has hardly any credibility left.
His cars went from 4th fastest to about 8th or 8th fastest and he was blaming his drivers openly or it. :down:

Robinho

19th November 2011, 20:50

kfzmeister

20th November 2011, 00:25

When i read Petrov's comments, i don't read into it like he's necessarily criticizing the team for building a crappy car, rather than him simply commenting about the failed development for most of the season. Not sure that that would cause his "sacking". He does bring a lot of money to the team and there is the future Sochi Russian GP connection, so i'm thinking that he might stay put.

ioan

20th November 2011, 13:17

i did say IF Boullier is to be believed, i must admit i'm not particularly sure about his credibility, but then this is F1 so he fits in very well!

regarding the car thing, Renault (Tech director James Allison) have actually just stated that this year was a brave experiment (forward facing exhausts) that can be considered a failure, as the car proved so difficult to develop and was inherently unstable, despite its promising beginnings. no mention of the drivers not performing

Renault admits its 2011 car and exhaust concept was a 'bold failure' - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96345)

The car was 4th fast at the start of the season, close to Ferrari in terms of ultimate pace. What they failed to do was develop it, and Petrov's words

"But when the windtunnel developments came, the new parts, because of the front exhausts, they didn't work. We worked on the front wing, the rear wing, the diffusers, the floor - but whatever we changed it was useless.

point to the inability of the technical team to advance the car during the season. Which is not surprising when you look at the list of high profile engineers who left the team during this season, and they were not replaced with other experienced people. This points to Boullier as the main problem there.

Bagwan

20th November 2011, 16:01

Oksana the she-wolf , Vitaly's manager , gave him a good smack , and made him apologize for his "outburst" , and moments later , Allison comes out and confirms Petrov's "petulant" remarks were the truth , making the obvious , public .

Malbec

20th November 2011, 18:56

point to the inability of the technical team to advance the car during the season. Which is not surprising when you look at the list of high profile engineers who left the team during this season, and they were not replaced with other experienced people. This points to Boullier as the main problem there.

I thought he was saying that because of the effect of the front exhausts which couldn't be accurately modelled in a windtunnel, the developments didn't work.

I don't think the team can be faulted for gambling on the FFE's at the start of the season. That said the core of the team that allowed it to punch above its weight for so long has disappeared so I don't expect Renault/Lotus to be that good in the future.

I don't know if you can pinpoint Boullier as the exact cause, it could be some other Genii folk that have made Renault a less pleasant place to work and have pushed people to leave. The fact that money has been so tight that there have been problems with the payroll couldn't have helped people feel welcome either.

I'll be interested to see if Petrov does indeed stay at the team as its clear he's not there on talent alone. If the Russian funding isn't as high as I thought we're probably looking at a Senna/Grosjean combo next season.

ioan

20th November 2011, 19:32

I don't know if you can pinpoint Boullier as the exact cause, it could be some other Genii folk that have made Renault a less pleasant place to work and have pushed people to leave. The fact that money has been so tight that there have been problems with the payroll couldn't have helped people feel welcome either.

The interface between a team and it's financial backers is the manager, in this case Boullier.

Malbec

20th November 2011, 20:09

The interface between a team and it's financial backers is the manager, in this case Boullier.

There are other Genii folk involved in the team though, like the guy Sutil stabbed (can't remember his name).

SGWilko

21st November 2011, 11:27

There are other Genii folk involved in the team though, like the guy Sutil * stabbed (can't remember his name).

Allegedly......

jens

21st November 2011, 17:00

It's interesting to think that in 2010 Bouiller actually got a lot of praise for turning the team around after the scandals and misery of 2009. The development work was also efficient during 2010. Right now Bouiller is not the only guy to blame. I think the instability in ownership can't have helped either. What concerns the car design and radical FEE, I actually view this experiment positively. At least they tried something different and risky to really try to catch top teams. In the end it didn't work out, but initially it seemed like a promising idea. But let's see, how can they build up the future on this experience. Initial signs aren't promising though and the loss of staff can't have helped either.

DexDexter

21st November 2011, 19:30

From what we saw to date he has hardly any credibility left.
His cars went from 4th fastest to about 8th or 8th fastest and he was blaming his drivers openly or it. :down:

Bouillier is quickly turning into a poor man's Briatore, a lot of talk but no results. At least Flavio's teams were succesful.

wedge

22nd November 2011, 01:14

Bouillier is quickly turning into a poor man's Briatore, a lot of talk but no results. At least Flavio's teams were succesful.

You can't really blame him. Fingers point to the technical side.

Renault went backwards as the season progressed. It's a bit worrying when you see Buemi overtaking/beating a Renault.

Ranger

22nd November 2011, 05:13

You can't really blame him. Fingers point to the technical side.

Renault went backwards as the season progressed. It's a bit worrying when you see Buemi overtaking/beating a Renault.

The team principal is responsible for team directive and employment of the technical team, so he is responsible to a large amount.

Sacking Nick Heidfeld for the reason of the team 'needing a change' is not an example of good leadership.

Nonetheless, we will see how they go next year.

ioan

22nd November 2011, 19:31

Sacking Nick Heidfeld for the reason of the team 'needing a change' is not an example of good leadership.

I guess in F1 a few millions only amount to change. ;)

BDunnell

22nd November 2011, 20:49

It's interesting to think that in 2010 Bouiller actually got a lot of praise for turning the team around after the scandals and misery of 2009. The development work was also efficient during 2010. Right now Bouiller is not the only guy to blame. I think the instability in ownership can't have helped either. What concerns the car design and radical FEE, I actually view this experiment positively. At least they tried something different and risky to really try to catch top teams.

I couldn't agree more. Placing the blame on one individual is very rarely correct.

DexDexter

22nd November 2011, 21:56

You can't really blame him. Fingers point to the technical side.

Renault went backwards as the season progressed. It's a bit worrying when you see Buemi overtaking/beating a Renault.

You know last year he boasted about negotiations with Räikkönen until Kimi put a stop to it. Now he again implied how Robertsons called him among other stupid things. Add to that the ultimatums for Kubica...

wedge

23rd November 2011, 01:02

The team principal is responsible for team directive and employment of the technical team, so he is responsible to a large amount.

Sacking Nick Heidfeld for the reason of the team 'needing a change' is not an example of good leadership.

Nonetheless, we will see how they go next year.

Renault have traditionally in the past few seasons seem had the knack of improving their car. Last year they brought a new front wing for nearly all the races but it seems this year they've been stubborn with their exhaust system.

S**t happens. It's been said that F1 has technically become homogenised but this year was anything but.

Wait till what the future brings before heads start rolling.

Add to that the ultimatums for Kubica...

If EB isn't exactly convinced of RK's fitness then should you be?

DexDexter

23rd November 2011, 10:56

Renault have traditionally in the past few seasons seem had the knack of improving their car. Last year they brought a new front wing for nearly all the races but it seems this year they've been stubborn with their exhaust system.

S**t happens. It's been said that F1 has technically become homogenised but this year was anything but.

Wait till what the future brings before heads start rolling.

If EB isn't exactly convinced of RK's fitness then should you be?

What I'm saying is that the guy should not discuss those things in public. Why give public deadlines to Kubica if you value him as a driver? Or does Bouillier have other motives? A good example of how things should be done is Ron Dennis who never ever gave public statements about Häkkinen's condition and when he would have to be ready to drive or lose his drive (after his accident in 1995.)

Malbec

24th November 2011, 12:10

What I'm saying is that the guy should not discuss those things in public. Why give public deadlines to Kubica if you value him as a driver? Or does Bouillier have other motives? A good example of how things should be done is Ron Dennis who never ever gave public statements about Häkkinen's condition and when he would have to be ready to drive or lose his drive (after his accident in 1995.)

A big difference between Mika and Kubica's case is that McLaren knew exactly what was happening with Mika's recovery. Ron and Mika had a very close relationship that developed exactly during this time with Ron often being at Mika's bedside.

Boullier (at least until a few days ago) didn't know what Kubica's status was and made it clear that he wasn't getting any information at all from his camp.

You can't have a private relationship aware from the public gaze if there is no communication from the other party.

I think Boullier has mishandled a few things in his time but with Kubica I don't fault him at all, Kubica's manager is the guilty party here.

wedge

24th November 2011, 13:45

Kubica's manager is the guilty party here.

Agreed. I'm all for privacy but it's been too quiet for updates on Kubica's recovery and more importantly his fitness levels appears at this moment in time is rather distressing.

DexDexter

24th November 2011, 20:28

A big difference between Mika and Kubica's case is that McLaren knew exactly what was happening with Mika's recovery. Ron and Mika had a very close relationship that developed exactly during this time with Ron often being at Mika's bedside.

Boullier (at least until a few days ago) didn't know what Kubica's status was and made it clear that he wasn't getting any information at all from his camp.

You can't have a private relationship aware from the public gaze if there is no communication from the other party.

I think Boullier has mishandled a few things in his time but with Kubica I don't fault him at all, Kubica's manager is the guilty party here.

Ok, I understand that but what I don't get it is that Renault liked Kubica and wanted him to drive their car, so why hide things from them if that indeed is the case? They should work together to get the man behind the wheel.

wedge

26th November 2011, 16:03

Contractual dispute?

RK was originally contracted to Renault but it is now Genii in the helm.

ioan

26th November 2011, 17:10

Funny how Petrov was faster than Senna in the FPs then he is slower in the Qualy. Maybe Boullier did not really get over Petrov's comments?!

Robinho

26th November 2011, 23:34

or maybe Senna had massive problems with KERS in FP and set his best time in practice with no KERS, only to have the problem fixed and do a decent job in qually

ioan

27th November 2011, 10:10

or maybe Senna had massive problems with KERS in FP and set his best time in practice with no KERS, only to have the problem fixed and do a decent job in qually

Both in FP2 and FP3? Hard to believe.

ioan

27th November 2011, 19:17

The KERS system is probably alot more complex than you think. With only a couple of hours between the 2 sessions, its not out of the realms of possibility that a technical problem may have needed longer to sort out. In 2009 Ferrari had many KERS problems and often ran practices without, most notably when Kimi's caught fire.

Keep up the funny posts mate, you're brightening my days! :laugh:

maybe, probably, 2009... try harder.

And BTW we are end of 2011 now.

Big Ben

28th November 2011, 11:01

The KERS system is probably alot more complex than you think. With only a couple of hours between the 2 sessions, its not out of the realms of possibility that a technical problem may have needed longer to sort out. In 2009 Ferrari had many KERS problems and often ran practices without, most notably when Kimi's caught fire.

I think there's more than a couple of hours between fp2 and fp3. Anyway, getting back to the topic, Petrov being a mediocre driver, if we are to describe his abilities in a nice way, he should be the last to complain. The team doesn't have much to brag home about when it comes to its 'main' driver either.