Why F1 should call Ferrari's quit-threat bluff

It is always during the endless yuletide season that Formula 1 is at its quietest, but if things have been pretty still these two weeks past, there have yet been talking points, the loudest of which came from Sergio Marchionne's pre-Christmas address to the world.

Little within it came as a surprise. The Ferrari president declared, for example, that Kimi Raikkonen was on his last warning, that if he didn't raise his game in 2018, Sebastian Vettel would have a new team-mate the following year.

This had the feel of old news. Short of Michael Schumacher, Raikkonen is the longest-serving Ferrari driver, about to begin his eighth season in the red overalls. If he narrowly won the world championship in 2007, his first year in the team, more often than not he was shaded by Felipe Massa, and by '09 Luca di Montezemolo opted to pay him off, so as to hasten Fernando Alonso's arrival.

Raikkonen then disappeared from F1 for a couple of years, rallying with Citroen, even flirting with NASCAR. There was some surprise when he returned in 2012, with Lotus, and even more when he won a couple of races with the underfunded team. For all that, though, many were amazed when Ferrari asked him back for '14.

There remain legions of Raikkonen fans, forever bewitched by his 'don't give a toss' persona, but not even his most fervent supporter could claim that his second spell with Ferrari has been a success. In the past three seasons he may not have been blown aside by Vettel as he was by Alonso in 2014, but invariably Vettel has had the upper hand, and there have been constant murmurings that Raikkonen is on borrowed time.

It is lack of consistency, always a Raikkonen trademark, that most irks Marchionne, as it did di Montezemolo. In Monaco last May he took pole position - his first for nine years - and led Vettel until the stops, when their positions changed. Had he been allowed to win, it might have significantly affected the rest of his season, but he was not, and not even that poker face could hide his displeasure.

When it comes to continued employment by Ferrari, a high card in Raikkonen's hand is his relationship with Vettel. The two have always got along, and of course Vettel, perhaps not unmindful of his Red Bull season with Daniel Ricciardo, likes it that the man in the other car is not as quick as he. Maranello insiders tell me he was instrumental in Raikkonen's one-year contract being renewed yet again.

"We have to find compromises that don't leave Ferrari without the possibility of showing its DNA in every race. If we can't find that, then Ferrari has to go away"
Ferrari boss Sergio Marchionne

There have been times when sentiment has unexpectedly had the better of logic in Ferrari decisions. Why else, for example, would long-time wealthy test driver Luca Badoer have had a couple of stand-in drives after Massa was injured at the Hungaroring in 2009?

Come to that, why did the team so long keep faith with Massa? Yes, he was loyal, and would have been a deserving world champion for Ferrari in 2008, but the fact is that in four later seasons as Alonso's team-mate he was outqualified 60-13, and scored 496 points to Alonso's 1029.

These things happened, though, on di Montezemolo's watch. Perhaps, if someone cares to blast for it, there is a touch of sentimentality in Marchionne, but so far none has been apparent.

"My opinion is that, if we find the right key, Raikkonen drives like a god - but he needs more consistency, and it's important to find the right key to make him drive like in Monaco also on other circuits. Probably this is the last season to find it."

As Marchionne put Raikkonen on notice, so also he did the same to Formula 1, saying people are 'playing with fire' if they believe he is bluffing - as Enzo Ferrari himself was often given to in temps perdu - about taking Ferrari out of the game.

"The situation has changed since 2015," Marchionne said, referring to when he fired di Montezemolo, and took the reins himself. "Starting from that moment, everyone knows that if we threaten to do something, we do it. The previous Concorde Agreement made it impossible for the team to evaluate an alternative outside the circus, but now there is the possibility to create an alternative championship from 2020/2021.

"I would like to continue with Formula 1, but we have to find compromises that don't leave Ferrari without the possibility of showing its DNA in every race. If we can't find that, then Ferrari has to go away.

"The main thing that bothers me is that inside Liberty Media there is a person with great experience in Formula 1, Ross Brawn, who is trying to give a direction that is not in the DNA of the sport."

Two thoughts: first, some might say that hybrid 'fuel saving' engines are themselves 'not in the DNA' of Formula 1, and second, while Marchionne uses the word 'compromises', clearly that is not something he thinks applicable to Ferrari.

What Brawn proposes is not doing away with the hybrids for 2021 (however much fans would like to see it), but simplifying them, and making them significantly cheaper to ease the plight of smaller teams obliged to buy engines.

Inescapably, far too much power in F1 now resides with Ferrari and Mercedes, who, unlike Renault, take great care not to sell engines to any team that might threaten them. Such as Marchionne might wish to continue with 'no holds barred' hybrids, but after four largely dreary seasons few would suggest they have done other than conspicuously damage Formula 1.

Like any enthusiast, I would hate to see Ferrari disappear, but the DNA of F1 - as well as technological sophistication - is sound and fury and racing, all of which are in perilously short supply in this era. If Brawn's utterly reasonable plan is not acceptable to Marchionne - indeed apparently not even a basis for discussion - I say his bluff should be called, and if it proves to be more than that, so be it.