Subscribe

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe
Autosport Plus

From the Pulpit

It was only a month ago that Autosport-Atlas' editor declared Alex Wurz a has-been and accused F1 Racing's editor of being biased in favour of the Austrian. No sooner after the McLaren substitute crossed the finish line at the San Marino Grand Prix in a solid fourth place, driving a car he has had little experience in, did she make the call to grovel for forgiveness. Now Matt Bishop gets his chance to explain why he was actually right, and why that doesn't necessarily mean he's biased...

As I write, on the morning of Wednesday May 4th, the immediate future of Jenson Button is being decided in a Paris Court. The evidence consists of his immediate past. His and his team's best interests are being represented by a prodigiously able (my lawyer friends tell me) and fabulously expensive (ditto) QC by the name of David Pannick. Pannick usually specialises in human rights cases, incidentally, and numbers among his regular clients Her Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Like the present leader of that once-venerable institution, Button will learn his fate on Thursday, May 5th. My guess is that both Tony Blair and 'Jens' (his favoured spelling, by the way) will get a hefty kick up the backside, but will avoid ultimate defeat. But, since what goes on in courtrooms and poll booths is notoriously tricky to make accurate predictions about, who really knows at this stage?

Previous article A Tale of Two Enzos in Mr. Mateschitz's Neighborhood
Next article The 2005 Spanish Grand Prix Preview

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe