I agree with much of your points but with the proviso that the margins are so small as to make your final point an exaggeration.Seanspeed wrote: ↑26 Oct 2024, 18:28Ferrari have had the fastest car at a very small handful of tracks this year. Red Bull dominated through China, and then Mclaren have had the fastest car at the large majority of tracks since. Even in Monaco, Piastri was super close to Leclerc in qualifying and the race, and I dont think it takes some huge leap to suggest Leclerc made the difference in the end.FittingMechanics wrote: ↑26 Oct 2024, 13:34Leclerc and Ferrari bottled it after Monaco.
It is clear they had fastest car, especially since Monza.
Ferrari did mess up badly with their Barcelona package(and specifically, the new floor), which derailed the whole middle chunk of the season. But even after rectifying it, it's still not accurate to say they've been fastest since Monza. Mclaren were arguably faster in Monza, they just messed up on strategy. Mclaren were pretty clearly fastest in Singapore as well. And looked pretty competitive in qualifying at Austin, but for Norris' mistake for Sprint quali.
This narrative that Ferrari have somehow had the car to beat since Monza is quite obviously false. This is just trying to deflect from the mistakes and underperformance of Mclaren and Norris, who are entirely to blame for the current championship predicament. There's still opportunity to rectify things, but if Verstappen still wins in the end, Mclaren+Norris will have 100% blown it.
Yes it can be argued that Lando could have, even should have scored more points against Max, and crucially Charles. Both these drivers were at the outset of 2024 far more battle hardened than Lando who has only been a race winner for a few months. So my premise is that Lando doesn't (yet?) have what it takes to challenge Charles in a car of similar pace AND that Ferrari could be accused of "bottling it" though I think even that is a little strong. Ferrari and Charles have had a car with underlying pace to battle at the front but looked incompetent at times like Canada and Silverstone where they couldn't find the setup. McLaren missed the setup at Austin (on Friday) - massively - but got back to a closer point of competitiveness the following day. Once again the margins are very close by F1 standards to start talking of FAIL. "100% blown it"??? Harsh or demonstrably wrong? They're leading the WCC. When the season concludes it looks likely that the premature (IMO) idea that McLaren should have applied strong team orders since Hungary will have faded away. Lando hasn't carried enough strength to the fight, his natural speed notwithstanding, to defeat Max, and to a degree, Charles.
All the shoulda, coulda, woulda bandied around by many critics (not just of McLaren) has been overblown given the wonderful season we are enjoying. Just as an example, pundit Will Buxton has been excoriating of McLaren over team orders. I never for a moment thought Lando had a serious chance unless Max and Red Bull faced late season calamities. Even with RB's difficulties mid season they haven't been that uncompetitive to not challenge for podiums. Ferrari have discovered setups to maximise their Monza upgrade. McLaren have been consistent challengers since Miami, sometimes the quickest, other times not quite there. As it would be unfair to be highly critical of Ferrari not getting a car with great potential in the window at times due to setup and a lack of understanding, so it is with McLaren. In the run to the end of the year it may prove crucial that Ferrari have two very experienced and fast drivers who have been classy and not to be underestimated. It will be great to watch how it unfolds.
