Dear Friends, some of you may be aware of this but our dear friend Sebastian Vettel has signed a contract extension with RedBull keeping him at Newey's team till the end of the 2015 season. Some will hail this as he wants to keep winning and be statistically one of the best drivers ever but a lot of people, me included view this as cowardly behaviour.
Over the years a variety of pundits including RedBull ambassador David Coulthard have suggested Seb moves elsewhere to be considered a true great but his lack of desire to prove himself elsewhere in my humble opinion highlights cowardice, maybe deep down he knows without Newey's car he would be beaten easily like he was in the lower formulae by people like Di Resta.
So dear friends, what do you think about this development? I believe he's a coward, refusing to show he can do it elsewhere. Some will say, there's no need to leave a winning team but the question is, why is he scared to prove himself elsewhere? Since he's so great, dominating a championship should be a breeze somewhere else.
Link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22865133
Your thoughts and comments are welcome.
Vettel a Coward?
posted on 14/6/13
I see Daredevil has continued his agenda against RedBull and Vettel yet again on this article.
posted on 14/6/13
comment by Rafael's curls (U17937)
posted 49 seconds ago
I see Daredevil has continued his agenda against RedBull and Vettel yet again on this article.
==========
posted on 14/6/13
Sorry MU can't agree. All drivers will go for the top car or go elsewhere for a bucketful of cash.
Mansell once asked for £23m to drive the Williams after he won the WDC, Senna said he would drive it for £23m less. Nuff said.
posted on 14/6/13
Mansell struggled far more with money than most in his quest to be an F1 champion, he just wanted a good payday after that.
posted on 14/6/13
"Sorry MU can't agree. All drivers will go for the top car or go elsewhere for a bucketful of cash.
Mansell once asked for £23m to drive the Williams after he won the WDC, Senna said he would drive it for £23m less. Nuff said."
That doesn't make sense you say ALL drivers will etc, etc, etc.
Then say Little Saint Ayrton would have done something for nothing.
Plainly he wouldn't, ne was just playing stupid bee's.
Like he did with Ron in '93.(Although you may not know about that)
He was good at playing stupid bee's.!
posted on 14/6/13
Veering off topic but Senna made something like $100m in F1 so he must have been doing something right
posted on 14/6/13
pacific o blue
just from memory senna did offer his services for free to williams in 93 i believe it was but prost had a veto in his contract stopping senna from driving for williams in 93 -
i doubt if williams were that bothered at the time as they had an unbeatable car for 93 and frank knew he was going to have senna on board eventually anyway --
posted on 14/6/13
Oh dear, POB are you in a bad mood?
What makes sense to me is that Senna wanted the best car no matter what. Schumacher went to Ferrari for cash.
As for not knowing about 1993, you could be right. I was drunk for most of it.
posted on 14/6/13
No, I'm not in a bad mood, Irish, but it may look like I am blaming Senna, I am not, he WAS very good at mind games and that's what he was playing.
Try this for a bit of a better explanation,
http://tinyurl.com/kbns2ue
Go down to the article, "Burning Rubber".
It explains it better than me.
"... an extremely theoretical nothing..."
Well, nobody would blame him for that now, would they?
posted on 14/6/13
I know your not in a bad mood POB I'm only pulling your chain.
You are correct about Senna. No-one was better at mind games IMO. Just watch him trying to intimidate Schumacher post race in 91.
But the fact he, as do all drivers (imo) want the best car unless a cash incentive steer them the other way.
Senna had made his fortune both inside and outside F1 by 1993. So his "race for nothing" means little to me. But it shows he wanted the best car. Why should Vettle be different?