The the risk of zooming straight into Pseuds Corner, Andrea Stella might be described as Formula One’s answer to Saint Francis of Assisi.
‘Where there is error, may I bring truth, where there is doubt, may I bring faith,’ as the mystic’s prayer goes.
And there is no doubt a major element of McLaren’s rebuilding these past two years lies in the Italian’s calming influence as team principal (that is Stella, not Saint Francis).
His is a voice of reason. His words are measured. He balances his judgments carefully. He was scrupulously fair last season in adjudicating Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri’s internal competition. ‘Papaya rules’, the team’s highway code governing how their two men race against each other, was his creation.
His technical acumen is another key ingredient. I remember this most vividly revealing itself to me on a long plane journey more than a year ago.
We stood in the bulkhead as he explained with such lucidity the requirements of the current generation of ground-effect cars that you could almost hear every bolt twist into place.
A major element of McLaren’s rebuilding these past two years lies in Andrea Stella’s (centre) calming influence as team principal
Under his leadership, empowered by chief executive Zak Brown, McLaren built the car that won them their first constructors’ title of the century
He understood the intricacies better than perhaps anyone else. Which is why, under his leadership, empowered by chief executive Zak Brown, McLaren built the car that won them their first constructors’ title of the century. It remains the outstanding machinery on the grid, notwithstanding Max Verstappen trespassing on that claim with victory in Japan last Sunday.
Which brings us to the rub. Should Verstappen have won that procession, ahead of Norris and Piastri? Well, Verstappen performed to a peak that nobody else on the grid could have scaled in taking a sensational pole, then dominating the race.
Fernando Alonso acknowledged the Dutchman’s exceptionalism by making that very point. But, of course, Verstappen’s unique ability has long been evident for all the world to see.
But was Stella as ambitious as he might have been last weekend in trying to thwart the one-man wrecking ball?
Why, for example, did McLaren settle for second and third instead of trying to deploy strategy to their advantage? An undercut? Perhaps better an overcut? First and third places were well within their grasp, not least given their car granted them two tenths a lap over Verstappen’s Red Bull.
Even if the ploy had flopped, they would likely have lost nothing in the constructors’ table. It was barely a gamble.
A second chance presented itself closer to the end of the race. Should McLaren not have let Piastri, running third, have a crack at Verstappen when it was clear that Norris, running second, was not mounting his own challenge?
Admittedly, it is debatable whether Piastri would have fared considerably better, seeing as he was hardly blowing the hottest of breath on Norris’s neck. But, still, it was surely worth a go, even if they later reversed the order had the Australian’s pursuit failed.
Max Verstappen performed to a peak that nobody else on the grid could have scaled
There were shades of last campaign when McLaren were slow to back Norris
The timidity, the stay-where-you-are-chaps instruction, was an echo of last season, when McLaren were astonishingly slow to back Norris for the title. It smacks of a team that is not yet as practised in the ruthless arts of in-race cunning as they might be, as if ambushed by finding themselves at the head of the field earlier than they imagined.
Red Bull, in contrast, would have chucked everything at the win, and to hell with any intra-garage sensitivities. They are the masters of strategy, of clear-headed pragmatism under fire.
Think of their super-conjuring of Verstappen’s first world title with a smart change of tyres in the Abu Dhabi decider in 2021 (no matter what the race director did with the darn safety car).
McLaren have never had an outright No 1 driver. It is not in their DNA.
There is no need to change that, and certainly not so early in the season. But a little more mid-combat dexterity would not go amiss.
Carlos Sainz risks fine
Carlos Sainz will to see if the FIA media delegate refers the matter to the stewards. That seems likely as the FIA are keen to stamp out bad language at press conferences
Carlos Sainz has risked another fine after he brushed off his late arrival on the grid in Suzuka last weekend by saying: ‘S*** happens.’
It was the Spaniard’s excuse for missing the start of the Japanese national anthem because he was delayed in the loo. He was fined £17,000, half of which was suspended.
Sainz, 30, now waits to see if the FIA media delegate refers the matter to the stewards. That seems likely as the FIA are keen to stamp out bad language at press conferences. Charles Leclerc was fined £8,420 last year for saying his Ferrari was ‘f****d’. Speaking ahead of this weekend’s race in Bahrain, Sainz said: ‘I’m the biggest supporter of punctuality and being, in a way, a gentleman, especially for a national anthem with all the authorities there.
‘I was the first one to say, “I’m late, I’m sorry for that”.’ Then he added, laughing: ‘I don’t know if I’m going to get another fine for saying this, but s*** happens. It’s the way it is.’
