Rantbox

[Stramala]

Well, that might mean that Citroën is pulling out from WRC together with Loeb. I mean, why would they sign Hirvonen instead of Neuville or Bouffier!

Or perhaps the opposite...

The following is a quote from the other 2011 works Ford driver Jari-Matti Latvala;
"The team is preparing for Monte Carlo even though we don’t have a contract with Ford."

Don't you think it's rather odd that a manufacturer would take this long to commit to a contract for the following season, which starts in the middle of January? I'd have taken no notice of this in 90% of cases, but with their #1 driver jumping ship a few days ago it changes the perspective a little. You have to wonder why Ford still haven't commited any backing to M-Sport for next year with only 7-8 weeks until the first rally of the next season...

[Myrvold]

The #1 driver hasn't been much number one in since, well, Sweden. And Ford is trying to get Ogier.

[mario]

Well, that might mean that Citroën is pulling out from WRC together with Loeb. I mean, why would they sign Hirvonen instead of Neuville or Bouffier!

Or perhaps the opposite...

The following is a quote from the other 2011 works Ford driver Jari-Matti Latvala;
"The team is preparing for Monte Carlo even though we don’t have a contract with Ford."

Don't you think it's rather odd that a manufacturer would take this long to commit to a contract for the following season, which starts in the middle of January? I'd have taken no notice of this in 90% of cases, but with their #1 driver jumping ship a few days ago it changes the perspective a little. You have to wonder why Ford still haven't commited any backing to M-Sport for next year with only 7-8 weeks until the first rally of the next season...

That does remind me of what happened when Toyota wound up their team - the first definite sigh that something was amiss was when they announced that they were releasing Glock and Trulli from their contracts. It may be that Ford has been taken aback by Hirvonen's moves and are frantically trying to reorganise their team (particularly if they're trying to lure Ogier across) but the lack of any firm commitment from them is worrying.

[IdeFan]

Unless Loeb retires until 2013, Hirvonen just committed career suicide.

I am inclined to agree, but put yourself in Hirvonen's shoes; if you ever want to be World Champion you have to beat the best, you have to believe that you can, in the right circumstances, beat anyone in the same car, if you admit that Loeb is better than you, you're never going to beat him. You need self belief to reach the top, but it is often misinterpreted as arrogance.

All evidence suggests that Loeb will destroy Hirvonen, but we all thought the same about Button going to McLaren...

[DanielPT]

All evidence suggests that Loeb will destroy Hirvonen, but we all thought the same about Button going to McLaren...

Anything different than that outcome becomes immediately one of the Rallying biggest upsets of all time.

[Cynon]

All evidence suggests that Loeb will destroy Hirvonen, but we all thought the same about Button going to McLaren...

Anything different than that outcome becomes immediately one of the Rallying biggest upsets of all time.

...and certainly won't make Loeb or the WRC's talent pool look very good.

[Stramala]

All evidence suggests that Loeb will destroy Hirvonen, but we all thought the same about Button going to McLaren...

Anything different than that outcome becomes immediately one of the Rallying biggest upsets of all time.

...and certainly won't make Loeb or the WRC's talent pool look very good.

I think few people realise WRC is a pay-driver sport. People like Henning Solberg, Matthew Wilson, Evgeny Novikov hog some of the best drives because they've got enough cash on tap to retain their seats regardless of their performances.
Urmo Aava comes to mind. He was starting to show promise, but his bank balance ran out before he could truly prove himself. Jarkko Nikara's career looks like it is starting to stall a little bit, which would be a shame, he looks like one of Finland's most promising young talents right now along with Joonas Lindroos.

Citroen actually have a strange habit of forcing drivers to bring cash with them - Dani Sordo brought Grupo Labaro sponsorship in his debut season at the top level in the 3rd works Citroen, and Seb Two had to retain financial backing from FFSA even once he'd reached the top level. It would've been like Toro Rosso asking Vettel to pay for his drive in 2007 and having DMSB logos plastered all over the car.

But, back to my original point, for the love of god, why give the third works Ford to Khalid al-Qassimi instead of Ott Tänak?

OK, that was rhetorical, we all know why - without al-Qassimi Ford would lose a huge chunk of their budget. I can't fathom how much the UAE are paying Ford but I would presume it's a significant percentage of total income.

Just consider this - there is an unbelieveable talent pool out there if teams are willing to for-go drivers bringing in sponsors. If you look at drivers who aren't currently tied to contracts;

Senior Team
Sebastien Ogier
Petter Solberg
Juho Hanninen (he's been long long overdue a top WRC seat)

Junior Team
Ott Tänak
Jarkko Nikara
Hayden Paddon

If that isn't a WRC powerhouse I don't know what is. Volkswagen - sit up and take notice of this.

[Myrvold]

Easy answer on the "why Al-Qassimi instead of Tanak" question. (even though you answer it yourself)

Al-Qassimi brings Abu Dhabi money. Ott Tanak is backed by DMACK, and has a contract that says that he has to drive with those tyres. Ford (M-Sport) have another contract. That means, if Al-Qassimi stops now, Tanak will not be signed up.

But I hope you know that there is not any "third car" anymore. There are three two-car teams, and rest is customers.

You have to pay your way in to the seats outside the factory teams, Henning manages it because of the way he is. Matthew Wilsom because of his dad. Novikov is extremely young, and I do think he has a potential, after all, he is only 21 years old.

You have lots of drivers that doesn't get the money, I figure we do have 2-3 more in Norway as well that have the ability or the potential to be a top 5 driver in WRC. But that's the way it is in all sports.

Petter has already priced himself out of everything aside a Ford-drive, but he is not a good friend of Wilson. Mads (Østberg) have yet to sign a contract for 2012, so he is a possible candidate, the same goes for Ogier (the guy even the French supposedly doesn't like).
Hanninen is under contract with Skoda (and then, maybe VW). Andreas (Mikkelsen) has signed for VW (England) and is going to race IRC again, maybe SWRC , and maybe WRC for VW. You have Bryan Bouffier and Thierry Neuville as well - there are to many drivers for 6 - soon to be 8 seats. (If Ford continues).

[Stramala]

Ott Tanak is backed by DMACK, and has a contract that says that he has to drive with those tyres. Ford (M-Sport) have another contract. That means, if Al-Qassimi stops now, Tanak will not be signed up.

My understanding was that was a one-off deal. And his entry was registered under M-Sport Stobart Ford instead of a seperate DMACK WRT. So I don't think the first half of that quite sticks. So, in theory, he could (and quite rightly should) drive for the B-Team next season.

Hadn't realised Team Abu Dhabi had split off from the main team, the car still looked identical (they even followed the livery swap in France!!). He was definitely part of the main team before this year however.

Also, there are more than three two-car teams, considering FERM and VM are father-son efforts where on occasion both generations were driving at the same time. And of course Stobart with up to three cars at once. But still, when there are only two true full-time multi-car teams at the top level it goes to show how on-the-edge WRC is right now. At least Mini will have a full 2 car campaign next season. I do wonder if Solberg will try to steal a seat from beneath Sordo or Meeke however.

[mario]

I think few people realise WRC is a pay-driver sport.

To be honest, these days I wonder if there are that many fans who even care enough about rallying to know that - I was for a while interested in rallying but lost interest as the sport has stagnated under Citroen's domination of the series (and that was before the withdrawal of everybody else but Ford).
Mind you, given that the cost of competing these days in a number of series has been rising sharply in recent years, it's not surprising that sponsorship is becoming critical these days. That's not to say that money alone will help you into the upper echelons of motorsport - though there certainly have been examples of that happening in the past - but it can just help tip the scales in favour of a driver as he rises through the ranks.

As an aside, it looks like MotoGP will be losing Suzuki next year - they had been struggling recently (they'd already made some cutbacks to their 2011 program), with only a tentative promise of a return to the sport in 2014. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96315
No wonder, then, that Dorna's CEO recently went on record to say that the sport needed to be reformed, particularly to cut costs much more aggressively for the satellite teams. After all, it looks like in MotoGP the teams are pushing prospective riders for sponsorship cash too - Dorna was citing the example of the Moto2 champion, Stefan Brald, being asked to provide £4-5 million towards the cost of hiring a bike as part of the reason why it wants to reform the sport towards production based bikes. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96261

[Cynon]

I think few people realise WRC is a pay-driver sport.

To be honest, these days I wonder if there are that many fans who even care enough about rallying to know that - I was for a while interested in rallying but lost interest as the sport has stagnated under Citroen's domination of the series (and that was before the withdrawal of everybody else but Ford).
Mind you, given that the cost of competing these days in a number of series has been rising sharply in recent years, it's not surprising that sponsorship is becoming critical these days. That's not to say that money alone will help you into the upper echelons of motorsport - though there certainly have been examples of that happening in the past - but it can just help tip the scales in favour of a driver as he rises through the ranks.

Which gives the rise of spec series. Believe it or not, spec racing isn't the incarnation of the devil, and if a particular series is floundering, it might not be a bad route to choose.

[Phoenix]

I think few people realise WRC is a pay-driver sport.

To be honest, these days I wonder if there are that many fans who even care enough about rallying to know that - I was for a while interested in rallying but lost interest as the sport has stagnated under Citroen's domination of the series (and that was before the withdrawal of everybody else but Ford).
Mind you, given that the cost of competing these days in a number of series has been rising sharply in recent years, it's not surprising that sponsorship is becoming critical these days. That's not to say that money alone will help you into the upper echelons of motorsport - though there certainly have been examples of that happening in the past - but it can just help tip the scales in favour of a driver as he rises through the ranks.

Which gives the rise of spec series. Believe it or not, spec racing isn't the incarnation of the devil, and if a particular series is floundering, it might not be a bad route to choose.

Spec series are not inherently bad, but I think a series with different manufactures involved is more productive and certainly interesting. Costs are really the only drawback, especially now that we are in the midst of a GEC.

[mario]

I think few people realise WRC is a pay-driver sport.

To be honest, these days I wonder if there are that many fans who even care enough about rallying to know that - I was for a while interested in rallying but lost interest as the sport has stagnated under Citroen's domination of the series (and that was before the withdrawal of everybody else but Ford).
Mind you, given that the cost of competing these days in a number of series has been rising sharply in recent years, it's not surprising that sponsorship is becoming critical these days. That's not to say that money alone will help you into the upper echelons of motorsport - though there certainly have been examples of that happening in the past - but it can just help tip the scales in favour of a driver as he rises through the ranks.

Which gives the rise of spec series. Believe it or not, spec racing isn't the incarnation of the devil, and if a particular series is floundering, it might not be a bad route to choose.

Spec series can often be quite interesting, as the rise of GP2 and Formula Renault 3.5 shows, and as a method of cost control it can be quite effective, though it does depend on how the series is organised. Moreover, given that some motorsport series have something of a tradition of independent manufacturers competing, those that remain are sometimes adverse to their identity being eroded by increasing standardisation - after all, in F1 the engine format was only standardised in the 3.0 litre V10 era (reputedly because Ferrari objected to Toyota's plans for a V12 engine when they wanted to join the sport) and even implementing a standard ECU proved to be a battle.

[Myrvold]

Some new rumours regarding the classes in rally:

These are rumoured to be the classes in rally from 2013:
WRC
R4T or whatever the name on the new 4WD class will be.
R-GT
R3
R1 + R2

In this way, WRC remains the lop level, only for world championship events.

Level 2: R4T, concentrating on regional, national events and the level for developing private teams.

Level 3: R-GT, is being prepared as a basis for
Gentlemen sports car drivers.

Level 4: R3 as a low-cost activity for serious drivers

Level 5: R1 and R2 for entry level to the sport.

[Vepe]

Some new rumours regarding the classes in rally:


In this way, WRC remains the lop level, only for world championship events.

Level 2: R4T, concentrating on regional, national events and the level for developing private teams.

Level 3: R-GT, is being prepared as a basis for
Gentlemen sports car drivers.

Level 4: R3 as a low-cost activity for serious drivers

Level 5: R1 and R2 for entry level to the sport.

So basically it´s

WRC is still WRC
R4T is what used to be Gr.N, Super 2000
R3 is somewhat of S1600 and smaller Gr.N
R2 and R1 are the lower classes
and R-GT is GT cars?

Am I correct?

[Myrvold]

WRC is WRC, but apparently not allowed in national championships (maybe not in European or IRC as well)
R4T is Gr.N/S2000, but it should be the same car as a WRC, but without the "WRC-kit". This is to make it easier for local drivers to get a "WRC-kit" for their home WRC-event. Maybe to try to get much more locals.
R3 is FWD cars as far as I know.
R1 and R2 are like the WRC Academy cars are now, they are Fiesta R2 cars.
R-GT is GT, but it seems like the FIA will limit them to 350HP, which will exclude a lot of the cars. It seems like they are afraid that they will be faster than the WRC cars on asphalt, a bit like the old F2 cars

[DanielPT]

To be honest, these days I wonder if there are that many fans who even care enough about rallying to know that - I was for a while interested in rallying but lost interest as the sport has stagnated under Citroen's domination of the series (and that was before the withdrawal of everybody else but Ford).
Mind you, given that the cost of competing these days in a number of series has been rising sharply in recent years, it's not surprising that sponsorship is becoming critical these days. That's not to say that money alone will help you into the upper echelons of motorsport - though there certainly have been examples of that happening in the past - but it can just help tip the scales in favour of a driver as he rises through the ranks.

Which gives the rise of spec series. Believe it or not, spec racing isn't the incarnation of the devil, and if a particular series is floundering, it might not be a bad route to choose.

Spec series can often be quite interesting, as the rise of GP2 and Formula Renault 3.5 shows, and as a method of cost control it can be quite effective, though it does depend on how the series is organised. Moreover, given that some motorsport series have something of a tradition of independent manufacturers competing, those that remain are sometimes adverse to their identity being eroded by increasing standardisation - after all, in F1 the engine format was only standardised in the 3.0 litre V10 era (reputedly because Ferrari objected to Toyota's plans for a V12 engine when they wanted to join the sport) and even implementing a standard ECU proved to be a battle.

I support spec series to some formulae but not all. The first car races pitted manufacturers pitting their machines against each other. It was a form of engineer competition to publicize which car was better, instead of drivers. That is the true essence of car racing and interest in which driver was best came later during the 1930s. Call me old fashioned but that is the way I see it. I understand that we live in a crisis but there must be a way to control costs without resorting to standardization.

I understand that was the way chosen by the American motor racing scene with IndyCar and NASCAR and that people there like the way those series are sorted. The theatrics and WWE-like show might be appealing to some, but not for all. It worked well but I cannot see it in some FIA series. WRC became boring and anonymous due to being only Citroens and Fords. There is not enough variety. WTCC is a Chevy championship and no one that I know of sees that. And it is certainly not the way for Formula 1, because, let's be honest, we already have two good spec series in FR3.5 and GP2 and that isn't that cheap anyway. Formula 1 would then became an irrelevance with nothing more than faster Dallaras. I imagine the technological appeal would be lost that way and the very own reason for racing would no longer exist. Motorsport would then become 'entertainment' and as every form of entertainment nowadays, when it loses the novelty effect it is pretty much doomed. At least it is the way I think it goes. Time will tell how things evolve.

[Vepe]

WRC is WRC, but apparently not allowed in national championships (maybe not in European or IRC as well)
R4T is Gr.N/S2000, but it should be the same car as a WRC, but without the "WRC-kit". This is to make it easier for local drivers to get a "WRC-kit" for their home WRC-event. Maybe to try to get much more locals.
R3 is FWD cars as far as I know.
R1 and R2 are like the WRC Academy cars are now, they are Fiesta R2 cars.
R-GT is GT, but it seems like the FIA will limit them to 350HP, which will exclude a lot of the cars. It seems like they are afraid that they will be faster than the WRC cars on asphalt, a bit like the old F2 cars

Ok, thanks for clearing this out

About the GT cars, weren´t they supposed to race this year also? I remember reading that Porsche being entered to Swedish Rally, but withdrawn.

[Myrvold]

They were, but something came up, most likely discussions about max HP and engine volume.

Oh well, looking forward to Rally Sweden this year, almost a complete day is supposed to be driven in Norway! Will be amazing to have WRC in Norway for more than one stage, without me working !

[Stramala]

About the GT cars, weren´t they supposed to race this year also? I remember reading that Porsche being entered to Swedish Rally, but withdrawn.

If my memory serves me right (which it often does not) Romain Dumas did a couple of rounds of the French Rally Championship in an LMS spec Porsche 911 GT3 RSR. But I would imagine regional events are a bit more relaxed on what cars are and are not allowed to score championship points (I believe he came 7th in one event and was awarded the points for it).

[Phoenix]

Which gives the rise of spec series. Believe it or not, spec racing isn't the incarnation of the devil, and if a particular series is floundering, it might not be a bad route to choose.

Spec series can often be quite interesting, as the rise of GP2 and Formula Renault 3.5 shows, and as a method of cost control it can be quite effective, though it does depend on how the series is organised. Moreover, given that some motorsport series have something of a tradition of independent manufacturers competing, those that remain are sometimes adverse to their identity being eroded by increasing standardisation - after all, in F1 the engine format was only standardised in the 3.0 litre V10 era (reputedly because Ferrari objected to Toyota's plans for a V12 engine when they wanted to join the sport) and even implementing a standard ECU proved to be a battle.

I support spec series to some formulae but not all. The first car races pitted manufacturers pitting their machines against each other. It was a form of engineer competition to publicize which car was better, instead of drivers. That is the true essence of car racing and interest in which driver was best came later during the 1930s. Call me old fashioned but that is the way I see it. I understand that we live in a crisis but there must be a way to control costs without resorting to standardization.

I understand that was the way chosen by the American motor racing scene with IndyCar and NASCAR and that people there like the way those series are sorted. The theatrics and WWE-like show might be appealing to some, but not for all. It worked well but I cannot see it in some FIA series. WRC became boring and anonymous due to being only Citroens and Fords. There is not enough variety. WTCC is a Chevy championship and no one that I know of sees that. And it is certainly not the way for Formula 1, because, let's be honest, we already have two good spec series in FR3.5 and GP2 and that isn't that cheap anyway. Formula 1 would then became an irrelevance with nothing more than faster Dallaras. I imagine the technological appeal would be lost that way and the very own reason for racing would no longer exist. Motorsport would then become 'entertainment' and as every form of entertainment nowadays, when it loses the novelty effect it is pretty much doomed. At least it is the way I think it goes. Time will tell how things evolve.[/quote]

I believe there must be a way to balance both things. F1, being the very highest echelon of motorsport, can't be reduced to a spec series. I say this basically because part of the good thing about F1 is that manufacturers can use some of the innovations in F1 for the road car division, just as LMS does. Manufacturers should be able to take something back from involving in the sport.

[DanielPT]

FIA can already deliver the 2012 WRC Championship trophy to Loeb, because, let's face it, barring a disaster of epic proportions it is a done deal...

Ogier joins VW missing 2012 WRC season.

[AndreaModa]

At least we can expect VW to be competitive for 2013. Considering what Mini have done this year I think VW should be targeting podiums at the very least for when they enter. Speaking of which I hope Mini can mount a more consistent challenge next year and maybe even sneak a win at some point.

[Klon]

I feel tempted to make another GP2 racing series, but I know I shouldn't since our forum market is already flooded with them - feels bad man.

[the Masked Lapwing]

I feel tempted to make another GP2 racing series, but I know I shouldn't since our forum market is already flooded with them - feels bad man.

Pfft, no one cares - just means no one misses out if there's several million of them going around!

[This]

I feel tempted to make another GP2 racing series, but I know I shouldn't since our forum market is already flooded with them - feels bad man.

Pfft, no one cares - just means no one misses out if there's several million of them going around!

if you ever find a caravan-racing mod or a backwards-racing mod... we don't have these yet...

[AdrianSutil]

Is there one with just reject teams and drivers? I'd love to see a podium consisting of Gachot's Coloni, Giacomelli's Life and Moreno's Forti

[DanielPT]

I feel tempted to make another GP2 racing series, but I know I shouldn't since our forum market is already flooded with them - feels bad man.

Go ahead man. If we have r as an infinite or a large enough (which seems to be the case) number represented by this letter of racing series, then we can deduce that r + 1 = r.

Now that class is over, go make that series!

[dinizintheoven]

Is there one with just reject teams and drivers? I'd love to see a podium consisting of Gachot's Coloni, Giacomelli's Life and Moreno's Forti

Sort of.

Forti are regular winners, as are Super Aguri, HWNSNBM has been champion twice, and Pedro Chaves has had a pole and a win. There's also vastly increased prospects for a nearly-reject in the upcoming season...

[Stramala]

DROWNING HORSES.

[CoopsII]

I was watching BBC News this morning, trying to get on top of the hangover that was putting me through the wringer when to make it worse guess who pops up reading the Sport?

Legard.

Aarcgh!! MY EYES!! MY EYES!!

Flipped over to SKY News (I panicked) just in time to see M****n B*****e telling me how good SKY would be doing the F1.

I wish those two Force Indias had run him over.

Judas.

[mario]

I was watching BBC News this morning, trying to get on top of the hangover that was putting me through the wringer when to make it worse guess who pops up reading the Sport?

Legard.

Aarcgh!! MY EYES!! MY EYES!!

Flipped over to SKY News (I panicked) just in time to see M****n B*****e telling me how good SKY would be doing the F1.

I wish those two Force Indias had run him over.

Judas.

To be fair to Brundle, at the Autosport awards he indicated that his initial preference was to stay with the BBC instead of switching to Sky. He has already said in the past that he was not happy at the way the BBC rushed into their deal with Sky without explaining what it would mean for the presenters until after the deal was done, and at the Autosport awards he said "had the BBC treated me differently then perhaps things would have been different".
After all, the BBC didn't exactly cover itself in glory either with the way it handled the deal - Autosport was handed a transcript of the Director General defending the BBC's actions to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee where he admitted that the BBC had made their deal with Sky without bothering to consult Channel 4 (Mark Thompson's justification was "It seems to me that it was not required of us" to speak to Channel 4). http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/96815

Overall, when you see the somewhat dismissive and high handed manner in which the BBC seems to have treated its rival free to air broadcasters, perhaps it's not all that surprising Brundle chose to leave - coupled to Sky offering him a chance to expand on his role (with additional technical films etc.) whilst the BBC were asking him to cut back, and it's not surprising why Brundle was swayed by the terms Sky offered.

[CoopsII]

Dont get me wrong, I understand that the BBC are the spoilt, arrogant, self-serving cause of all of this.

[JeremyMcClean]

Dont get me wrong, I understand that the BBC are the spoilt, arrogant, self-serving cause of all of this.

Then again, so is Bernie Ecclestone.

[Captain Hammer]

Over the past month, I have notced that Autosport have run a dozen stories - nearly one every other day - about Raikkonen's return and how he is just as committed as he was before he went rallying, and how he can easily succeed. This culminated a few days ago with Damon Hill offering his opinion on the matter, sounding suspiciously like a yes-man. I could understand it when journalists were asking Eric Boullier and Gerard Lopez because they run the team. I could understand it when they asked Romain Grosjean and Sebastian Vettel, because they are Raikkonen's new team-mate and the reigning World Champion respectively. But as time wore on, they started asking people who were further and further away from Raikkonen. First David Coulthard, then Damon Hill. Who next, Kim Jong-un? He's suddenly become prominent in Korea, and there's a Grand Prix in Korea, so I'm sure that by this time next month, Autosport will have sent someone to Pyongyang to get his thoughts. And it will no doubt be headline news. Long story short, one month after it was announced, Raikkonen's return is old news, but publications keep turning out stories that hype him up.

I find this particularly telling because Autosport have totally ignored Gerhard Berger's comments that he would not re-sign Raikkonen. Considering that Berger is co-owner of a team that just made one of the most ruthless moves in the sport's recent history by ditching Alguersuari and Buemi, I'd be very interested in what he has to say - and why - on the subject of Raikkonen's return. And yet, there hasn't been any mention of it on Autosport.

[eagleash]

Didn't Berger sell his share back to Mateschitz several years ago?

[AndreaModa]

Didn't Berger sell his share back to Mateschitz several years ago?

I believe he did.

[mario]

Over the past month, I have notced that Autosport have run a dozen stories - nearly one every other day - about Raikkonen's return and how he is just as committed as he was before he went rallying, and how he can easily succeed. This culminated a few days ago with Damon Hill offering his opinion on the matter, sounding suspiciously like a yes-man. I could understand it when journalists were asking Eric Boullier and Gerard Lopez because they run the team. I could understand it when they asked Romain Grosjean and Sebastian Vettel, because they are Raikkonen's new team-mate and the reigning World Champion respectively. But as time wore on, they started asking people who were further and further away from Raikkonen. First David Coulthard, then Damon Hill. Who next, Kim Jong-un? He's suddenly become prominent in Korea, and there's a Grand Prix in Korea, so I'm sure that by this time next month, Autosport will have sent someone to Pyongyang to get his thoughts. And it will no doubt be headline news. Long story short, one month after it was announced, Raikkonen's return is old news, but publications keep turning out stories that hype him up.

I find this particularly telling because Autosport have totally ignored Gerhard Berger's comments that he would not re-sign Raikkonen. Considering that Berger is co-owner of a team that just made one of the most ruthless moves in the sport's recent history by ditching Alguersuari and Buemi, I'd be very interested in what he has to say - and why - on the subject of Raikkonen's return. And yet, there hasn't been any mention of it on Autosport.

He who pays the piper calls the tune - Group Lotus has been getting quite close to Autosport after they chose to enter the sport, going to the extent of sponsoring the last Autosport Engineering Show and possibly doing the same thing again this coming year. I wouldn't be surprised, therefore, if Group Lotus has decided to milk the story for all that it is worth - they are the ones who benefit most from the higher media coverage - and have leaned on Autosport to provide them with the most flattering and extensive coverage possible, hence why stories like Berger's comments on Kimi might have been quietly left to one side.
It's going to be a problem for Kimi though - we've seen that the reaction to Schumacher's return has been mixed, and arguably he was in better shape than Kimi was for a return despite his age, so too much pre-season hype could backfire badly on the team and Kimi if his performance is underwhelming in the opening races. If the media and public turn their focus on him as aggressively as on Schumacher I can see Kimi getting sick of the sport fairly quickly given his famed dislike of the politics and media in F1 at the moment.

[AdrianSutil]

Didn't Berger sell his share back to Mateschitz several years ago?

I believe he did.

Yes he did. Sold his 50% share back in November 2008.

[eagleash]

Didn't Berger sell his share back to Mateschitz several years ago?

I believe he did.

Yes he did. Sold his 50% share back in November 2008.

*Rhetorical*