F1s

The simple answer is that the top management of Aston Martin and Audi have felt things were not working at various junctures and decided to act.

As far as Audi is concerned, it was clear some time ago that not enough investment was being put into Sauber early enough for the team to be in good shape when Audi officially entered F1 in 2026.

Andreas Seidl, the first chief executive officer, had been concerned about that for a while, and there was a bit of a power struggle between him and Oliver Hoffmann, the chairman of the boards of all Sauber companies, through 2023 and 2024.

It was expected one would win out. In the end, Audi decided to remove them both, and appoint Mattia Binotto and Jonathan Wheatley in a dual leadership role, Binotto as chief operating and technical officer and Wheatley as team principal.

Many in F1 raised their eyebrows at that – dual leaderships rarely work. Add in that at Audi there was another senior figure, in chief executive officer Adam Baker, and many felt the leadership of Audi looked unwieldy.

So it was not a massive surprise when that structure was streamlined, with Baker removed, and Binotto made head of the Audi F1 project under Audi CEO Gernot Dollner.

That was supposed to be that. Binotto was in overall charge, Wheatley ran the race team.

But when Wheatley decided that he wanted to come back to the UK, his talks with Aston Martin leaked, and he and Audi agreed to split with immediate effect.

As for Aston Martin, Lawrence Stroll is an ambitious man, he wants success, and he has invested a lot of money in it.

So it’s hardly a surprise that, when he feels things are not working, he takes action.

All the changes he has made have seemed logical on one level or another. There was clearly a problem with car design – after they made a big leap forward in 2023 under new technical director Dan Fallows, the team failed to develop the car effectively in season. They started 2024 less competitively and fell backwards again.

At the same time, Stroll was recruiting Newey. Why wouldn’t he, given he was available having left Red Bull? And with Newey on board, and the team stumbling under Fallows, it’s hardly a surprise Fallows would be considered surplus to requirements.

Same with the leadership. Mike Krack became team principal but the team was not moving in a convincing direction. Hence Stroll looked for change. Andy Cowell is highly regarded; his recruitment made sense.

Stroll would not have expected a clash between Cowell and Newey, but he got one, so another change was made.

Each change is understandable in isolation. But success in F1 is founded on stability not disruption and there has been little evidence of that at either team for the past two or three years.

F1’s bosses are caught in the middle of this debate, recognising the superficial appeal of the back-and-forth racing, but concerned about what the new cars are doing to the sport they grew up loving because they were attracted by its essence as the ultimate test of driver and machine.

Andrea Stella, team principal of world champions McLaren, said: “In qualifying, there’s some aspects of driving that could be counterintuitive.

“Like, occasionally there are comments from our drivers that once they make a mistake, actually save some energy, you go faster overall in a sector, because the energy you saved with the delay on the throttle because you had a problem is going to reward you at the end of the straight.”

Mercedes F1 team principal Toto Wolff said: “From an entertainment perspective, I believe that what we’ve seen today between Ferrari and McLaren was good racing. Many overtakes.

“We were all part of Formula 1 where there was no overtake, literally. Sometimes we’re too nostalgic about the good old years.

“But I think the product is good in itself. We saw quite some racing in the midfield also. And that is, I think, the positive.

“Now, from a driver’s standpoint, when it comes to the qualifying lap, that is different. Clearly, lift and coast in the qualifying, I’m sure for someone like Max, who is a full-attack guy, it’s difficult to cope and digest.

“Qualifying flat-out would be nice. But when you look at the fans and the excitement that is there, live, the cheering when there’s overtakes and also on social media, the younger fans, the vast majority, through all the demographics, like the sport at the moment.

“So, yes, we can always look at how we’re improving it. But at the moment, all the indicators and all the data say people love it. And I spoke with Stefano (Domenicali, the F1 president). He says that, too.”

The cancellation of the Bahrain and Saudi Arabia Grands Prix gives the sport a little more breathing space to consider all this.

There is a meeting of team bosses with F1 and governing body the FIA this week, and another race in Japan in two weeks’ time before a five-week break before the next Grand Prix in Miami at the beginning of May.

A number of ideas to reduce the degree to which the purity of the driving experience has been polluted are already in the mix, such as removing a lower limit for energy recovery currently in force in a certain phase of the straights. And others may yet emerge.

Stella says: “Do we want to be faithful to the DNA of racing in a traditional sense? Do we accept that this counterintuitive situation belongs to the business or not? This is a high-level philosophical question.”