Emilia Romagne GP: McLaren strategy calls in Imola showed a “weakness”, explains Jacques Villeneuve | F1 News

After the last upset victory of Max Verstappen for Red Bull at the Grand Prix of Emilia Romagne, McLaren’s strategic calls are again under control.

Verstappen exceeded the Oscar Piastri pole-sitter for the head in the first round, but has always had a major job to do to ensure victory with the other McLaren of Lando Norris who soon exceeded George Russell for third.

While the rhythm of Verstappen was undoubtedly faster than anyone in Imola expected, McLaren undoubtedly facilitated the life of Dutch with several calls during the race.

The first decision came to stop the head of the world championship Piastri, who followed Verstappen of less than three seconds at the time, on the 13th round, the lock actually in a strategy with two judgments.

This turned like many of the other overlaps, including Verstappen and Norris at the front, stayed away and found more life in their tires to move to a one -shop strategy window while Piastri had to make their way through traffic.

McLaren then opposed Norris, before Verstappen stops, at the end of Tour 28, only for a virtual security car to be implemented a few moments later when Esteban Ocon stopped on the right track.

This was undoubtedly regrettable for McLaren, and there was no way to predict such an occurrence, but the more a driver remains outside, the more likely he is to benefit from such an interruption.

Verstappen subsequently doubled his advance by about 10 to 20 seconds, then seemed to go to victory while Norris and Piastri followed large gaps between them.

However, another incident – Kimi Antonelli from Mercedes stopping on the right track with a technical failure – triggered a full safety car and gave McLaren a chance to pressure Verstappen once again.

With more than the advantage of a stop on Norris, Verstappen opposed his head and Norris embarked behind.

However, Piastri remained outside and emerged in front of Norris, but was then in front of his teammate on hard tires which were 16 rounds older than the new set of the British.

It was unrealistic that Piastri was able to challenge Verstappen since the Red Bull also had fresh tires, while it also seemed very likely that Norris would be able to pass his teammate in the 10 -round sprint on arrival.

McLaren therefore had the opportunity to ask Piastri to allow Norris to attack Verstappen in the closing stages, but no.

Villeneuve: McLaren has shown weakness

In the end, Norris exceeded Piastri for the second and Verstappen won comfortably, leading the former world champion of F1 and Sky Sports F1 Pundit Jacques Villeneuve to question their decision.

Villeneuve said: “They show weakness. Basically, they do not show the strength that Red Bull is still showing year after year.

“It is as if they were afraid of being aggressive while trying to win the pilot championship, and they are afraid to go against Piastri. It’s really, really strange.

“Piastri spoiled this first corner. He was caught sleeping. He should never have left the area in second position, then he had no pace, which was strange. Norris had more rhythm.

“At the restart, McLaren knew that it was a question of Tours before Norris would have taken Piastri with the tire difference, it was obvious.

“100%, sure that he was going to move forward, so why make him lose three laps instead of giving him a blow to Verstappen?”

The result saw Norris reduce Piastri’s advance at the top of the pilot ranking at 13 points, while Verstappen closed less than 22 points in the advance in third.

Villeneuve continued: “Because Verstappen is in the championship. You do not want to give Verstappen Victoires. It is more points for him in the pilot championship.

“They seem to be satisfied with the second and third. Maclaren has a car where a good weekend means first and second. Nothing less is a little disappointing. The first and the third is quite acceptable, but they seem satisfied with the second and third.

“This weak thing. You can also see it in the strategy. When Norris went for a long time, why are you angry?

“You made the decision to go for a long time. You stay on the track. Your pace is still good. So why get a little early? It’s like you were afraid of going.

“They did not take advantage of the virtual safety car. At the end of the day, with the other security car, it did not make a difference. But it still shows this lack of” let’s go for that “.”

Norris, Stella defends McLaren decisions

Although Norris crosses Norris would undoubtedly have given McLaren a better chance of victory, the reality is that Piastri would have been very unlikely to want to allow his teammate the possibility of forcing a 10 -point swing in the classification, which would have happened if they had finished first and third.

Norris seemed to understand the team’s thought and praised the pit wall for having done “a good job”.

“I was on better tires, but I didn’t expect anything,” said Norris Sky Sports F1. “It was always a difficult fight. It was close to the first round. That’s how it should be, of course.

“I waste time through it, then he waste time, but that’s what we have to do to fight for a championship.

“If you try to make someone happy, the other will be unhappy, so it’s like that.

“I think we have managed it well, and it was a good work of the team.”

Andrea Stella, director of the McLaren team, revealed that he had planned to order a switch before deciding against this.

“It was definitely a thought,” he said Sky Sports F1.

“We want Oscar to have his own chances of restarting. So we assumed that the principle if Lando could pass max, he should have passed Oscar quite easily considering that he was on fairly old tires.

“In reality, if the Delta rhythm was sufficient, things would have taken care of themselves. We are satisfied with the way things have happened.

“The two drivers are happy, think it was right and that’s how we are going in the race.”

Chadwick: Too early for team orders

Triple champion of the W series and Sky Sports F1 One expert Jamie Chadwick thinks it is too early in the season for McLaren to enforce team orders because they could harm the team’s chemistry.

She said: “This is the case to have two number one drivers. It is because there is not an obvious star. I think that if Red Bull had another driver who was of talent equal to Max, then it would probably be the same headache there.

“This is a good problem to have. We have discussed this. It is not a bad thing that they have two big drivers who fight for a world championship, but they cannot start to pass these orders so early that one of the pilots will already get the bump with the other.

“It’s delicate. I think there will be a confrontation at some point. I think we can already prevent this. If you even look today, it has already got closer.

“I think that when it happens, that’s when McLaren will have to manage it. Until then, I think they play a good team game.

“They direct the manufacturers’ championship. Max scandalized them today – we grew up to expect this – and I think that is how it worked.”

The next step in the European triple head of F1 is the jewel of the Crown, the Monaco Grand Prix from May 23 to 25, with a cover from this Friday live on Sky Sports F1. Stream Sky Sports with now – no contract, cancel at any time