Skip to main content

Petrov stays put

Image
By
It was all looking a bit shaky for Vitaly Petrov. The rumour-mill was strongly suggesting that his time at Renault was over and he'd be out on his ear (and possibly F1 altogether).

Surprisingly, Renault/Lotus (or whatever they are calling themselves this week) have signed him back on for 2 years. Petrov is a bit of a strange one: He seems to lack consistency, lurching from mediocre race and silly mistake to flashes of brilliance and gritty determination. Maybe someone with some power in the team was still narked about Monobrow bunking off to Ferrari, and were happy to sign Vitaly again on the strength of his race-long triumph of keeping the Spanish grump behind him at the last race, inducing Alonso to a) not win the title b) shake his fist at him in a way most unbecoming of a Gentleman.

Whatever the reason, Petrov finds himself once more in a situation not dissimilar to Massa at Ferrari. If he beats his clearly rather good team-mate Kubica, it's likely to be seen as a bit of a fluke. If he gets thrashed by him, his stock will continue to fall. Tricky, huh? Still, it is possible to make a difference in a situation like that; You only have to look at Rosberg, and to a lesser extent, Webber and Button. All did well against a team-mate expected to blow them not just off the track, but probably the surface of the planet.

And can Renault move up the field now they've got a bit more stability? It's going to be tricky for Vitaly...

(Playing today: Frankie Goes To Hollywood's "Maximum Joy" best of from 2000... ooh, a whole decade ago!)
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"It's all gone quiet..." said Roobarb

By
If, like me, you grew up (and I’m aware of the irony in that) in the ‘70s, February was a tough month, with the sad news that Richard Briers and Bob Godfrey had died. Briers had a distinguished acting career and is, quite rightly, fondly remembered most for his character in ‘The Good Life’. Amongst his many roles, both serious and comedic, he also lent his voice to a startling bit of animation that burst it’s wobbly way on to our wooden-box-surrounded screens in 1974. The 1970s seemed to be largely hued in varying shades of beige, with hints of mustard yellow and burnt orange, and colour TV was a relatively new experience still, so the animated adventures of a daft dog and caustic cat who were the shades of dayglo green and pink normally reserved for highlighter pens, must have been a bit of a shock to the eyes at the time. It caused mine to open very wide indeed. Roobarb was written by Grange Calveley, and brought vividly into life by Godfrey, whose strange, shaky-looking sty...
Post a Comment
Read more

Suffering from natural obsolescence

By
You know you’re getting old when it dawns on you that you’re outliving technological breakthroughs. You know the sort of thing – something revolutionary, that heralds a seismic shift it the way the modern world operates. Clever, time-saving, breathtaking and life-changing (and featuring a circuit board). It’s the future, baby! Until it isn’t any more. I got to pondering this when we laughed heartily in the office about someone asking if our camcorder used “tape”. Tape? Get with the times, Daddy-o! If it ain’t digital then for-get-it! I then attempted to explain to an impossibly young colleague that video tape in a camcorder was indeed once a “thing”, requiring the carrying of something the size of a briefcase around on your shoulder, containing batteries normally reserved for a bus, and a start-up time from pressing ‘Record’ so lengthy, couples were already getting divorced by the time it was ready to record them saying “I do”. After explaining what tape was, I realised I’d ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Shouting in the social media mirror

By
It was always tricky to fit everything you wanted into the intentionally short character count of Twitter, especially when, like me, you tend to write ridiculously long sentences that keep going on and on, with no discernible end in sight, until you start wondering what the point was in the first place. The maximum length of a text message originally limited a tweet to 140 characters, due to it being a common way to post your ramblings in Twitter’s early days. Ten years later, we’ve largely consigned texting to the tech dustbin, and after a lot of angst, the social media platform’s bigwigs have finally opted to double your ranting capacity to 280. Responses ranged from “You’ve ruined it! Closing my account!” to the far more common “Meh” of modern disinterest. As someone rightly pointed out, just because you have twice as much capacity doesn’t mean you actually have to use it. It is, of course, and excellent opportunity to use the English language correctly and include punctuat...
Post a Comment
Read more