Martin Whitmarsh witch hunt

[Chad Stewarthill]

I am not a fan of taking debates down this route because it effectively suggests that you cannot form an opinion on an event, issue, item etc unless you are privy to all available information. We wouldn’t be here debating F1 otherwise, as for every contentious issue there exists information that you and I are not aware of.

No I don’t sit in meetings where Martin Whitmarsh is present. You may not agree with such intrusive scrutiny but I think there is plenty of compelling evidence out there, from simply watching races to looking at simple failures on strategy, car development and how he generally comes across in public to make an assessment.

Fair enough, point taken. I've no objection to anyone expressing their opinions (I've done so enough times myself, I have to admit), as long as we are clear that that's all they are. My point was really just to warn against expressing an opinion which is based predominantly on outward appearance of what someone is like, as if it is established fact. I don't remember MW's demeanour in the Singapore F1 forum so I am unable to comment, except to say that I lean more towards Canis' point of view as expressed in post #20. Richard Branson, for example, always appears very affable and friendly (cuddly even), when interviewed in public. But I bet he can be tough and ruthless behind the scenes when necessary.

Finally, it's one thing when the likes of us engage in debates between ourselves which are ultimately of no consequence to the subjects of our musings; but when journalists in national newspapers write articles suggesting that senior figures might be in danger of losing their jobs, I hope that those journalists have applied a higher level of scrutiny and/or backed up their opinions with good information, before shooting their mouths off. Too often such articles seem to me to be little more than rumour-mongering.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

Many have mentioned the transition at the start of the season from a bad car to a suddenly good car as evidence of MW competence

I don't agree, it's the opposite

For a while now lack of downforce has been a major Mclaren factor, MW has not sorted this out, the car that arrive at testing didn't address this and tried to introduce fancy gadgets such as the 'octopus' exhaust, it was only when they copied the Red Bull otebd system did they find enough downforce to mask the ongoing problem

Without the exhaust and floor that was banned at Silverstone the car has gotten worse and is basically the shocker we saw in testing but without over complicated exhausts etc

Whitmarsh has had a chance but it's not like things are getting better, they are getting worse, he has lost Newey, Fry amongst others, he is losing Lewis as we speak. Only Button might have a sense of loyalty, and even he is increasingly questioning the teams decisions

Drastic change is needed, build around the best asset, and sort out the downforce instead of introduce gadgets that seldom tell early enough

 

[teabagyokel]

I won't believe anything written in the Heil. And I think there is a lack of perspective amongst some.

 

[Quintessentially]

OK, a few points to address here.

1) "There may be moves in the boardroom"? You do know that MW sits in the boardroom, not as a director of the F1 team but in a senior capacity within McLaren as a whole. In fact if people in the boardroom wanted rid of MW then the only person who can currently outrank him within the corporate structure is Ron Dennis or the majority shareholders.
.

Well this is exactly what has been suggested, whether true or false.

 

[jez101]

Should Red Bull fire Horner? Stupid question, right. We are not debating that because it would clearly be a bad idea.

The fact that MW's future is even being discussed is a sure sign for me that there is a problem. That there is a noticeable lack of wagons being circled in Woking should be enough to show that his position is tenuous at best.

It is true that he doesn't design the cars and it is true that he did not personally make many of the mistakes McLaren seem to have made. But, he is in charge. He is the boss, and his job is therefore not to do x, y or z. His job is to get the best people in those positions and to get the best out of all the people his company employs. In my eyes he has failed to do that. He has had time and during that time, he has not delivered and his company has consistently under performed.

Leadership and management are funny things. What you do is irrelevant - my view of a great leader is someone who seems to do very little, because the people they leads are independently doing great jobs and as a team they are delivering the results. Only the results count when judging leaders, I'm afraid...

 

[dave]

Only the results count when judging leaders, I'm afraid...

Well that would mean you would have fired amost every great business leader in the world.

Don't you think the overall situation and that past are worth considering at least a little bit?

 

[Mezzer]

That there is a noticeable lack of wagons being circled in Woking should be enough to show that his position is tenuous at best.

Is this really true? Its seems to me that he only needs one wagon, Dennis', and he's covered.

 

[canis]

Well this is exactly what has been suggested, whether true or false.

And that is where the story falls down for me. The Mail (what a great source of reliable information this paper has been in the past) has suggested this is the case, but they haven't done the background work on the story.

Are there people in McLaren F1 who don't like the way that MW runs things? I would bet on yes, because in any organisation there will be people who think they or others can do it better.

Are the McLaren board question MW as the TP? I would say no, though they may be questioning him about how he is going to stop the errors that have been creeping in recently. I would be questioning that right now, especially as they wanted to use the British GP as a stage to advertise from and two mistakes ruined the weekend. The stories out there that McLaren were surprised by the pace of Lewis at the start of the GP appear to be very true, even Lewis alluded to it in his interviews. Add that to the fact that setup, possible fuel consumption as just about every other variable was based on guess work for the weekend due to having so little time to adjust the car and test it after all the changes to the rules that would affect downforce and handling and what happened was an unlucky consequence, not really a mistake.

What you have hear is a story which in the usual fashion of the Mail has come from a rumour, or half overheard conversation which they have decided to fill in the gaps to make it the most sensational story it could possibly turn out to be and then run it as truth.The Mail has a habit of doing this fairly regularly and has been caught out a lot in the past for it. For all we know the reporter overheard a conversation where an engineer said "I don't really like to be around Martin right now, he is in a fowl mood and someone is going to get it in the neck from high up". There you go, with that I can use the statement to support all of the story given by the mail....

 

[Andyoak]

I don't see McLaren as a team that is particularly unsuccessful at the moment.
I do see a season where one team is being spectacularly successful at the moment.

Historically this tends to happen once a decade in F1; and rarely lasts longer than a year or two...

 

[Il_leone]

i should add MW nickname at Woking is Martin Whiplash (not the s & M type) from one guy who was made redundant by Mclaren who I met a while back

To go back to people who left in terms of engineers

Newey- was somewhat poached by Red Bull with an offer he could not refuse with DC suggesting to Red Bull to try and get him. Newey's relationship with Ron Dennis was strained after initially agreeing to join Jaguar ( Red Bull's former guise ) and only to do a U-turn.

He designed some poor Mclaren's 2002 and 2004- the antelope nose but Mclaren were also handicapped by the unreliable Mercedes engines and poor Michelin tyres to Bridgestones...his MP4-19 was never raced in 2003 possibly costing Raikkonen the title thanks to Ron's obsession with perfection

Fry - he was at Mclaren for 18 years and probably felt it was time for a move

COughlan and Ryan both sacked

People are finger wagging at Whitmarsh to be sacked because he is failing to deliver to both British drivers who are world champions but no one said anything about Patrick Head or Frank Williams should be sacked for costing Mansell three world titles with pitstop screw ups and told to stay out until his tyre shredded

Nor did anyone suggests Nick Fry should have been sacked as Honda principal for wasting Jenson Button's career at Honda thank goodness for Ross Brawn

 

[jez101]

Well that would mean you would have fired amost every great business leader in the world.

Name me one great busiess leader who didnt get the results? The only question is how much time should be given to deliver

 

[RasputinLives]

Did you know that Winston Churchill was responsible for the whole plan behind the disastorous battle of Gallipoli yet he went on to be one of the greatest military leaders Britian and the world has ever seen.

Don't know what made me think of that.

 

[jez101]

Did you know that Winston Churchill was responsible for the whole plan behind the disastorous battle of Gallipoli yet he went on to be one of the greatest military leaders Britian and the world has ever seen.

Don't know what made me think of that.

Gallipolli and WWII were 30 years apart though. Are you saying McLaren should stick with Whitmarsh as TP for the next 30 years so they can eventually come good in 2040?

I note also that Churchill didn't spent the years between his failure in 1915 and his success in 1945 stubbornly trying to continue the fight for Gallipoli - he took a step back, went a different direction and came back stronger. I am sure Whitmarsh (and Sam Michael at Williams) will do the same thing.

They will be back, just not doing what they are now. Whitmarsh could well stay on as head of FOTA for example and achieve great victories there, I just think that him staying as TP would be a bit like Churchill camping out in Turkey for 30 years, waiting for Constantinople to fall.

 

[sportsman]

Martin Whitmarsh is CEO of McLaren racing.
And its not that easy to sack a CEO.

 

[jez101]

Martin Whitmarsh is CEO of McLaren racing.
And its not that easy to sack a CEO.

I am really thinking of the Team Principal role. I just don't think MW is suited to that - as I have said, I think he could do (more) good things with FOTA, and could stay on at McLaren without having to be TP.

Compare MW to Cristian Horner, whose mega-strop last weekend managed to get the FIA to back down on the OTT EBD rules. Horner played an absolute blinder, Flavio or Benie-esque. If the shoe had been on the other foot, I suspect MW would not have had the same results.

 

[Road of Bones]

I am really thinking of the Team Principal role. I just don't think MW is suited to that

I would suggest that there are at least 21 people on here who would disagree with you, and more pertinently, so does Ron Dennis...

 

[RasputinLives]

Gallipolli and WWII were 30 years apart though. Are you saying McLaren should stick with Whitmarsh as TP for the next 30 years so they can eventually come good in 2040?

I note also that Churchill didn't spent the years between his failure in 1915 and his success in 1945 stubbornly trying to continue the fight for Gallipoli - he took a step back, went a different direction and came back stronger. I am sure Whitmarsh (and Sam Michael at Williams) will do the same thing.

They will be back, just not doing what they are now. Whitmarsh could well stay on as head of FOTA for example and achieve great victories there, I just think that him staying as TP would be a bit like Churchill camping out in Turkey for 30 years, waiting for Constantinople to fall.

What I'm trying to say Jez is that even the greatest of the greats has to make mistakes so they can learn from them - now if Mr Martin was making the same mistakes over and over again then I would agree things wouldn't look good but he's not is he? The major example of this was the early season re-design so that Mclaren started off with a much better car rather than going through all the updates like 2009. He's even learning to handle Hamilton better in the media this season.

Lets face it - he's been Team Principle from the second race in 2009 and in that time he's managed to turn a shopping trolly car into a race winner. He's brought in a driver who has clearly contributed more to the team points wise and technical wise more than the person he replaced. He managed to get a second in the constructers championship in 2010 when the Mclaren was (in my opinon) actually the 3rd fastest car in the field. He had both the team drivers in the championship until a couple of races to go in 2010. Lets also not forget that until last Sunday Mclaren were the only team to have toppled this seemingly indestructable Red Bull car. Ron 'the saint' Dennis had far worse season and no one called for his head.

Lets not get into a football mentality here of sacking a manager every 3 months because the results aren't good enough.

 

[jez101]

I would suggest that there are at least 21 people on here who would disagree with you, and more pertinently, so does Ron Dennis...

I know, I am arguing a losing case... . Perhaps I will stop there, you all know what I think by now

I hope I am wrong - I have galvanised support for Martin with my arguments against him, so lets hope the team feel like you all do. I want Jenson and Lewis to win as much as anyone but Vettel & Horner are formidable foes

 

[Road of Bones]

Formidable indeed Jez - which is what makes it all the sweeter to see a Montreal or a China result...

 

[Incubus]

I want Jenson and Lewis to win as much as anyone but Vettel & Horner are formidable foes [/quote]

--------------------------------

I agree with your point, but personally I'd rather say "Newey and Vettel are formidable foes"...