2012 Season Review

[eytl]

Hi everyone,

Well, it's here, the 2012 F1 Rejects Season Review! As usual, featuring a season overview, and rankings for all the drivers and teams.

A few changes this year from previous seasons. Firstly, the driver and team reviews are slightly shorter than previous years - due to time constraints and permanent sleep deprivation on my part. Secondly, I haven't had time to present it in the usual tabular capsule format like we've done it in years past. Thirdly, I've broken with tradition and presented the rankings in reverse order, from lowest to highest instead of the other way around.

http://www.f1rejects.com/centrale/2012/review/index.html
http://www.f1rejects.com/centrale/2012/review/drivers.html
http://www.f1rejects.com/centrale/2012/review/teams.html

No doubt the rankings will provoke much debate and I expect the world's supply of papayas to be hurled my way. I must say the driver rankings in particular were very difficult this year. The first five were obvious - and seems to have been reflected in most driver rankings for the year I've seen. But after that just about every position was a toss-up. In the end it was just a matter of ranking them relative to each other. By that I mean, I don't necessarily think Mark Webber deserved as high as 7th or that Kamui Kobayashi deserved as low as 14th, but they are where they are relative to each other this year.

You'll notice there's no reject podium or ROTY award yet. I'm yet to discuss this with Jamie. It's a particularly difficult choice. Given the rankings, I welcome your views on who/what should be awarded ROTY and who/what should be on the reject podium. I should say I'd prefer not to put non-drivers/teams on the podium (e.g. stewards, Bernie, Psy etc.).

And, hopefully, a Season Review podcast featuring Margie Lane and our one-word reviews is coming soon!

Cheers,
Enoch

[WaffleCat]

Sure,despite your setbacks,it really is a fantastic read Enoch.I don't care too much about the brevity of it.In fact,I think it makes the article a better read in my opinion.


As for ROTY,I'd say 3rd to HRT,2nd to Crashjean and 1st to....Mercedes.Even I thought that the victory in China was really lucky.

[SuperAguri]

I am going to wait until the podcast before I read the written review. Oh I miss the days when the Season review came out well before Christmas, when there used to be a competition and when small furry creatures from alpha centuri were real small furry creatures from alpha centuri.

[FMecha]

Although there is no RotY yet, I'm pleased with the season review.

(I posted this through UBCD's Parted Magic.

[dr-baker]

Definitely agree with your assessment of Senna ("Senna deserved more credit than he's received."). And Nico ahead of Schumacher?Correct again!

[Phoenix]

Nice work as always, though I have to say I have my own disagreements about the rankings:
-How could be Rosberg ahead of Schumacher considering how abysmal his second half of the year was?
-Why was Webber so high when he clearly dropped off the boil on a nice first part of the year?
-Why on Earth was Grosjean so low even accounting for the many incidents he created?

Apart from that, the assesments were very accurate and well-written, as usual

[tommykl]

Nice work as always, though I have to say I have my own disagreements about the rankings:
-How could be Rosberg ahead of Schumacher considering how abysmal his second half of the year was?
-Why was Webber so high when he clearly dropped off the boil on a nice first part of the year?
-Why on Earth was Grosjean so low even accounting for the many incidents he created?

Apart from that, the assesments were very accurate and well-written, as usual

So you're saying Rosberg and Webber should be lower because they were crap for part of the year, but Grosjean should be higher because he was only crap for part of the year?

[James1978]

Kovalainen going from being ranked 3rd in 2011 to 23rd in 2012 must be the biggest year on year drop ever!!

(I suspect the biggest leap the other way was Button from 2008 to 2009)?

[Phoenix]

Nice work as always, though I have to say I have my own disagreements about the rankings:
-How could be Rosberg ahead of Schumacher considering how abysmal his second half of the year was?
-Why was Webber so high when he clearly dropped off the boil on a nice first part of the year?
-Why on Earth was Grosjean so low even accounting for the many incidents he created?

Apart from that, the assesments were very accurate and well-written, as usual

So you're saying Rosberg and Webber should be lower because they were crap for part of the year, but Grosjean should be higher because he was only crap for part of the year?

Well... eerm, I also base my rankings on expectations. I, for one, never expected Grosjean to be so quick and competitive out of the box, but Rosberg and Webber should have lived up to the standard they were supposed to set, because I don't think either Webber or Rosberg are as poor as what some of the performances they put later on in the season might show.

[Row Man Gross-Gene]

I agree with most of the driver review except for the Grosjean and Massa rankings. I'm biased in favor of Romain, but he had a bunch of good races and if he hadn't been singled out so much, I think he would have had more. I'm not saying top 10 or anything, but he should have been ahead of Senna at the least.

In Massa's case, I think Ferrari must bear much of the blame for his poor first half. There was never going to be another (available) driver who would have been able to get in that crapbox midseason and do any better than Felipe. And none of them would have matched his last 1/3rd of the season. Again, I don't think top 10 for Felipe, but a few spaces higher for his blazing return to form.

[Salamander]

I agree with most of the driver review except for the Grosjean and Massa rankings. I'm biased in favor of Romain, but he had a bunch of good races and if he hadn't been singled out so much, I think he would have had more. I'm not saying top 10 or anything, but he should have been ahead of Senna at the least.

That goes for me too. I also think Schumacher and Senna should be a couple spots lower; Schumacher because I feel he does need to be criticised for his mistakes. Ss experienced as he is, he should not have been making so many flagrant errors. He was closer to Rosberg, but I feel that was as much down to Rosberg's deterioration in form and ability as much as Schumacher improving.

I've said plenty about why I think Senna is utter garbage, so to summarise - in terms of raw pace, Senna was as far behind Maldonado as Massa was behind Alonso at the start of the year. Except Senna never bridged that gap, and despite scoring twice as often, did not manage to overhaul Maldonado's tally, even though there was plenty of times when Maldonado was on for a solid result.

[eytl]

Nice work as always, though I have to say I have my own disagreements about the rankings:
-How could be Rosberg ahead of Schumacher considering how abysmal his second half of the year was?
-Why was Webber so high when he clearly dropped off the boil on a nice first part of the year?
-Why on Earth was Grosjean so low even accounting for the many incidents he created?

Whilst I won't address every disagreement, and I actually expect a fair bit of disagreement this year, I'm happy to expand on my rationale for these three.

Rosberg: I thought so too, until I reviewed his results. I think often we can be coloured by the last few races for a driver - "you're only as good as your last race". Rosberg was of course unlucky to get caught up in that incident with Grosjean at Suzuka, with Kobayashi at Yeongam, and with Karthikeyan at Abu Dhabi. That accounted for 3 of the last six races after Singapore, where he finished 5th. So really he only had three bad races (India, USA, Brazil) as the Mercedes declined.

Webber: Again, I would have put him lower but for a more objective review of his results. I have noted some of his "cack-handed" drives in the second half of the year (Italy, Singapore, Abu Dhabi). But in Germany and Belgium he was hampered by gearbox changes (although Seb taught him a lesson in pure racing at Spa - and that's a rarity), in Suzuka he was hit by Grosjean. That leaves Korea, India and Brazil where he came 2nd, 3rd and 4th, and in Austin he was running 3rd. So while he didn't maintain the high level we saw in the first part of the year, it wasn't that bad a level in the second half of the year.

Grosjean: This is a matter of impression and expectation. I expected Grosjean to be quick. His low ranking is for how poor his incidents were, the fact he didn't seem to really learn from them, and how mentally he seemed to lose it in the face of criticism. Compared to Maldonado, some of whose incidents were even more reckless, I didn't expect Pastor's pace, and I was impressed by how he managed to calm down more as the season wore on.

[DOSBoot]

Webber: Again, I would have put him lower but for a more objective review of his results. I have noted some of his "cack-handed" drives in the second half of the year (Italy, Singapore, Abu Dhabi). But in Germany and Belgium he was hampered by gearbox changes (although Seb taught him a lesson in pure racing at Spa - and that's a rarity), in Suzuka he was hit by Grosjean. That leaves Korea, India and Brazil where he came 2nd, 3rd and 4th, and in Austin he was running 3rd. So while he didn't maintain the high level we saw in the first part of the year, it wasn't that bad a level in the second half of the year.

Thank You! I thought I was the only one on this forum who thought of that as well. While he did have some bad drives of his own doing, I thought it was more of a case of his car letting down. There just didn't seem to be a lot of people who were willing to accept that.

For the most part, it's a pretty good list. Although I do have a few disagreements with it:

Senna, Shumacher, and McLaren were ranked way too high. (Senna I feel is DBTMOTY, Shumacher had more bad than good, McLaren for thier unreliability.)
Perez, and Grojean were ranked too low. (Perez I probably would have put 4th, Grojean would have been around 12th-14th.)
Sauber I feel should have been in the #1 spot, while Red Bull probably would have been the 3rd best in my book.
I think Perez has earned a shot at McLaren next year. Whether he will capitlize on that or not is yet to be seen. (I feel a bet coming on.)

But other than that, good job on the articles!

[Gerudo Dragon]

Good job! The only thing I would strongly disagree with Schu's way-too-high rating, for me, that single lap in Monaco doesn't make up for all the cock-ups an experienced driver like him shouldn't be making.

[AndreaModa]

Naturally delighted with Marussia being ranked 8th!

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

There's something I agree and something I don't really agree, but it was a really good reading.
Good job.

[FullMetalJack]

Naturally delighted with Marussia being ranked 8th!

8th or 9th is fairly accurate to be honest, they made progress through the season, whilst HRT stayed still, and Caterham moved backwards. And of course they were going to rank ahead of Mercedes, and possibly Toro Rosso too.

[Londoner]

Great review. The only thing I'd disagree with is how highly Senna is rated.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

Couple of things I disagree with but I enjoyed reading it a lot

[FullMetalJack]

Couple of things I disagree with but I enjoyed reading it a lot

Yeah, it could be said that Controversial Enoch stuck his neck on the line with some of the ratings.

[Salamander]

I probably should've mentioned this earlier, but it was a good read, Enoch. As noted, I don't entirely agree, but I think ranking most of the teams is a bit of a crapshoot, really. I mean, you could pretty much rearrange McLaren down to Marussia in just about any order and justify it, there were so many highs and lows for each team.

[Captain Hammer]

I disagree with a couple of driver rankings, myself:

- Bruno Senna should be considerably lower than 15th. The position is justified as Senna being "the man who recorded ten points-scoring finishes compared to Maldonado's five, and was only 14 points behind the Venezuelan", but in my book, that's a serious mark against him. He scored points in twice as many races as Maldonado, but finished the season fourteen points behind. Add to that his woeful qualifying performances and some very strong showings from Maldonado - like Singapore - that were undermined by problems beyond his control, and Bruno Senna continued his tend of underwhelming. All he managed to do is prove that he shouldn't have been racing in 2012.

- Paul di Resta should also be much lower. He was upstaged by Hulkenberg for most of the year, which may be explained by the way he spent more time making excuses for his poor performances than actually doing something about it. If you read any of his comments after qualifying - most notably when he missed Q3 and especially if Hulkenberg made it - he's always complaining about problems that strike just before he has the opportunity to set a representative lap time (ie he gets blocked, a mechanical failure pops up, or the track temperature rises and the tyres stop working). Add to that his comments that McLaren took Perez because he was "more marketable" than other drivers on offer and his explaining away that his problems in qualifying in Austin were because his driving style is "very smooth" (it's not) and thus he could not get the tyres working properly, it's pretty clear that di Resta got distracted by the idea that he could be driving for McLaren next year, and it hurt his results.

- Felipe Massa should be higher. Yes, he struggled in the first half of the season, but as the teams review section points out, part of that was down to the way Ferrari handled him. He managed to turn things around by the end of the season, and while it's probably not enough for a significantly-higher ranking, at the very least he should be ahead of di Resta and Senna.

[girry]

Since this seems to have become the official 'forward-your-complaints-to-Enoch-here' thread, I would also like to mention the exaggerated difference between Vergne and Ricciardo. Sure, we don't know exactly how good or bad they were, but they weren't that far apart - even if Vergne was awful in qualifying, it's not like he didn't have his own problems there as Ricciardo did in races....

No other complaints really, it must have been difficult to rate especially down from P8 - there were so many factors and fluctuations of form not always down to the drivers themselves that you could put serious arguments for each of the judgements, depends on where you view from.

A really enjoyable read - always enjoyed and looked forward to these insights (even way before noticing the forum) and this one didn't let me down either....

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

Naturally delighted with Marussia being ranked 8th!

8th or 9th is fairly accurate to be honest, they made progress through the season, whilst HRT stayed still, and Caterham moved backwards. And of course they were going to rank ahead of Mercedes, and possibly Toro Rosso too.

I think that Marussia deserves the 8th.

[eytl]

it must have been difficult to rate especially down from P8 - there were so many factors and fluctuations of form not always down to the drivers themselves that you could put serious arguments for each of the judgements, depends on where you view from.

Absolutely. I agonised over pretty much all the driver rankings from 8th down.

As a case in point in relation to some of the other more common disagreements that people have posted ...

Senna: I don't quite understand the degree of anti-Bruno sentiment, although at one stage I ranked him quite a bit lower before eventually promoting him to 15th. I don't think he's a world-beating driver. To my mind he probably underwhelmed the Williams slightly in terms of quali pace, but Maldonado tended to drag impossible times out of the FW34. But he scored points consistently throughout the season. Maybe it's just that I tend to value consistency. Plus I think the fact that he missed out on so much free practice time must be a factor in his favour. I thought the way Williams handled the whole Bottas-Senna thing was not that great.

Massa: I'm a touch surprised by how many think Massa should have been higher, when I got the impression from other forum threads that there was a groundswell of opinion that suggested he should be ROTY or even DBTMOTY. I guess I was just disappointed in how poor he was earlier in the year (carrying over his average form from 2011). Trust me, I started with Massa even lower before promoting him to 18th.

Schumacher: I also don't understand the anti-Schumi sentiment. I mean Hungary was appalling; clouting Vergne at Singapore likewise. The incident in Spain with Senna was 50-50. But what are all these other bad races he had and massive errors he made? You think that he's off the pace in quali these days and his usual position is 13th or 14th, until you do a count and you realise he out-qualified Rosberg over the year. I personally thought his Q3 lap in Austin was one of THE single best laps of the year (granted that he and Rosberg had different exhausts on their cars) even though in the race he inevitably slid down the order. To me it was a sign that he was pushing to the end, whereas I just can't help but feel that Nico is permanently limited by the speed of his car. Then again, I had both Mercedes drivers lower down before promoting them to 8th and 9th. I dropped Perez and Di Resta down instead.

Capt Hammer, not sure you can say PDR was upstaged by Hulkenberg for most of the year. As I said, 14 races in he was ahead in the quali and points battle. But I was disappointed by the way he seemed to become indifferent/arrogant in the last six races while Nico got on with the job and delivered some big performances.

And giraurd, I actually agree that Ricciardo and Vergne don't deserve to be 9 places apart, but I just couldn't fit Vergne any higher. In any other season Vergne's performance level might have netted him, say, 15th or 16th in my rankings.

[James1978]

I think in any given year it's probably easy to rank the first few and bottom few, but really difficult to do those in the middle....which is why I'm not going to say anyone should have been higher or lower!

[dr-baker]

it must have been difficult to rate especially down from P8 - there were so many factors and fluctuations of form not always down to the drivers themselves that you could put serious arguments for each of the judgements, depends on where you view from.

Absolutely. I agonised over pretty much all the driver rankings from 8th down.

As a case in point in relation to some of the other more common disagreements that people have posted ...

Senna: I don't quite understand the degree of anti-Bruno sentiment, although at one stage I ranked him quite a bit lower before eventually promoting him to 15th. I don't think he's a world-beating driver. To my mind he probably underwhelmed the Williams slightly in terms of quali pace, but Maldonado tended to drag impossible times out of the FW34. But he scored points consistently throughout the season. Maybe it's just that I tend to value consistency. Plus I think the fact that he missed out on so much free practice time must be a factor in his favour. I thought the way Williams handled the whole Bottas-Senna thing was not that great.

Just to reiterate that I for one agree with your assessment of Senna - I must be one of the few on here that likes him... And the missing-out on free practice I reckon must have had some influence. Would have been interesting to see what may have happened if Bottas had alternated between Senna and Maldonado's seats throughout the season...

[Ferrim]

Would have placed Button (and maybe Webber) a bit lower, and definitely Senna doesn't deserve to be ahead of Massa (Felipe showed in the final part of the year that he still has the speed, something that Bruno hasn't done at any point in his career). Apart from that, I like your order, and particularly that you placed Hamilton in front of Vettel; Lewis was the most deserving driver this year, apart from Alonso.

And it was a great read, indeed.

[Phoenix]

Nice work as always, though I have to say I have my own disagreements about the rankings:
-How could be Rosberg ahead of Schumacher considering how abysmal his second half of the year was?
-Why was Webber so high when he clearly dropped off the boil on a nice first part of the year?
-Why on Earth was Grosjean so low even accounting for the many incidents he created?

Whilst I won't address every disagreement, and I actually expect a fair bit of disagreement this year, I'm happy to expand on my rationale for these three.

Rosberg: I thought so too, until I reviewed his results. I think often we can be coloured by the last few races for a driver - "you're only as good as your last race". Rosberg was of course unlucky to get caught up in that incident with Grosjean at Suzuka, with Kobayashi at Yeongam, and with Karthikeyan at Abu Dhabi. That accounted for 3 of the last six races after Singapore, where he finished 5th. So really he only had three bad races (India, USA, Brazil) as the Mercedes declined.

Webber: Again, I would have put him lower but for a more objective review of his results. I have noted some of his "cack-handed" drives in the second half of the year (Italy, Singapore, Abu Dhabi). But in Germany and Belgium he was hampered by gearbox changes (although Seb taught him a lesson in pure racing at Spa - and that's a rarity), in Suzuka he was hit by Grosjean. That leaves Korea, India and Brazil where he came 2nd, 3rd and 4th, and in Austin he was running 3rd. So while he didn't maintain the high level we saw in the first part of the year, it wasn't that bad a level in the second half of the year.

Grosjean: This is a matter of impression and expectation. I expected Grosjean to be quick. His low ranking is for how poor his incidents were, the fact he didn't seem to really learn from them, and how mentally he seemed to lose it in the face of criticism. Compared to Maldonado, some of whose incidents were even more reckless, I didn't expect Pastor's pace, and I was impressed by how he managed to calm down more as the season wore on.

I understand - and thank you for taking your time answering me in such depth - but, in the case of Rosberg, I think Schumacher was still more impressive and should have been ranked higher, in spite of his horrendous race at Hungaroring. Rosberg might have been the guy to take Mercedes' win but on the whole Schumacher was, I think, more impressive during the season and was really crippled by bad luck in the first part of the year. Had he kept his pole at Monaco, who knows if he could have challenged for the victory?

And I am surprised you thought Grosjean was going to be that quick, at least during the first part of the season. Qualifying in 3rd at his first race since Abu Dhabi 2009 was quite something.

[Captain Hammer]

Senna: I don't quite understand the degree of anti-Bruno sentiment, although at one stage I ranked him quite a bit lower before eventually promoting him to 15th. I don't think he's a world-beating driver. To my mind he probably underwhelmed the Williams slightly in terms of quali pace, but Maldonado tended to drag impossible times out of the FW34. But he scored points consistently throughout the season. Maybe it's just that I tend to value consistency. Plus I think the fact that he missed out on so much free practice time must be a factor in his favour. I thought the way Williams handled the whole Bottas-Senna thing was not that great.

I think that the animosity towards Senna stems from the way he simply wasted a seat that a more-talented driver could have filled. And it's not like he just had an off season - he wasn't great when he was racing for HRT or Renault, either. He had absolutely no business being in Formula 1 this year (and has no business being there next year, either), but he was there because of his sponsors and because his name is Senna. If his name was Bruno Jones and he was unrelated to a famous driver (much less the most famous driver), nobody would have bothered with him.

Capt Hammer, not sure you can say PDR was upstaged by Hulkenberg for most of the year. As I said, 14 races in he was ahead in the quali and points battle. But I was disappointed by the way he seemed to become indifferent/arrogant in the last six races while Nico got on with the job and delivered some big performances.

The arrogance of di Resta is what I'm talking about when I rate him so lowly. I get the impression that he assumes he will race for McLaren, Ferrari or Red Bull some day, and that actually earning his place there is a formality (kind of like the Australian swimming team at the London Olympics assuming they would win everything). Ironically, he's not good enough for a front-line drive. The only way he stands any chance of racing for one of those teams is if they get desperate and/or have to pick the best of a bad bunch.

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

[img]The%20arrogance%20of%20di%20Resta%20is%20what%20I'm%20talking%20about%20when%20I%20rate%20him%20so%20lowly.%20I%20get%20the%20impression%20that%20he%20assumes%20he%20will%20race%20for%20McLaren,%20Ferrari%20or%20Red%20Bull%20some%20day,%20and%20that%20actually%20earning%20his%20place%20there%20is%20a%20formality[/img]
I have to agree with this sentence. I got the same impression too.

[Warren Hughes]

Are the podcast rankings different from the season review rankings, or does this mean that either Karthikeyan or HRT will be ROTY this year? And also, just to indulge in a bit of Enoch-bashing to suit the tone of the rest of the thread, I wasn't a fan of the reverse order thing.

[thechicanef1]

I generally agree with your rankings, and I agree that this year, ranking would be difficult, which is why I had suggested range rankings, instead of spot rankings.
I just used the word 'rankings' 4 times in a single sentence.

[FullMetalJack]

I generally agree with your rankings, and I agree that this year, ranking would be difficult, which is why I had suggested range rankings, instead of spot rankings.
I just used the word 'rankings' 4 times in a single sentence.

As long as you don't say ranking like Nick Heidfeld

[James1978]

I generally agree with your rankings, and I agree that this year, ranking would be difficult, which is why I had suggested range rankings, instead of spot rankings.
I just used the word 'rankings' 4 times in a single sentence.

As long as you don't say ranking like Nick Heidfeld

Shame on you Martin Brundle!!

[Yannick]

If Narain and / or HRT cannot get the Award by default because pre-season expectations have been so low, Enoch, you suggest Heikki and / or Caterham getting the award. I'm curious as to what your discussion with Jamie about the podium will result in.

[Benetton]

This would've been my ranking. I was not impressed by neither STR driver this year. They had some solid drives and Ricciardo had a few good quali laps but it isn't enough to be ranked in top 15 in a season like this were many other drivers really maxed out. The problem with Senna is that while he was consistent I felt all the time that he wasn't maximizing the result like Maldonado occasionally did, mostly because Senna simply does not have the speed.


1. Fernando Alonso
2. Lewis Hamilton
3. Sebastian Vettel
4. Kimi Raikkonen
5. Nico Hulkenberg
6. Jenson Button
7. Nico Rosberg
8. Michael Schumacher
9. Pastor Maldonado
10. Sergio Perez
11. Kamui Kobayashi
12. Mark Webber
13. Charles Pic
14. Felipe Massa
15. Paul di Resta
16. Timo Glock
17. Romain Grosjean
18. Daniel Ricciardo
19. Jean-Eric Vergne
20. Pedro de la Rosa
21. Bruno Senna
22. Vitaly Petrov
23. Heikki Kovalainen
24. Narain Karthikeyan

[FullMetalJack]

This would've been my ranking. I was not impressed by neither STR driver this year. They had some solid drives and Ricciardo had a few good quali laps but it isn't enough to be ranked in top 15 in a season like this were many other drivers really maxed out. The problem with Senna is that while he was consistent I felt all the time that he wasn't maximizing the result like Maldonado occasionally did, mostly because Senna simply does not have the speed.


1. Fernando Alonso
2. Lewis Hamilton
3. Sebastian Vettel
4. Kimi Raikkonen
5. Nico Hulkenberg
6. Jenson Button
7. Nico Rosberg
8. Michael Schumacher
9. Pastor Maldonado
10. Sergio Perez
11. Kamui Kobayashi
12. Mark Webber
13. Charles Pic
14. Felipe Massa
15. Paul di Resta
16. Timo Glock
17. Romain Grosjean
18. Daniel Ricciardo
19. Jean-Eric Vergne
20. Pedro de la Rosa
21. Bruno Senna
22. Vitaly Petrov
23. Heikki Kovalainen
24. Narain Karthikeyan

Mine would be

1. Fernando Alonso
2. Lewis Hamilton
3. Sebastian Vettel
4. Kimi Raikkonen
5. Nico Hulkenberg
6. Jenson Button
7. Sergio Perez
8. Kamui Kobayashi
9. Nico Rosberg
10. Mark Webber
11. Pastor Maldonado
12. Felipe Massa
13. Paul Di Resta
14. Romain Grosjean
15. Charles Pic
16. Michael Schumacher
17. Vitaly Petrov
18. Timo Glock
19. Daniel Ricciardo
20. Pedro de la Rosa
21. Jean-Eric Vergne
22. Heikki Kovalainen
23. Bruno Senna
24. Narain Karthikeyan

1. Sauber
2. McLaren
3. Lotus
4. Red Bull
5. Williams
6. Ferrari
7. Force India
8. Marussia
9. Toro Rosso
10. Mercedes
11. Caterham
12. HRT

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

If Narain and / or HRT cannot get the Award by default because pre-season expectations have been so low, Enoch, you suggest Heikki and / or Caterham getting the award. I'm curious as to what your discussion with Jamie about the podium will result in.

Probably HRT got the award because, while Marussia had some improvements throughout the season, HRT hadn't.

[pasta_maldonado]

If Narain and / or HRT cannot get the Award by default because pre-season expectations have been so low, Enoch, you suggest Heikki and / or Caterham getting the award. I'm curious as to what your discussion with Jamie about the podium will result in.

Probably HRT got the award because, while Marussia had some improvements throughout the season, HRT hadn't.

It'll be an insult if it doesn't go to Mercedes