mario wrote:Phoenix, you could also add to the list of poor driver choices by Ligier the decision by Guy Ligier to bring in Ickx in 1979 to replace the injured Depailler, when Ickx never got within a second of his team mate (and was routinely much further back).
In fact, I really wish that i could find an article that I saw elsewhere about the 1979 season, explaining why Ligier was so strong in the opening races, only to fall back afterwards.
But, essentially, it pointed out that Ligier, thanks to its sportscar roots, maganed to build a very torsionally stiff chassis, which meant that they could maximise their ground effects, at a time when the Lotus chassis was simply not strong enough (there is the famous quote that "The Lotus 79 chassis had all the torsional rigidity of wet lettuce"). Mclaren also couldn't build a strong enough chassis, whilst the Alfa V12 in the Brabham meant the car had a very high centre of gravity, and was quite heavy (although the Ligier was a bit overweight, due to the chassis). Meanwhile, Ferrari couldn't build proper venturi tunnels, because their 12 cylinder boxer engine was in the way, and the Williams FW07 was not ready for the start of the season.
So, for the opening few races, Ligier had the best car, and it showed when they beat Lotus by over a second in Buenos Aires. It was all the more entertaining for Ligier because as the car had been unloaded, a couple of Lotus engineers were looking at the car, and were saying "Why have htey done the suspension like that?" and "Why are the sidepods shaped in such a strange way?", before one of them was heard to remark "It [the Ligier] is a mess - if that thing wins a race, I'll resign immediately".
What is interesting is that the article then went on to describe why they fell back. There was an old legend that Guy Ligier found the perfect suspension set up for the opening races, wrote it down on a cigarette packet and then lost it, and they were simply unable to find the right set up again. However, fun though it may be, it seems that it was a deliberate false rumour put out by rival teams (Lotus in particular), who were bitter at Ligier's success.
Simply put, it was down to monetary problems - Ligier were operating on a shoestring (the mechanics had to sleep in the garage, because the team couldn't afford hotels), and simply couldn't afford to develop the car. Depailler's accident then robbed them of an experienced development driver, and the combination of superior tyres and power offset the disadvantages of the Ferrari T4 for long enough for Ferrari to take the title.
This is a very interesting post...I forgot about Ickx driving for then in 1979. It was probably signed because of experience, but he hadn't driven regularly in Formula 1 since 1975 and seemed past his best ever since he signed for Lotus. It showed.
I thought Ligier had a healthy budget. They had sponsorship from Gitanes, mainly. If it was funded, or influenced in any way by the French government at that time, I don't know, though.
And now, with BAR...
RAW PACE-7.0 OK, so 1999 was an utter disaster, but the BARs were usually decent enough in that regard, and had some very good days, especially in 2004.
DRIVER SELECTION-5.5 Button proved to be a very safe and good investment, but Villeneuve didn't quite cut it as he should had. I can understand to an extent why the team chose Zonta in 1999 (he was the current WSC champion) but keeping it for 2000 was not right. And Sato was there for the Honda engines in the first place; albeit he performed OK in 2004, his performances were pale compared to what Button did (3rd against 8th in the standings). And don't ask about 2005: as someone else said:
"Bonsai not banzai".
STRATEGY MAKING-7.0 They did the job, I guess.
ENTERTAINING VALUE-7.0 Villeneuve had his feisty moments, and we cannot forget Sato either, but mostly they were quite quiet.
PERSONAL SYMPATHY-3.0 A team that was formed from a giant tobacco company will never rank high in this regard in my books, just like if there was a team formed from a giant energetic drinks company.
RELIABILITY-6.5 2002 was a bad year, with a lot of Honda engines blow-ups, and 1999 was even worse, but regularly they were OK in this regard.
LIVERY RATING (sorry, I had to put it 
)-4.0-Dull. Just dull. Oh, well. there was 1999. Wait...Ghastly. Just ghastly.
