A farewell snap from the Manor F1 team gives us a glimpse of what a 2017 car actually looks like.
The ever consuming media giant that is Motorsport.com have released a picture taken at Manor F1 aero department soon after the announcement that investment had failed to be found for this coming season.
Here we see a 60% scale model of the car they would’ve raced had the coffers continued to flow through the ever struggling minow team.
Manor are the last team left from the three ‘new teams’ from 2010 and in recent history enjoyed a cult following not to different to the original F1 minnows of yesteryear, Minardi.
Perhaps the fact that they graced the points a few times in their 6 year existence might be the reason.
A true underdog.
Alas, what is often forgotten is that the team had been involved with the last 2 deaths in F1 since Senna’s 1994 at Imola. Namely Maria de Villota and Jules Bianchi.
This aside, f1 fans always like a team that can punch above its weight and rise above adversity. Unfortunately, it looks like 2017 is a leap too far.
I feel sorry for the 200+ people that have lost their jobs. I sense that many people are “fans” of Manor because of Bianchi. He’s the only driver that has been killed since they became F1 fans – they liked putting #pray for jules in their twitter posts.
The fact is that Manor were a crap team. Had it not been for M-B giving them free drivers and reduced cost engines they might have gone bust at the beginning of 2016.
And I take issue with The Judges comparison to Minardi. While Minardi were minnows they scored several 4th’s, 5th’s and 6’s during their time, something that was never going to happen to Manor.
It was an ironic comparison, hence the commas
‘Crap team’ is dismissive and, I think, unjustified. Underfunded and under-resourced in modern F1 terms? Yes, certainly. But they were told they were joining a series with a budget cap, so is it fair to slate them for this? And, given the weighting of prize money in F1, unless you have a huge external injection of cash you are never going to be able to progress from the back of the grid to the front. In fact the front just gets further away. They’ve done their absolute best with what they have for years, with committed and talented staff. That’s not a ‘crap team’.
The reason why people are/were fans of Manor is that everyone wants to see a team like this do well and get better. Because it’s a good story. Because sport needs to be about surprises, and efforts being rewarded, and the underdog – just sometimes – being able too trade punches with the champ. Because it would be an indication that the sport is healthy. Because – in the end – Chelsea and MB buying championships doesn’t have a lot to do with the spirit of competition.
Like you, I have sympathy for all those people who’ve given it all for a struggling team but I wish they were still around and I hope F1 soon becomes a sport where a GOOD team of GOOD people can thrive.
Manor also knew that only the top ten scoring teams got a pay out.
Correct. They also ‘knew’ that other teams’ ability to hugely outspend them would be limited.
All three of the newest teams have now failed. Were they all just shit and deserving of failure? I don’t believe they actually were, but let’s assume I’m wrong; the question then becomes ‘Why is F1 only capable i attracting shit and doomed teams? And not even enough of them to fill the grid?’.
Let’s not forget why Mindardi got sold to RB. It was impossible for the team to make any progress. Despite not being a crap team.
Be clear; what exactly are trying to say here?
“Alas, what is often forgotten is that the team had been involved with the last 2 deaths in F1 since Senna’s 1994 at Imola. Namely Maria de Villota and Jules Bianchi.”
Can I say that I’m encouraged by the lack of a penis? After the recent Renault peek, that such a mild-Manored design crew can conceive of such a slim nose is Manor from heaven (in a Manor of speaking).
And, for mine, I think the cult following makes the Minardi reference legit.
Maybe I am being an acid pisser, but Minardi was sold and was renamed Torro Rosso.
Maria de Villota crashed into a tailift of a truck while testing (when the team was still Marussia) She survived the crash, and was found dead a full year later. Allthough still pretty young, an autopsy confirmed her death to be a result of cardiac arrest. True, it is a bit vague (everybody dies of cardiac arrest in the end), but afaik it wasn’t ruled foul play.
“does finger crossing for Manor”
What bothers me about this is that the writer SEEMS TO ME to be implying that Manor was in some way culpable for the deaths, that this is because they were an unworthy team (wanting relative to Minardi), and that the deaths of the drivers mean that the Manor team is undeserving of the support it has/had.
If that’s the case (and I’m struggling to find another way of reading it) then this doesn’t really fit with this site’s repeated criticism of Whiting, Todt and Bernie wrt Bianchi’s death. And that’s before we get started on the rest of what is wrong with this viewpoint.
The statement in the article merely implies that Manor in whatever guise and in whatever degree (or lack of) culpability, are associated with those tragedies. It was an ironic comparison to Minardi who Cav rightly points out, actually had some good results in their past.
Let me get this right; The comparison is ironic because Minardi achieved some good results and drivers suffered fatal injuries in Manor cars? Why would it be ironic without an assumption that Manor were somehow at fault?
Minardi achieved admirable success. Manor less so. That is all.
Judge – would it be also fair to point out that Minardi’s “admirable success” was achieved at a time when differential between prize money and/or funding of the top teams and that of Minardi was not 20-30x? There was no historic constructors bonus, no Ferrari Investment Association.
Fiction is a talent you have 😉
Reblogged this on BWOAH Racing Acid .