It is as unpopular a conclusion as it is a painfully objective one: Kimi Räikkönen, the 2007 Formula One world champion, just doesn’t cut it in 2016.
Much consideration was given to this column, though not because the conclusion isn’t sound. Rather, because the one-time bearer of the ‘Flying Finn’ moniker has amassed such a following that he is something of a protected species.
The reason for this has always been elusive. Once he was undoubtedly among the sport’s quickest, capable of some astonishing drives – including at that 2005 Japanese Grand Prix – but those days have long passed the 36-year-old.
Is it that this age of anti-establishmentarianism, evidenced in politics, extends to sport and has lent Räikkönen the credibility to wring these extra years from his Formula One career?
Whatever the reason, it mustn’t cloud the evidence: it’s time Ferrari ended its driver’s superannuation tour.
The most important reason is that, simply, he isn’t performing, and he hasn’t done so for a surprising amount of time considering his grip on one of the sport’s most sought-after seats.
After winning his championship in 2007 – and though no-one doubts Kimi was of championship calibre, the title victory that season was fortuitous in light of McLaren teammates Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso taking points of each other in an open feud – he has been in a steady state of decline.
In 2008 he was comfortably outperformed by Felipe Massa and forced to play the second-driver role in the Brazilian’s own title fight, yet Massa is certainly not held in the same regard as Räikkönen. In 2009, before Massa suffered his midyear accident in Hungary, the Finn was already 12 points behind his teammate.
Was it a problem with motivation? Not according to Räikkönen, who instead complains of being more sensitive to imperfect cars – but arguably this is equally incriminating given the drivers regarded as the sport’s greatest have histories of driving around sub-par machinery.
Whatever the reason, the Finn was dumped in favour of Fernando Alonso for the 2010 season to spend two years in the wilderness, including delivering lukewarm results in the World Rally Championship and dabbling with NASCAR, which mostly involved him complaining his water bottle was empty and that his car was ‘shit’. Needless to say he didn’t set the motorsport world on fire.
His 2012 return with Lotus showed glimmers of hope the Iceman might’ve been back, including victories in Abu Dhabi that year and in Australia in 2013, but despite his uber-consistent performances he fell out with the team two rounds before the end of the season and left.
No matter. Ferrari was convinced and hired him back just four years after paying out his contract.
For Räikkönen fans this is where the biography will end, because in 2014 he finished a career-worst 12th in the drivers championship standings and was trounced by teammate Fernando Alonso to the tune of 106 points.
A change in teammate to Sebastian Vettel and a marked upswing in the car’s performance shrunk the gap, but the German’s amassing of 278 points was almost twice as much as Räikkönen’s 150.
The Finn’s two-year contract ended last year, but Ferrari, bafflingly, chose to give him a one-year extension despite the overwhelming evidence backing the contrary decision.
But the Finn’s underwhelming performances are only part of the need for change. When the flimsy argument for stability might have been justifiable while the technical team was being rebuilt last year, the stated aim of a full-blown title assault is simply incompatible with Räikkönen’s ongoing tenure.
Mercedes, the undeniably dominant force of 2014 and 2015, easily took home both constructors championships because both of its drivers were competitive – Nico Rosberg, twice the runner-up, managed to score 88 per cent (neglecting double points) and 85 per cent of Lewis Hamilton’s score in 2014 and 2015.
Kimi Räikkönen, on the other hand, scored 34 per cent and 54 per cent of his teammate’s totals in those same years – an average of just 44 per cent.
It isn’t enough, and while Ferrari has often favoured having an obvious number-one driver, even Rubens Barrichello in the 2000–04 championship era scored 61 per cent of Michael Schumacher’s points, including two runner-up and one third-place championship finishes.
With former Ferrari junior academy driver Sergio Perez surging this season and with Romain Grosjean growing into his prime years – not to mention the disruptive option of wresting Carlos Sainz out of his one-year Toro Rosso deal to damage Red Bull’s driver programme – there is no justifiable reason to retain Kimi Räikkönen for a fourth successive year. There is every reason to give a younger driver the chance to push Vettel for all he’s worth.
A contract renewal damages Räikkönen’s legacy as much as it does Ferrari’s championship challenge, and for these reasons Kimi Räikkönen quite simply has got to go.
Follow @MichaelLamonato on Twitter
Phastur
Guest
I get it Kimi's not the driver he once was.....but that can be said of many drivers in who turned 36 in there careers......96 points each my friends.....and with that kind of sensitivity in this years Ferrari, I'm amazed that either of the drivers are that far up the standings.....Grosjean, really??? Don't forget about the pressures of driving the red car.....It's easy to perform well in a Haas with absolutely zero expectation. Or a Force India that has no business being near the podium.......Sergio did well at McLaren in 13 though right??? Don't get me wrong, Kimi's lost his fight somewhat.....but still can consistently bring the car home in the top 3 when the pit wall isn't ruining his chances....I still pick Kimi for the second seat at Maranello..Don't forget whomever fills the seat, will have to with a short term in mind.......Ricciardo is going to be the man to beat for years to come and he isn't available until 2019... Cheers to all.
Armchair expert
Guest
Please let's just hope that whoever it is that gets the gig has just a little bit of a personality. Kimi would not be fun at parties
SM
Guest
Barrichello let Schumacher through at the same track a year earlier to finish second to David Coulthard. I agree with the rest of what you wrote.
anon
Guest
You're wrong. Barrichello gave him one win in 2002. That's it. Schumacher gave that win back to Barrichello later that year at Indianapolis, slowing down just before the finish line. So the "debt" was settled there and then. Barrichello NEVER handed another win to Schumacher. You know why? Barrichello was never ahead of Schumacher on track. Austria was actually a funny track that Barrichello used to be able to match Schumacher for speed (simple track, not particularly technical). Let's go through the head to head in qualifying between Schumacher and Barrichello. From 2003 and on, drivers qualified with their starting fuel so qualifying times aren't reflective of one lap speed. 2000 15 vs 2 2001 16 vs 1 2002 13 vs 4 It's fair to say Schumacher destroyed Barrichello.
steve
Guest
I think it should be made clear that Barrichello was robbed of lots of wins and possibly a F1 title of his own through team orders. I lost count of the number of times over the years he was at Ferrari that he had to slow down and let MS pass him.
Simoc
Guest
But you didn't pick one of those three. I want Grosjean at Renault, despite him not wanting them, and so I'm going for Perez. His form has been outstanding and must have shaken Nico Hulkenburg. And yes, Raikenon must go, as must Button, the two overpaid journeymen going nowhere. Massa also.
anon
Guest
I agree completely about Raikkonen. Selfish guy, talks to people like dirt, not a team player at all, it's baffling that Ferrari went back to him after he got put into his first retirement by Massa of all drivers, and Ferrari paid $20 million per year for the pleasure. Top teams have become so conservative in their driver selection (apart from Red Bull). Hulkenberg would have driven at Ferrari for next to nothing. How much does Raikkonen bring to the table in terms of technical input? You could argue it's the engineers on computers in the back of the garage or 1000's of miles away that provide most of the technical input these days. Plus Ferrari already has Vettel at Ferrari, who is a well experienced driver, been exposed to a strong team culture at RBR, and has 4 championships to his name. As for Barrichello, he was no slouch. He had some amazing results with Jordan and Stewart before going to Ferrari in 2000. He was robbed of a lot of those results through poor mechanical reliability. For all the talk of how good Senna's drive at Donnington 1993 was, Barrichello was actually the more impressive driver in that race. He started 12th and was already 3rd after the first lap in a relatively primitive car compared to Senna's McLaren with its exotic electronics. The fact is Schumacher was just that much better than Barrichello. Schumacher destroyed all his teammates. For Barrichello to score 61% of Schumacher's points in that 2000-04 period isn't that bad when you consider the points system from 2000-02 was 10-6-4-3-2-1. 2003 was 10-8-6, can't remember 2004. But today is 25-18-etc with points down to 10th, so you're effectively getting the equivalent of 10-7.2-etc. It's far easier today for Raikkonen to keep up with a teammate but he has been destroyed (by the guy who was destroyed by Ricciardo). People love to call Barrichello a number two, love to bring up Austria 2002, but Ferrari had missed championships by the skin of their teeth 97, 98 and 99 so they were never going to let it happen again. This was in an era of in-season development. The 2002 Ferrari went on to be one of the most dominant cars ever, but they weren't to know that at still an early stage in the season. Barrichello was already virtually out of the championship by Austria 2002. Ferrari simply did the smart thing, like when they had Massa give up a win for Alonso in 2010, Coulthard moving over for Hakkinen in 1998, Hamilton being gifted Rosberg's 3rd place in 2013, Piquet crashing for Alonso in 2008, even Schumacher sacrificed a win for Irvine in 1999 to help him win the championship.