Le Mans shows why Sauber matters

Michael Lamonato Columnist

By Michael Lamonato, Michael Lamonato is a Roar Expert


2 Have your say

    Sauber may not be Formula One's most notable team, but they add much to the competition (Getty Images / Red Bull Content Pool)

    Related coverage

    Sauber tends not to be a name that evokes any particularly passionate response from a casual motorsport fan, but the decades-old midfield team has rarely had a dull moment in Formula One.

    This week Sauber wrote another chapter in its chequered history: it has parted ways with long-time team member and, more recently, CEO and team principal Monisha Kaltenborn.

    “Longbow Finance SA,” read the statement published by the team’s mysterious owners, “regrets to announce that, by mutual consent and due to diverging views of the future of the company, Monisha Kaltenborn will leave her positions with the Sauber Group effective immediately.”

    Longbow Finance swept to Sauber’s saviour in the middle of last year when the team was teetering on the brink of financial ruin, seizing a 100 per cent share from former joint owners Peter Sauber and Kaltenborn herself.

    The plan was is to return the team to health as a research and development organisation in a similar style to Williams, which has become self-sustaining by diversifying into businesses beyond Formula One.

    Before the company can do that, however, it must find on-track success, and performance has been sorely lacking since 2014. Though the car is being developed for the first time in more than a year, upgrades are failing to bring the expected benefits, and only the ongoing embarrassment of McLaren-Honda is keeping Sauber off the bottom of the table.

    Somewhere along the way Kaltenborn, a Formula One leader of 20 years experience, and Longbow Finance, which has been involved in the sport for less than 12 months, have disagreed on exactly how to reverse the slump, and the more experienced head has come off second best.

    The immediacy of the departure has left the team in the indefinite lurch on the eve of a grand prix — and considering Sauber is being helmed by a company with limited F1 experience and no obvious rebuilding plan, concern is the overwhelming emotion.

    But why should we be concerned about a team with such bleak prospects and a largely unspectacular if lengthy tenure in Formula One?

    Because independent teams like Sauber are the backbone of Formula One.

    Consider last weekend’s 24 Hours of Le Mans. The world-famous endurance race always a spectacle, but last weekend it was especially so when it seemed an LMP2 car — run by Jackie Chan DC Racing, no less — would claim overall victory ahead of a stumbling field of its LMP1 rivals.

    The sensational result wasn’t to be — one of the two surviving LMP1 challengers climbed up the field to resume the lead in the final hours — but the prospect of such an historic moment highlighted a defining problem of the World Endurance Championship in 2017: a lack of top-flight competitors.

    With Peugeot long gone, Audi’s sudden dieselgate-fuelled departure at the end of last season and Rebellion Racing’s switch to LMP2, LMP1 has been left with only two competitive team entries in Porsche and Toyota, and with the next regulatory cycle yet to be defined beyond broad principles, there are rumours one or both could withdraw in the near future.

    It’s a sad state of affairs for a racing category that only 12 months ago seemed to be on the cusp of a golden era.

    The problem — and the lesson Formula One ought to heed — is that reliance on auto manufacturers at the expense of independent teams.

    Formula One should have learnt this in 2009–10, when in the space of little more than 12 months the number of manufacturers dropped from six to three, jeopardising a significant portion of the F1 grid.

    The fact is that with the exception of Ferrari, which is almost inextricably tied to F1, manufacturers that arrive in the sport do so for their own reasons, chief amongst them marketing. Their forays into international motorsport inevitably have goals, and once those goals are achieved — or, as in the case of Toyota, are deemed unachievable — they withdraw.

    Only the independent teams who come to Formula One for its own sake feel responsibility for the sport, and even if they tend to only infrequently take places on the podium, never mind vie for the title, their contributions to the category are irreplaceable.

    This is why it has long been folly for Formula One to commercially favour its manufacturers and even Red Bull Racing, which exists in F1 with the same marketing philosophy — one day these teams will leave F1, their pockets full but the sport poorer for the sacrificing of the smaller teams for short-term gain.

    This ethos, championed by the former commercial rights holder, brought Sauber to this place. Longbow may have saved the day last year, but the team is far from out of the tunnel — indeed the light seems almost further away today than it did 12 months ago.

    Michael Lamonato
    Michael Lamonato

    Michael is one-third of F1 podcast Box of Neutrals, as heard weekly on ABC Grandstand Digital nationwide. Though he's been part of the F1's travelling press room since 2012, people seem more interested in the time he was sick in a kart ? but don't ask about that, follow him on Twitter instead @MichaelLamonato.

    This video is trending right now! Submit your videos for the chance to win a share of $10,000!

    Oldest | Newest | Most Recent

    The Crowd Says (2)

    • June 23rd 2017 @ 6:24pm
      Glen said | June 23rd 2017 @ 6:24pm | ! Report

      Despite the LMP1 issues, I found this year’s Le Mans race thrilling. There were great moments throughout.

      I lamented the loss of the Toyotas and it was a sorry sight seeing the first Porsche try to limp around the track.

      While the Jackie Chan LMP2 car was in front there was a real sense of something amazing happening. The pursuit of the Jackie Chan car by the LMP1 Porsche was great to watch also.

      • Columnist

        June 26th 2017 @ 11:17am
        Michael Lamonato said | June 26th 2017 @ 11:17am | ! Report

        I’m not denying the race was good — Le Mans was great, in fact — but it was accidentally so. An LMP2 car shouldn’t on pace be racing for victory, and while half the battle in endurance racing it to make it to the finish, the fact that a handful of car issues wiped out the entire leading category is the concern.

    Have Your Say

    If not logged in, please enter your name and email before submitting your comment. Please review our comments policy before posting on the Roar.