The Late Braking F1 Podcast - Should Ferrari have a No.1 driver in 2023?

Episode Date: February 1, 2023

The F1 season draws ever nearer, and the LB boys are back for another episode of chaos! This week Ben, Sam and Harry discuss whether Ferrari are right or wrong to have a No.1 driver, chat through Bottas' comments on the F1, and play a classic game of F1: Order Please... JOIN our Discord: https://discord.gg/dQJdu2SbAm SUPPORT our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/latebraking TWEET us @LBraking BUY our merch: https://late-braking-f1-podcast.creator-spring.com/ SUBSCRIBE to our podcast! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This podcast is part of the Sports Social Podcast Network. Thank you for listening to the Late Breaking F1 podcast. Make sure to tune in for new episodes every Wednesday and Grand Prix Sunday. Hello and a very warm welcome to the late breaking F1 podcast presented by Harry Ead, Sam Sage and me, Ben Hocking. We're finally, to all of our joy, we're in livery season. Hooray, F1 is on the horizon It's almost like that That first sign that it's on its way

We're recording on the day Of Hasse's new livery being released We're going to be discussing all of the liveries By the way When they're all launched We won't do the one by one Pimp My F1 is on its way In a couple of weeks' time

We've still got plenty to talk about today Sam, you must be incredibly hyped I'm so hyped I mean livery season for me Is like opening a fresh box of twanging chicken nuggets from McDonald's It is so

or breathe it in you know you dip it in that sauce you put it in you bite off the batter it feels so good and we're back at it we're here

we're here again and I'm so exciting I love every season I can't wait for Pimp my F1 but we're not talking about today folks no no no no no

other things Ben right other things what sauce oh because you get four sources with your 20s chicken nuggets now for everyone

interested Ben is a freak and hates all sauce and Harry's a freak There's not like ketchup, so their opinions are irrelevant. I don't hear any arguments of them. Whatever. You get two ketchup to two barbecues.

I regret asking this so bad right now. I regret you asking. He's just spreading lies about me. What's from us lies? Folks, if you're new to the show, I want to emphasize that I think we've got a review the other day that it was like they don't actually discuss anything. We're quite, you know, up in the air.

So if that's not what you're here for, go on and watch the race or something. I don't tell the listeners to go away I'm really going to both today what what would happen Ben if I did mention or talk about my opinion of the new livery on the Hass

would I be banned can I go home Is that what you want? I see you're in your home I just You know it feels nice to talk about some new F1 but I know we have to hold it in for Pimp my F1

Well, we just want to see how it goes We don't want to rush to conclusions too quickly I don't want to discuss the hasslery here And we all say it's the most beautiful thing we've ever seen And then it ends up being like the seventh best one Like it, for example, we wouldn't want to review an F1 season Just based on the first race Otherwise Ferrari would have been champions last year

It's good to wait until the end of the year Before you do your season review Can I argue with that logic Ben can argue with it. Here comes the money, Graham. Great, love that. Money, money, money, money, money, money. We're playing F1 order, please, later on in the show.

We're going to be discussing some punditory changes that Sky Sports are making. Valtrey Bottas has been questioning the FIA because he just doesn't care anymore. It's the boat! The boat. But we're going to start our discussion with, Ferrari.

So recently, Select Media were invited to Freddie Vassar's comments and he said about having a number one driver, we have two very good drivers that are able to do the job. We will have the capacity to provide them exactly the same car and the same structure

and the same support. What is clear is that the target is to win with Ferrari and for Ferrari. There will be no number one and number two. So getting the team dynamics out there fairly early. Sam, there's a mistake not to make Leclair or signs

a number one driver for the year? No, I think Friggy Vaseline has greased the joints of Ferrari very nicely at the start of his time here. Oh, no, Harry's got a pat... You can't see it, but Harry's got a pot of Vaseline of Freddie Vass right there. How weird is that? Just on the deck.

It's not my Vaseline. It was here when I got here. Has it greased the bolts of your Ferrari? Love. Yes. Very much so. He drives a Ferrari. Rather work for you. anyway, yeah, so I think this is a stellar play from Freddie Vass, from Mr. Vassir. I think that when you're coming into a new organisation, you know, you want to make friends,

you don't want to make enemies immediately, you don't want to start, you know, peeing people off, essentially, when you just turned up to a new job, whether you're the boss or not. So motivation is key for this Ferrari season. They obviously had a great start last time around. LeCleur ending up quite comfortably outdoing Carlos Sainz. So in my eyes, you've got to keep them both motivated to prove a point to make sure that they are fighting for something internally if they're not going to be fighting for that World Championship.

I think it's quite a clever play there from Freddie Vass. So the idea of saying, if you were to walk in day one and go, Charlotte Clare is my number one driver, Carlos Sites is my number two driver, what's that going to do for half the garage, for the morale? That is immediately going to just tear the team apart, destroying any kind of uplifting, positive culture that they're driving all together towards to win a title the end of the season. It makes social sense that he's coming and said this.

Of course, actions will speak louder than words later on in the season. And let's just say, Charlotte-Clair has the most abominable season. He's demoting even further than Moses, LeCleur, coming halfway through the summer break, so I know. Does that exist? Well, I don't know. Because he just become, I don't know, Pete Lecler or something. That's Pete Gazzle.

Anyway, my point is, let's say. say science is 100 points clear come the summer break. At that point, you could, Frilly Vass has got every right to walk out and go, the championship fight is with Carlos, that's where we're going to be putting our energy. Charles is going to be there to back up Carlos Sites now for the rest of the season. It makes

sense, he wings, the team wings, it speaks for itself. I think you'd be very daft to do it right now in the first two or three weeks of your appointment at a team, especially such as Ferrari. So makes sort of sense. It's a clever move. Do you see this as a

sensible move as well, Harry? Or do you think this is an error? They could go in the direction of, say, Schumacher and Barrichello. Of course, they had a number one, number two dynamic that worked very well back in the day. So do you think this is a right or wrong decision? I think there's a right decision.

The Schumacher Barakheller dynamic, you know, I don't think it holds true as well these days. You have to have quite a difference in your driver's skill ability. No offense, Rubens. Anyway, this isn't about it. No offense, Michael. No offense, Michael.

Cheers, Rubel's crying. I think we've seen, you know, when LeClaire joined in 2019, they said they, from the outset, said Vettel is the number one driver. But it turned out that LeClau was a match for him, and that all sort of came undone. So we've seen Ferrari mess this up before, so I think it's sensible for them not to try it again. If we get to a point in the season, as Sam says,

where it's clear the one driver is far ahead, then yes, then it's time to make that decision. But they've got to be clear cut on that. I weirdly watched the highlights of the British, last year's British GP of the weekend. And I forgot the Ferrari tried to absolutely bin off the win at least twice in that race. But first time not letting LeClaire go past signs.

And the second time, where they were like, signs don't go past Leclair. I mean, come on. Just prioritise the one that's got the most chance of winning. Sorry, this isn't a Ferrari rant, but I was like, you've got it wrong though, isn't they?

Yeah. The best thing is, that wasn't even like their top five were strategic races. That's the most amazing thing. Well, they won it. So I guess they can come out

and go, well, that went well. Just. Good work, guys. That sounds perfect. We did it. But my point is, they need to, completely correct.

I think not to go into the season with a number one, number two driver attitude. Let's see how it plays out. But when they get to that point, I, middleish of the season. And if it's clear there's a driver that's ahead, then you've got to prioritize that driver to an extent, because I know then they almost shot themselves on the foot

by trying to prioritize LeCler at the end of that race, and it almost didn't work. So just common sense. But luckily, I think big Freddie Vass has got a very sensible head on his shoulders, lovely shoulders. So I think that they'll be okay in that sense. I just get the feeling. So yeah, sensible move. It sounds right. It would do, you know, imagine the morale on one side of the garage if you've told already your number two. That sucks.

So sensible, sensible, cool. It's a really good thing you actually mentioned the 2019 season because I'd completely forgotten that Ferrari had mucked around with their number one status with Vettel and LeClau coming in as number two driver and how it became so irrelevant after like two races. I remember very vividly like, Australian Grand Prix where I think Vetter was fourth and LeClaire was fifth and Vettel was the number

one driver but he had car issues and LeCler was told to stay behind and LeClaire was like, all right, fine. But then the same thing happened in Bahrain but they were going for the lead and they were like, just stay behind him if you want and he's like, no. And then that was it. From there it was like, oh, yeah, we probably shouldn't have bothered with this number one, number two things. So that's a really good example of literally at Ferrari. where it can just completely capitulate into nothing overnight.

So I'm with you both on this. I don't believe this was a mistake at all. I think this was the right message for Freddie Vassar to put out there. Sorry, jungle is Vassive just to get that one back in. Oh, good. Yeah, I know you like that one. At current, we have absolutely no idea where Ferrari are going to be championship-wise. Like, we've all got a inkling, but the pecking order won't change much this year versus last year, which I think is fair.

But we don't know whether they'll be competing for a championship or on the fringes of a championship or whether they'll have an all-out disaster and go back a couple of positions. So before knowing all of that, assigning number one and number two drivers just seems completely irrelevant because it's a distraction, right? you don't even know whether you're going to need it. You've got a few examples where, like, let's say last season, Lando Norris dominated Daniel Ricardo, right? And Alex Albin dominated Nicholas Latifie, just to give two random examples. It's not because one of them was a number one driver

and the other was a number two driver. They just dominated on track. And it kind of just, that's generally how it works, the number one, number two drivers. They just work themselves out. and you don't need that often to actually make the decisions because, well, the number one driver is the number one driver for a reason. It's usually because they're not needing the help of the number two driver. So when they need a help, it's usually a rarity.

It just seems like if they were putting forward number one and number two drivers at this point, before they even know that they need them, it's just pointless. It's like getting a bucket of water ready every time you go to cook something. It's like, okay, once in there every 1,000 times you might need that to put out of fire, but the other 99 times it's going to work okay and you don't need it. So what's the point in preempting it? It just doesn't make any sense. So I think what he's done here is absolutely spot on.

And let's be clear about what Freddie Vass is trying to do here. He's trying to solve an incredibly long list of issues Ferrari have. What's the point in adding another one? But he's got to solve, you know, look at what happened last year. Signs unreliability, not knowing how hard tires work. You know, pitting for a fastest lap and getting a penalty and then not getting the fastest lap. Basic strategic decisions.

There was probably a time last year where they didn't have enough food in catering. They probably forgot the car one weekend. Like they've got a long list of reasons of, of. why Vass is there to fix issues. There's no point just unnecessarily adding another one on the list. So I understand the decision here, and the question is going to be, and I'll pose this to you, Sam, now, is he, if needed, going to be tough enough to make the decisions later in the season

if the situation comes to that? I think this is a real strength of what Freddie Vass has in his locker. Is this toughness? Is the ability to, you know, pull all the... the punches if needed. If something isn't going well, and he's already come out and said some reasoning about, specifically about the strategy, I think he came out and said that, you know, the strategy issues weren't down to necessarily one person, but an internal process and how it was operating was just profoundly wrong, right? From the buildup, it was wrong. And he's,

he's not hidden away from that. He's immediately come out and addressed what everyone thinks is one of the biggest problems of Ferrari faces is that the whole system that they operated on, which he's clearly coming and now looked at has gone, this doesn't make sense. So why you're doing it like this, it doesn't make sense. And he's publicly said, it don't make sense. So we're going to change it. And I have a lot of faith in how Vassir is going to run this team, actually. It's probably the first time in a long time that a boss has come into Ferrari,

whether it be internally or externally. And I feel like Ferrari are in safe hands and they look promising. I trust what they're saying publicly at the moment. It all makes sense. It all feels like it's logical and it's safe. And I do feel like he will come down like an absolute tongue of bricks, like a brick wall falling right on you if something mucks up that it shouldn't have mucked up. I feel like he will hold people accountable and he will be able to give you a real reason as to why,

you know, we didn't win the championship because of X or X race was lost. This is the problem. This is how we solved. of it. I do think that if he can instill his regime well and put the processes in that he needs to, and Ferrari allow him the tether to do it, they have a good long-term pair of hands to take that team forward in championship fights. I do think that realistically, Big Frigey Vass at the helm is one of the most positive things that could have happened to Ferrari for quite some time. I think he's got the whole package. Harry, do you think he's in a position where he will make the

tough calls if he needs to regarding strategic decisions regarding a number one, number two situation later in the season if it needs it. Yeah, I think so. You mentioned all the list of issues that they've got. I imagine Freddie Bass walking

into the front door at Marinello. It's the same as that gif that's used a lot when who is it? What's into the door and everything's just on fire and everything's being thrown around? He's just like, yes, they go. A sitcom of all time. In community.

That is absolute ridiculous. It's not the worst of all time. I just love. I love that invites. I'm proper angry. I've bitten it off with all of my... Sort of shark. My little maggot bait.

No, sorry. You're all right. The worst is friends. So there we go. We could do it. Oh. Contramational opinion. I love it.

There we go. Good. Well, I wish I had. started that analogy because we've just alienated a good chunk of our listeners. But anyway, yeah, I think he's tough enough

to make those calls. I don't know because I can think of actually any concrete examples, but you just get the impression that that's just what he's like. You just doesn't take any nonsense. Takes no shizzle. DeZolder, Freddie Bass. So,

yeah, I'm pretty confident in, oh, Sam's just walked off. Cheers, Sam. Anyway, he's insulted the friend sitcom and then just walked off. Hello, mate. You're back. Sorry, I've just got to tell people off in the corridor for chatting too loud. You know what it is. Shut up. Yeah, interrupts it. You get out on appliances. I've got domestic traffic apparently coming through here.

Fantastic traffic. Oh, God. Anyway, yeah, I've got full faith in Freddie Bass to make those tough calls. that like you've already mentioned, it's interesting that he's already come out and publicly said about the strategy team that, you know, the strategy department that needs to be changed

or adjusted. I think it's very encouraging sign. It's good that he's recognized. I know it's obvious, but it's good that he's recognized that's one of the big issues of Ferrari. So it's a good start. But yeah, Just you wait

to my predictions, folks. They get me spicy. They're not far off. Not far off. I mean, eventually, Freddie Bass to win the championship.

Freddie Bass. Yeah, Constructors champion. Love that. I agree. I think he's got, he is literally the dictionary definition of a shrewd operator, right?

Like, he will make the decisions when he needs to make them. Shrewd operator. Thank you. The thing that worries me a little bit is when it comes to these team decisions where it might not be popular amongst both drivers if it got to that scenario. Firstly, you can't make them too. Ferrari have been guilty of this before, like quite a bit in the past now, but you remember Barakello and Schumach, Austria.

You can't make those decisions too early. Otherwise it backfires in terms of public, yeah, just how the public take it. but you can't also make these decisions too late. The problem is if he needs to make a decision like this in the favour of Charles Leclair, who we know Vassar and Leclair have a very good relationship and have so for a long time, it does run the risk of alienating Carlos Seines,

and I hope it doesn't get to that, but I think that is a risk. We're going to take a short break. We're going to be discussing Alpha Romeo after the break. All right, Alpha Romeo. So, first of all, we have to mention, this. I put together a provisional schedule yesterday on this. Yes, this is so good. So good. And I put forward a potential topic of

Audi buying a minority stake in Alfa Romeo Salda. I just remember what this is. And Sam responded with something along the lines of, should we talk about steak in Alfa Romeo? I was like, and I was there like, I can't say what I actually. for, but I was like, you beefing idiot, I've written that now. But I

put something a bit calmer of a more pleasant in the text bank, to which Sam responded, no, no, no. I mean stake the company being the title sponsor of Alfa Romeo, not Audi taking a stake in the team. So to be clear,

Audi are taking a minority stake in the Alfa Romeo team that's now sponsored by steak. Have we all got this. Yes, clear. Well done. Cook steaks at every race this year.

If I only a big old rump, you like that, that'll be great. Big odd rump stakes. Let's focus on Jesus. Oh, this is a disaster. Sorry. Carry on.

Let's focus on Steak the Company, who have become the title sponsor of Alfa Romeo for this year, and it's indeed a multi-year agreement that they've got with the team. So the team is now known as Alpha Romeo Team Steak. Rolls up the tongue, lovely. It's such a stupid name.

It's the worst name in Formula One history. The company refers to itself as a leading entertainment and lifestyle brand, which is marketing talk for crypto casino and sports betting platform, I think. But Sam, we've seen with other crypto sponsors, it's not going particularly well. Do you have any concerns here at all? Yeah, I mean, the first. first point I'm glad you've already raised here is the name of the company, stake.com. Now, I understand the point of it, right? You have a steak in gambling. You make your

steak, you make your claim, so to speak. But it is a bloody awful name for anything, isn't it? Unless you're literally selling steaks, it is a really, and that can be both the steak as in like a vampire steak or like a meat-based steak. I'm not bothered which one you choose. But both of those are logical. We have a steak counter going. Yeah. This is atrocious as a name. So that's the first reason why I'm just infuriated by this whole process. Secondly, you know, Formula One has had its issues, shall we put politely, with sponsorship and how safe or appropriate those sponsorships are for broadcasting rights, for the audience at hand,

for the countries that we go to as well. Obviously, different religious beliefs or cultural beliefs disagree with certain things, as is, you know, normally across the world, we're all different. And stake have come in. And let's just say they're not the most professional and reputable gambling company. They call themselves, as Ben said, an entertainment and lifestyle company. They're not. They're a crypto gambling online casino.

Or they don't use real currency. They use the likes of, you know, your bitcoins and whatnot, which the market is incredibly, you know, flamboyance in its fluctuation from zero valuations and bankruptcy to hundreds of millions in someone's pocket all in a space of 24 hours, which is not good when you're the leading sponsor of a global organisation, a sport for a start. But when you look at how other sports are dealing with gambling for a start, and this company specifically,

they got hit last year with a $400 million lawsuit for several problems around how they run their operations and what they do. They've also been sued for stealing $350,000. of other people. You can do all your research online to their folks. So again, the reputation is great. There's also being some rumors

that previous members of the board or owners of the company have had some time behind bars in the clink, you know, as you might say. So the slimmer. The slumber. So it's not great. You know, it's not good.

I'm not sure that I would be trusting it. And then if you look at how Stake had been treating as a company anyway, they most recently have quite a large venture into English football, into the Premier League. And one of the most recent clubs that they sponsored was Everton Football Club. And it was so negative to a point where over 50,000 fans of the one club signed a petition and sent it to the owners that they're not welcome there. And I think they started to do bad things to their footballing jerseys, their kits that had the brandy on it, because it was so despised in a community that struggles so much with it. addiction, you know, England itself and a lot of the world have troubles with gambling and

addiction. It needs to be looked at properly and scrutinized for the effects it's going to have. We have the same thing for cigarette sponsors, for example. You know, you don't have cigarettes on cars anymore for the negative impact that it has, do it's, especially its younger audience, but its audience in general. And gambling is the same thing. It can be a really, really negative, awful environment for someone to being. If they especially have an addictive personality. So State Cumming is a title sponsor. I'm incredibly shocked by. I'm amazed that a team would want to sign up with a company like this anyway. Alpha M.R. is actually begging for money.

Teams would have been looking at them as a viable investment. I'm really, really disappointing. I'm surprised at Formula One, Liberty or the FIA, whoever it is that technically sanctions off on this. It's allowed it to go ahead. I was quite shocked. I'm really, really disappointing it. It's not where I think Formula One should be going as a sport. Yeah, I mean, Crypto and F1 is hardly a match made in heaven based on the,

couple of years, because they start to become a bit of a precedent on companies getting these crypto sponsors and it going horribly wrong. So the Mercedes one from last year, FTX, that was probably the most public. Everything that happened there, including the boss of the company ended up being arrested. That was a pretty disgusting chapter. But it's not just them. Ferrari had Velas, who their price just tanked and they're not on, there was a forced early termination of their contract. They're not on the car anymore and they should have been for this year. Red Bull, I think they cut ties with Tezos.

There's one from Alphotari as well, I think, that isn't on the car anymore, possibly. But I can't remember what that's cool on top of my head. So it's not just one or two. There's quite a few already that there are. was a lot of money being poured in from these crypto sponsors and they seem to be going away at a fairly rapid pace. And obviously, we've now got a title sponsor coming in here needs a big deal. You have to have some skepticism that something might go horribly wrong. I mean, you really mentioned quite a few of the points I wanted to make, Sam, in terms of

the company itself. It seems to be just scratching the surface. really about what you could know about them if you really started to dig deep into it. Because there's a few other things as well about how they run their operations, which seems really dodgy. They're somehow based, I think somewhere in the Caribbean, but they're located in Australia. They have their headquarters in Australia, which should be illegal, but because they don't advertise to Australians and Australians can't actually use their website, because because of gambling laws in the country, they're allowed to get away with it.

So you've got a country set up, sorry, you've got a company set up in a country where that country itself cannot use your service in any way, shape, or form, and you can't advertise to them. It seems really weird. And just a bit, yeah, dodgy is probably the word. It doesn't seem quite right. And you already mentioned the $400 million lawsuit that they've been facing for, yeah, for someone who nearly started the company up with them. And Al-Di's on their way.

We know that the minority's thing has been brought by them in the last couple of days. So they're going to want in a few years' time, 2026 is the end goal for Al-Ni to get into the sport. They're going to want to pick up a team and run with it. They want this transition to happen. They don't want to be picking up a mess, right? And there seems to be a risk that that might happen. And there is one thing, I'll finish off my point here, that worries me. be more than anything.

Anything and everything about this company. Late Breaking is older than that company. Oh, wow. Oh, dear. Steak was set up in 2017. Late breaking goes back to the end of 2016. Now, if that's not worrying, I don't know what is. We need to make some money.

Clearly we're not doing something right. We haven't had a 400 million lawsuit, though, so I think swings around about... We wouldn't survive it. We'd have to sell our souls to pay for a 400 million lawsuit. The matter of Wurley bars, I've got a shift to pay 400 million lawsuit. I think the reality is we'd just end up suing each other and then, like, making all of ourselves bankrupt. That sounds like a late rate you can do. I don't understand how the legal system works, so I will be screwed.

The other thing I want to bring up before Harry gives his points is obviously, Ben, as you rightly brought up, the foundation is in Australia who have a very strict gambling policy and they can't operate their own business within the country they're founding. The amount of other countries as well on our calendar that don't agree with betting and gambling that don't allow it in their nation is surprisingly high. So I wonder what is going to happen when Alpha and Mayo visit these nations. Are they going to have to put some scupies? You know, you remember when Ferrari and Marlborough and they had the stupid barcode on the car?

Are we going to get something like that that comes up? I'd be shocked if they... I think they'll have to do that in Australia. I don't know about other specific countries, but I'd be shocked if they don't do that for Australia based on what I've seen. Yeah. But, I mean, the other...

The flip side of it is that sports gambling in the US right now is just going crazy, like in terms of growth year-on-year. So they'll probably make something out of that. Harry, what are your thoughts on this? I entirely agree with all the points you've made about gambling and it's not great. Not ideal. So I'll put that aside because I'll just end up repeating what you've already said.

But my wider point here, and it's not just an alpha, a major specific one, is to all the F1 teams, stop getting dodgy sponsors. Like, this isn't the first one. steak is the latest one. Rich energy. Sheep energy. We remember you. Cheap energy.

Rocket, remember they sponsored Williams? What do they make phones? Never seen a Rocket phone? They're like a business phone producer. Yeah, come on. Like, they're not real. Obviously all the crypto ones you've already mentioned,

just try a bit harder, F1 teams. Stop going for the quick buck. I know it's difficult for some, you know, like Williams, you had Rocket and Hass, we went for rich energy. But when we, from the outside, as we mentioned, a company that's older than steak, when we can see that it looks, it's a bit dodged.

I mean, rich energy, you could see in a mile off. That was the dodgiest thing in the world. And again, here, it kind of reeks of that a bit. So if we can see the issues with it, then maybe you shouldn't get them to put their name on Saudi Rif onka, because, it's, you know, Formula One is growing, ever growing, and especially in the US,

and I know you make the point, Ben, that sports gambling is taking off there, but, but just looks a bit, looks a bit crap. If you've got these F1 cars going around with these pretty dodgy companies

plastered down the side of them, like, just try it harder. I might be really shallow-minded. I mean, I am an idiot, I'm aware, but, like,

visually, if I was an investor, I was the owner of Alpha Romeo or Salba. And I was like, oh, what sponsors have we got lined up, guys? Going to the marketing team with the contracts team, whatever. Like, you know, who have we got coming in? What's going on the side of our car? And someone just went, I was stake.com look on the side of the car.

I'd be like, no, don't care how much money's coming in. That just looks ridiculous. The word steak, just on the side of my car. That sounds awful. Do you remember old, I've had to Google the chap's game because it's such a hilarious story. Do you remember Malik Adu, Ibrahim, him with Arrows in the 90s, that the Nigerian prince that promised Arrow is this wealth of sponsorship money, $125 million in the 90s, and then within a month he just disappeared

and arrows were really bankrupt because of it. That's another incredibly dodgy sponsor from the past. Great story. I'd also, if you want to get into dodgy F1, that era, just have a look about Andrea Moda. That's, they're as dodgy as they come. Well, yeah, great term. Yeah. To my point about having nice sponsors on your car, go and speak to Eddie Jordan. He got a can of fizzy pop on his first off his car. That man knows how a market, dung it? Seven up. I mean, he does because he was quite clever in that he would just paint the car whatever color the main sponsor was. So that's why the Jordan was great because seven up were there. He was like, oh, dude.

Green is. Off you go, lads. So are we concluding this point by saying Eddie Jordan knows better? Yes, because I 100% agree with it and I'm just making sure we're all on the same page here. Good. Right. We're aligned. We'll take another short break,

but we'll be back to discuss some Valtry Botas comments about the FIA right after this. The boat. The boat. Imagine if Alfa Romeo did what Eddie Jordan did and had to paint their car the colour of the sponsor and they just painted their car like a medium rare steak. A bit red in the middle

The pink of the mistake That'd be really funny And then like the helmets had to be like I don't know like the T-bone or something I can't wait for all the mistake puns we're going to make this year When Bottas or Joe Probably made one on my Twitter when they signed it

Did not go viral No Wait Never mind Okay, Valtry Bottas. Valtry Bottas, of course, voted in late breakings January newsletter edition, the coolest guy in the world, right? He's just so cool now.

So cool. We got a newsletter now. I didn't know that. I forgot to let you know about that. Am I on the mailing list? He's got a subscriber list, no. No. No.

Baltry Bottas speaking to Swedish newspaper Expresson regarding the FI. announcing that any political statements will need to be vetted by the FIA before they're allowed to go ahead. He said, I don't understand why they want to control us. I think we should have the right to talk about what we want. What do you think on this one, Sam? Do you think Bottas is right? Yeah, he's goddamn right. 100% right. I love Falki Bottas and the man is, I hope he's filling said Vettel shoes, right? It does feel like they've gone, that son of a preacher man, Sebastian Vessel is finally out of his show, and Lewis Hamilton, the other guy that

we don't like talking about stuff, he's the only one left. So you know what? Let's clamp down. Let's shut them down. Valtry Bottas, of course, is Lewis's secret best mate. They obviously, you know, we love each other, which I love. He's gone, hang on the minute. I now can't talk about anything. That's not all right. And I'm here for it. I think that is bang on. I think that these people are exactly that. They are people. They have free will. They have their own voices. And they're allowed to stand for things and they're allowed to use their publicity and their success and their talent to stand up for what they believe in. And you could do it anywhere else in the world. You know, other sports don't stop you from speaking out.

And I think Formula One should do the same thing. I think as we mentioned a little while ago with Zach Brown's comments that don't be wrong, if Formula One want to cohesively come behind an issue, for example, racism or sexism or. massagingly in the sport or I don't know, whatever issue in the world you might think needs to be addressed. I'm here for it. I agree that F-1 should club together and maybe push towards it. But if something is happening in Bossass's hometown,

and he thinks, I need to say something about this, I think it's got every bloody right to stand there and say it. And I am still appalled that this is a real thing that the FIA have tried to bring in, quite frankly. So well done Valtry for standing up and saying something, which is I wrong it, because you're no longer out to stand. stand up and say something. Love a bit of all already here on the late breaking effort podcast. Harry, what's your thoughts about the statement?

Up the bodies. Come on, Bautry. That's inappropriate. That's not appropriate. The bone. The bone. More bodies, please. Yeah. More bodies, please. Yeah.

I'm so glad, as you say, Sam, that there's, you know, because there's always a risk by losing Sebastian Betta, one of the more vocal, or most vocal, one of the most vocal drivers in F1 that there's a risk the other drivers might stand back but I'm very happy to see Valtrey taking

as you say ironically taking a stand here against this I think we put this on our Twitter what sums it up is that Helmut Marco has come out against this The moral compass of F1 when he comes out and says that you know

a man who suggested that his drivers should go to a coronavirus camp has said that this is bad. So it's a really bad idea. I think that's fair to say. Yeah, I've full kudos to Valtry for speaking up about this. And I hope as we get into the season, you know, some of the drivers are still on the winter break,

a bit sleepy still. I hope others join him and by just ignoring this thing because it's just dumb, isn't it? It's just real dumb. It's 2023, guys. What are we trying to do it? They get pading off to pay the fines. Just keep doing it, boys.

Stand up for it. Oh, exactly. Like, what's different? Speeding in the pit lane, standing up and saying something you believe in, 10,000 pound fines. Both at the same time. On the radio whilst a speeding.

That would be impressive. Yeah, so full credit to the Valtry here. I'm very happy to see that, as you say, he just don't care anymore, does he? He's so happy. He's on another. level of chill that man. I'm loving watching here. I just want to be his mate

all the time. Agreed. I think the answer to his question is very simple. I don't understand why they want to control us. Well, they want to control you because that way they can protect themselves, right?

That's what they're looking to do here, rightly or wrongly. That's why they're implementing this. I think the overall messiness of this situation actually comes about from the dynamic that it isn't a direct employer-employee situation when you've got the FIA and a driver because the driver is an employee of the team, the team takes part in the championship. So it's almost a bit of a messy link rather than, let's say I go to my job and it's a very simple employer-employee dynamic.

I know what I can say and what I can't say, and that is somewhat bound by the employer, and it's very straightforward. Here it isn't. So I do believe that the team should retain some control over what the driver puts out as a message. Now, I think most teams are in agreement with absolutely anything and everything

that has been put out by drivers over the last few years. So I think they would condone everything that they've been doing, but I think the team should retain that control because ultimately the driver is working, right? When they are on the grid before the race or on the podium after the race, they're representing their company. So I think that they should be, not to strip them completely of their individuality, but certainly in the same way that I couldn't stand up against something like this if my employer doesn't agree with me. I understand that same thing happening from a team perspective, but where the FIA gets involved for me is where it gets a bit more confusing. So I think the FIA, I don't think the FIA are right

to do this. Are they within their rights to do this? I think they probably are in terms of, legally, I think they are allowed to do what they're doing here. But that doesn't ever mean that they should. And I don't think there's any actual gain to them putting this out there. I think that they should. Bottas made this point actually in a further quote where he just essentially said, the drivers on the grid, we're all sensible. We're all good people. We're all standing up for what you should stand up for. Let us get on with it. And I would agree with that. So I don't agree with what the FIA are doing here. Are they entitled to do so? Sadly, the answer is probably yes to that.

What's very confusing about it as well, as if a driver were to do the opposite of what Valtrey just said, Ben, in that quote that you rightly quoted, it's a great thing that he said. In a fantasy world, let's say one driver decides, I'm going to wear a t-shirt on the grid

that promotes weapons of mass destruction or something awful like that, right? The FIA could surely then sping it on its head and look brilliant by immediately acting and doing something to go, we don't agree with that, that's not appropriate,

we're shutting this down, the driver has been punished, we stand for X, Y, and Z. Surely they've got ways of looking good. To me, I can make great PR out of someone else being rubbish or something or doing something they shouldn't do. I don't understand why, realistically,

unless they're secretly going, well, a lot of our countries are we racing love weapons of mass destruction, and we can't publicly say that we agree. this is all hypothetical, please don't quote this in anywhere. Oh my God, where we go with this? But do you see the point I'm making? Do you see the point I'm making?

In theory, right, the FIA could make themselves like the good guys by actually backing up the positive messages and deterring the negative messages. Yeah, I think that would probably be very easy to do from an individual perspective. And this is why I don't think they should do this because I think it would work itself out. But if someone came forward with something as radical

what you mentioned there as the example, you would like to think that it would definitely not be more than one person that would think that. So because I think the power then comes in and where it becomes difficult to spin from an FIA perspective is if five people come forward with the same view or seven people all wear the same T-shirt, then it starts to become, I think, a bit of a more of a reflection of the series

rather than one individual who's out of his mind. So, but again, going back to the point, I think they're all, well, they're reasonable people, but I don't think you'd ever find that five people on the grid would come out and say something so ludicrous that the FIA would then have to make that statement. So let them get on with it is what I would say. Yeah, silly, silly people. Yeah. Well, from the FIA, let's move on to Sky Sports.

So just a quick one here. as we appreciate not everyone, of course, gets the sky sports coverage, but they've made a few punditry changes over the last couple of days ahead of their 2023 season, and we thought we'd have a bit of a discussion, maybe not necessarily about those two changes specifically, but what really makes a good pundit in 2023, bias is something that's very regularly discussed within the Formula One community, whether it should be present, is it a good thing,

does it promote, you know, does it promote more opinion, which gets people talking, Harry, what's your opinion on bias overall in terms of an F1 pundit? What makes a good F1 pundit in 2023? I think firstly, bias as a whole is it's just impossible to eliminate. There's always a bit of bias. Even if you try to be the most neutral person in the world, apart from maybe if you're Ben, but most people that are trying to be neutral,

there's still an element of bias involved. doesn't matter what you do, Brexit, Ben, over there. And I think that's, that's, even if it's unconscious,

even if it's a conscious decision, it's, you know, in the UK, we have Sky Sports. Now, they're not the worst in the world, but there's,

there's clearly a leaning towards British drivers and mainly Lewis Hamilton. But from like a selling or marketing point of view, why would they not? Because Lewis Hamilton, he's pretty good of the F1. He sells quite well for F1. Let's not be a being about the bush.

And the same for the Dutch TV about Max Verstappen. Even before he was double world champion, he was the man. It doesn't matter where he, you know, what race were on. It was all about Maxifestappan. And the same you go to Italy. It's all about Ferrari, etc., etc.

Now, so I think it's impossible to say that you're going to have a completely unbiased. broadcast and that's the same for the pundits. Now, having said that, I don't, I don't think a good pundit makes, you know, is an extremely biased person. I don't think that, for me personally, that's not what makes a good

pundit. But someone with good analysis, someone that has a personality that isn't a spoon, always good, that they're more important to me, I think. And if there's a bit of bias involved in there, then there's a bit of bias.

But normally with these presenting teams, you know, look at them out of people's sky have got. It balances itself out pretty well because you might have one opinion and another opinion. Some of the best sky bits of Sky TV is when Nika Rosberg is there. Now, he's probably biased. He's not there all that often.

That's the problem. When he's allowed him? If you're allowed there this year. He is allowed back this year, so hopefully he'll get some good TV. Yeah. I don't want that one. Who knows? He's fancy the charred, did he?

That was it. He's just like 22. No, want to come. I love Zoom. He loves Zoom. My point is,

he's opinionated. Yes, it's maybe slightly biased, but there's another opinion that's on a different bias, and I'm doing this in vertical, and bias,

that means that there's a bit of back and forth, and that's kind of what makes a good, you know, a good punditry team. I always liked, back in the BBC days,

Eddie Jordan, and David Coulthard. Eddie John's getting a lot of love on this podcast, but I don't care. He deserves it. Every second of love he deserves it. But the bias between those two was between like the view of a racing driver

and the view of a team boss. And every time they just used to argue, not argue, but a debate. And it was good. It was good, good TVs. So yeah, look, I think complete out there bias is not what I want, but you're never going to eliminate,

it. So I think you can embrace it a little bit. But as long as there's some differing opinions in a punditry team, then that's all I ask for. I don't want just one point of view all the time because that's just not fun to watch, quite frankly. Yeah, I mean, first of all, in terms of the two, Paul de Rester and Johnny Herbert are leaving the Sky Sports commentary team,

A lot of people are suggesting that Sky Sports are trying to remove bias. Let's face, they were basically a polar opposite ends of the bias spectrum if that exists. So I don't know it out. Exactly. I don't think they're making a direction one way or the other by doing this. In terms of what makes a good pundit in 2023, I agree with you, Harry, that it's about insightfulness and it is about being analytical. And that hasn't changed. And that made a good pundit 30 years ago and it still makes a good pundit today. And I really believe that pundits should not

shy away from opinion at the fear of being called out for bias. Because we don't want spoons, as Harry so delicately put, as pundits. We do want pundits that have character and can use their own previous experience, whether it is as a team boss or whether it's as a driver, you wanted them to be able to use their experience to form their arguments. That makes for good TV and good analysis overall. I will say this, bias, and I'm pretty certain I'm going to make this point horribly, but I'm going to try it. Bias exists and you're right, Harry, it does exist and you can never fully eradicate it. But really, I think what's important is where that bias stands. Dems from. So I consider myself to be biased based on my values and my interpretation of what

Formula One should be. So to use one example of this, Brazil 2021, you'll remember there was a situation where Vastappan ran Hamilton off the road when Hamilton was trying to make the overtake on him. And I said that was a slam dunk penalty for Max Vastappen. Is that because I'm biased towards Lewis Hamilton? No, that is because I am biased towards what I believe racing should be, which is you leave racing room when you're side by side going into a corner. And if that situation had been completely the other way around, my understanding of what that situation was would be exactly the same, and I would have advocated for the exact same penalty on Vastappen instead of Hamilton. And for me,

that is perfectly acceptable and not just acceptable, encouraged. That is. is what I want from analysis when it comes to Formula One. Bias for me, where it is problematic, is if I had advocated for Vastappen to get a penalty in that situation, and if roles were reversed, I don't think a penalty should be applied to Hamilton. That is biased towards an individual for no reason other than the fact that they are that individual, which I don't think can stand. It doesn't have a place in Formula One. But certainly having bias. towards your own interpretation of what the sports should be

and whatever drivers then carry out what is close to that interpretation, that is what I think it should be. From like people like us on a podcast, from pundits at Sky Sports, that is what is perfect for me. What about you, Sam? I think a team of pundits have to draw themselves from a different wealth of experience.

I think that's what makes up a great team. You know, you'll have, for example, Sky Sports, I've recently employed Naomi Schiff as part of their team, who brings a very different line of experience, so let's say, Damon Hill or Johnny Herbert, right? They come from a completely different background. They grew up with a completely different background. Their racing seasons were very different,

and I think it's very valuable for a team to have those almost polar perspectives on a team, to debate, to argue, as you used the example earlier, of any Jordan and Mark Weber or David Cautard or something like that. It's informative and at the same time, very, very separate. you can hear two different points of view. I heard it was a quote. I think it was made for someone like Stephen Frye,

who was talking about social media and he was talking about Twitter specifically. And he said, you shouldn't block the people you disagree with. You should follow the people you disagree with so you can hear the different points of view. And you may never agree with that point of view, but you're informed on it

and you can understand both sides of the story. And Ben, I think your point was right in the sense of bias exists. But if bias is coming from and informed, educated, and considered point of view where every argument you're making has a logical reasoning behind it, like you said, I grew up with running drivers off the track being a penalty, and that's wrong, and that's the reasoning that I've given.

I've got examples to back that up, then therefore the decision I make is bias because of what I was brought up with, and I understand those reasons. But if your bias is Lewis Hamilton should get a penalty because he's a black man, then your bias can get out the sport and it's not welcome here, quite frankly, right? There's the difference in the two. One is bias for you've got a prejudice in your life

that doesn't make sense. The other bias is, well, the sport or something you've loved has been the same for 20, 30 years, and all of a something, it's changed. So I think a good pundit is also very different from a good commentator as well, but a good pundit needs to be informed. They need to be analytical and have the ability

to withdraw certain key parts of information. But above all, I want them to be passionate, it. I don't want them to be, you know, a wet flannel, a wet blanket on the microphone. I don't want them to be drab and dull. If you believe something is wrong or if you believe something needs to change or you saw something, you want to talk about it, use your expertise, use your knowledge, use your privilege within this sporting environment to inform and allow us to enjoy that. And I don't, yeah, if you're biased, fine, but be biased for the right reasons. Make it make sense before you coming and be biased. So I think a great pundit is exciting and they're passionate and they're

courageous, but they're not, you know, as we've already spoken about, bias for the sake of it, for viewpoints that don't really make sense. And as I said, I think a commentator is very different from a pundit. And I think some people are great commentators. I think some people are great fundits. And I think some people shouldn't ever do one or the other. So yeah, be interesting what other people think about what makes a good pundit. Absolutely. Let us know in the usual places. We'll take our final break over this episode and on the other side, we'll be playing order please.

Okay, here we go. F1, order please. Whether it's a can of Coca-Cola or a lump of cheese or we're ordering drivers by the size of their knees. This game is full of facts, just you wait and see. This is Formula One. Order, order, please. F-1 order please.

But with a twist, not the game itself. The game is exactly the same, but the twist is that you can actually watch this if you really want to on YouTube. Some of you will already be watching. So, hello. Hello, YouTube. Wave in YouTube videos, they do know.

So, F1 order, please. We've not been on here for nine months. No, we haven't. Yeah, so F1 order, please. Fairly basic concept in that I will put together a series. there are four answers in the series and Sam and Harry will take it in turns to put them in the correct order

so it could be for example most world championships won in Formula One history and the options might be Michael Schumacher Fernando Alonzo Kimi Reikinen and Sam in which case that's already the correct

order because it's 7-2-1-0 it might happen next year so there are six overall it had been 10 minutes on side to try it again six overall oh by the way you can steal it as well you can steal points so if

someone gets it wrong it will go over to the other person they have the chance to steal they don't have to because if they try to and they get it wrong as well they lose a point I'm going to start with Harry this time around any number between one and six please

number one please number one a shock. Okay. I'm going to give you four drivers. I want you to tell me who had the most qualifying wins over their

teammate last season. So, 2022. Oh, man. Lando Norris, Alex Alburn, Kevin Magnuson, Charles LeClair. Oh, I'm so stressed.

Alex. Sal Bond. I'll go for most. Yep. Then I'll go for Lando Norris. Yep. Then I'll go for Kevin Magnuson, Charlotte Claire. That is not the correct order. Sam,

would you like the chance to steal? What are you going to leave it? I mean, famously, I am terrible at this game. So, yes, I will steal because I don't know the answer. and I like to live dangerously.

So I'm going to go at the top. Landon Norris, second Alex Albon, third, Kevin Magnuson, fourth, Charles LeClerc. So, just to clarify, because it's the same order as I put them to you. Norris, Albert, Magnuson,

Leclair is the order you're going for. Yes. Order! Yes! It's a great day for Sam! Ben gave the answer in his question. Yeah. What a little player. Absolutely tricked to you.

Yeah, so that is the correct order. Alex Almond was undone because he had one fewer race to beat Nicholas Latifi. Otherwise, they probably would have been level. Lando Norris, 20 wins over his teammate. Alex Albin, of course, missed the Italian Grand Prix qualifying. So he had 19 wins over Nicholas Latifie in the season. Then a little bit of a jump down to Kevin Magnuson, who had 16, and Charle of Clare who had 15.

So Sam's on the board first of all and it goes to you next. Any number between two and six, Sam? I'll have number six, please, Ben. Number six. I'm going to give you four seasons. I want you to tell me from most to least how many points Ferrari scored in that season.

Oh, have a day off, Ben. 2021, 2018, 2017 and 2014. For some reason, there was a little part of me that thought you were going to save the numbers afterwards, so I was a bit confused when you went to the next year. But obviously, that is literally the aim of the game. Don't game that, yeah.

Yeah. So, hang on, let's have gone through that game, 2021, 2018, 2017 and 2014. Yes. Okay. I'm going to say at the top, most points scored in the year 2018, second, 2021, third, 2017, last 2014. That is not the correct answer.

Harry, would you like the chance to steal? Go on then. He is a point behind after all. Well, you know, I'll go for also 2018 at the top. 2017, second, 2021, third and 2014. fourth. I hate this game. 2018, Ferrari scored

571 points. 2017, they had 522. And then a bit of a dump I jumped down to 2021, 323 and a half points. And then 2014, just 216 points. That was a bad year.

Wasn't a good year. If it was a good year, out of a car. One all that makes it. And back to you, Harry. What number? number two please number two

so I'm going to give you four constructors from earliest to latest when did they first enter a Grand Prix so you've got Benetton Ligier Salber

and Tyrell from earliest to latest yes Tyrol earliest then Ligier then Benetton then Salba Salba

Salba Oh dear Very good Salba Salba Tiro was 1970 first race

Ligier 1976 Beniton 1988 86 and Salber 1993 makes it 2-1 to Harry and back to you Sam for the next one

three four or five it's a bad day for Sam I'll have number four please Ben right down the middle I love it we're looking for fastest to slowest the lap records at each of these tracks

oh blimey Hungara rig Circuit to Catalonia, Barcelona, Zanvort, and Circuit Gilles Villevonneuve. Just to clarify, that's using the current configuration of all of those tracks, including the one with the full Sector 3 of Spain.

I know there are rumours that it might go back to the old format, but I'm not using that here. I need to write them down because they're all a bit long, and I have a very sad brain. Um, so hold on. Okay, so we've got Catalonia, Zanvort, Hungary, and what was the other one? Montreal, Jillvildov.

Montreal, all the champs. Okay. Um, I think it's going to be, so Farskis to least Faskis is how I'm doing it. Um, I think it's going to be, oh, it's one that I'm torn on. Um, oh, huh. Montreal is the fastest, Zanvort's second fastest, Catalania third fastest, hungry, slowest. That's not the correct order, Harry.

Oh, tell me something I don't know. No, I don't want to steal that one because I have no idea. Fair, I don't blame you. It's a bit of a tricky one. So the fastest of the lot was Zanvort. Lewis Hamilton's lap record there was a 11-11. then comes circuit Gilles Villeneuve

Valtry Bottas fastest lap there at a 113 113 1 and then a few seconds slower than that is Hungara Ring Hamilton's fastest lap there 1166

and then lastly Barcelona at a 1181 for Max Verstappen tough one that oh I'm glad it wasn't just the one that I got confused

that's I'm all right with that yeah it was one and two and three and four if you switched the switch those two around you'd have been right

but you didn't didn't put the fastest one last, so there's no embarrassment or anything about that. Two, one to Harry is the score. I mean? Three or five. Harry, which one would you like? Number three, please.

Number three. You'll leave you four drivers. I want you to tell me, from most to least, how many seasons they've competed in Formula One. Sorry, that's not true. Number of seasons, they've scored points. Not how many they've competed in it. They've scored points. Yeah, how many seasons

have they scored points in? So you've got Sergio Perez, Felipe Massa, Etton Senner, and Jack Villeneuve. Ugh. Nice.

Sergio Perez, Massa, Sena. I'll go for... Oh, tricky. Perez the most. Then... Oh, I don't know. Perez-Massa, Villene of Senna, from the most to least.

Not correct. Sam, do you want to steal it? I mean, I kind of do, because obviously I need to equalise as all I could do is draw, but at the same time, I genuinely have no idea what the order is. But, hey, we said live life on the edge.

You know, it's 2023. Let's go, let's go all in. I'm going to steal, and I'm going to go with Sergio Perez, most, Shatvilner, second,

Massa, third, and then whoever it was, Senga, fourth, I forgot, Sanger,

just one of the great skil all time, will go last. As you know, there is always a minus one penalty. If you try to steal

and you don't do so successfully, which is what has happened here. It's not correct either. Felipe Massa. We play this stinking game. Well, put some respect on Felipe Massa and you wouldn't lose points.

He's the most on that list, followed by Sergio Perez second, Ayrton Senner's third, and then Jacques Villeneuve, as usual, Harry overrates him because he's actually last on this list. He loves him. He loves him too much, which leaves the score at 2-0, and it goes back to Sam for the final one, which is number five. Most to least, Q1 eliminations. So you've got Adrian Sutil, Charles Peake, Marcus Erickson, and he's back again, Felipe Massa.

Oh, baby, Felipe, baby. Oh, this is a tough one. This is a tough one. I'm going to go with Peak the most, Erickson's second most, sotile, third most, and then Felipe Massa the least. I'm putting respect on his game, and now I'm going to be wrong. You were right about one thing, your last comment, that you were going to be wrong. It's not the correct order. Do you want to try and steal?

And this is, basically, if you don't want to steal, you win two nil. If you tried to steal and get it right, you win three nil. Or if you try and steal and you get it wrong, you win one nil. which one you want to go for go on that I'll steal or try and still I will go for

Erickson the most Erickson the most peak How long was Charles Peak at that around for? It wasn't very long was it No Erickson the most

Sutil second peak Third Mass or fourth Oh dear You can't steal what I've ever had You know It's a great quote And that was points. In fairness to you on the peak suggestion,

like he holds the record for most number of Q1 eliminations without ever making it into Q2. So he was eliminated in Q1 every single time. The problem is Eric and Sotil were... A pick of his powers. Massa, 13 times he was knocked down in Q1 in his entire F1 career, which is pretty good going. Wasn't aware this was going to become a Felipe Master appreciation game,

but here we are. Anyway, well done. You're win, hurry. Whether it's a can of Coca-Cola or a lump of cheese, or we're ordering drivers by the size of their knees. This game is full of facts, just you wait and see. This is Formula One. Order, order, please.

I mean, the video gives away that I'm not singing it live. Yeah, because a lot of people definitely think that you're singing that lie. What? I mean, it sounds so good every time. I'm just really consistent. No? No one believe it?

Good. Good. Someone out there does. For sure. All right. Time for my favourite thing ever. Well, there we go. Before the breaking is the best thing ever, Harry.

This is a close second. Oh, yes. What is it, Sam? It's been there. Been peaked. It's the LB. Question of the week.

This time, our question of the week that we posed on Instagram and on Twitter was, if any brand or company could sponsor us in the world, who would it be? And why? Any answers that you liked? Yeah, there was one that I'm looking for now on Instagram. It was so irrelevant. made me laugh so much. And that's it, right.

It's because, as from Andy Popps in 172, and he's just said, fingers crispy pancakes. Now, fingers crispy pancakes. I've never had them. They've never been mentioned on this podcast ever. But it's just gone, I bloody love them. And you know what?

I admire it. It's just gone, I love that so much. I should be your sponsor. Yeah, committed. Love it. Jake R.D. on Instagram said Ron Seal, because it's the best fence coverage for me. There were a lot of fence answers.

There was a shout for B&Q from Chris Taylor, which I'm trying to get an American comparison. Home Depot is probably the American comparison there. Yeah. But yeah, a lot of fence comments flying around. DuraCell from Monty Goodwin to power your smoke alarm, of course, Harry. They break in all the favour. Andrew

Andrew Henderson 29 says Asda and then he replied to his own reply saying for the pizza obviously

What else will get before? Well, Worley bars Plenty of people The Whirley bars Yeah were the correct

answer here So Join the Revolution Can I also say that Crystal Reimer has actually tagged

London City fires Which am I going to get a bad name in that. It's around to go, look, this is not

useful services. They literally tagged them and said, for the sole purpose of getting Harry's fire alarm battery changed. Look, London City Fighter, if you're listening, I have changed the batteries. My home is safe. Don't worry.

I love that Dakota has come out and said, Smith and Weston, the official spokes from Sam makes finger pistols. It goes, phew, pips. So true. We'd love a big Yaha sponsor. It'd be fantastic. Speaking of Yaha sponsors,

Raff saying Dallas Cowboys. Yeha! Yeah! The Dallas Cowboys. Oh man. I appreciate people actually tagging them as well. There's social media managers.

You've actually had to look at that. Yeah. And gone, what? I would say we're sorry. Why are we tagged in this today? We're not. We're not. My favorite answer.

I mean... I'm just to get... Go on some. Sorry. I'm on a delay, folks. They don't really realize. this, but I'm actually about four seconds behind them. So when I start talking, they don't know that I've started,

which is quite funny. Jimmy Dean, oh, Jimmy Dean. Peacier, just said, Jimmy Dean, get your sausages out. And I'm going to say that as a tagline for our whole podcast would be just great. I think my favourite two would be Samuel Wade saying deliveroo for sending me for a bag of chips.

Fair play to you. But my favourite answer this week goes to young Yosef, who said, Lotus or maybe Brabham? Yes, yes, yes. Leave me alone. That was so funny. Any others?

Are we done here? What we're doing? What's happening? That is the most down-air time we've ever had on this bloody show. We've cut that out. That was horrendous. There were a couple of shouts for Fox

because of being able to get access to the Simpsons for Chief Wiggum sound bites, which I appreciate. Clancy. Clancy? Clancy. Come on, Ralphie. My cat's breast spells my cat food.

I suspected him, but then he said yard trimmie. Got to learn a lesson in the detail. Get him toys. Oh, that's enough of that. Thank you very much to everyone that put in answers for a question of the week. We absolutely love just reading them and bursting out laughing whenever we do. So Monday evening, next Monday evening, we'll put out another one. We'll be completely random.

And if yours is funny enough, and to be honest, about 99% of the ones we get are funny, they'll be read out on the podcast. And you might even get your name credited if we remember when we say it, but we don't always do, as I'm sure you're aware. boy, yeah, that's probably enough, isn't it? Go on, Sam, get us out of it. Well, folks, I hope you've enjoyed the show and I, abysmal performance at F1 order, please.

Of course, let's know your thoughts on the topics we've discussed today. When you think about the stake sponsorship, how Aldi are going to join the sport very, very soon, of course, and their minority purchase of Salba, or the Salba group, of course. And of course, what Bottas has said, should drivers be having a freak speedily, What? What are I going to say?

Freaks, mealy? They can probably do that already. Yeah, you're fine. Oh, dear. Oh, dear. The outro's got on very bad. Join us on social media at our breaking, you know, Instagram's on a lot like a record for a podcast.

If you always look at us on TikTok, because we're down with the Kigs, and then when the keys are coming up and we go TikTok and that's the late break here for a podcast as well. Discord in the description. Loads of great people there. Merchandise is available. And if you're a Patreon subscriber,

don't forget you'll get your free extra topic It's going out now, it's there, it's available. We talk about the Saudi Arabia possible purchase of Formula One from Liberty. That's available to Patreon subscribers. And you get Agfree podcast and discount on merch as well. So check it out. It helps us out massively. Thanks for sticking around.

Go check out the YouTube, of course. The video will now be live. And it really helps us out that we get support across all of our channels. In the meantime, I've been Samuel Sage. I've been Ben Hocking. And I've been Chief Wiggum. And remember. Keep breaking it late.

The podcast is part of the Sports Social Podcast Network.