After the Monza GP there is finally a bit of clarity in Formula One: drivers are not that important, in 2007.
In fact, a look at the standings reveals a remarkable pattern, with McLaren’s pilots in positions #1 and #2, then Ferrari’s in #3 and #4, then BMW Sauber’s in #5 and #6 and so on with Renault, Williams, Red Bull and Toyota.
The first 14 places are occupied by successive pairings of team-mates.
Ergo the car is more important than the actual driver.
Now can we say there is anything fishy, after months of allegations?
Well, there is just a hint that something may not be as usual, in the fact that Ferrari and McLaren are so much better than anybody else.
In a year where drivers are not important, in fact, what are the chances that two completely independent cars can compete so close to each other?
Wouldn’t it be much more probable for one team to be in front of the pack, having cracked the right configuration and materials for the current set of rules?
Or otherwise, if such mix can be found by more than one team, shouldn’t there be three or four competing at the top?
If I were the judge in the McLaren-Ferrary spy case, I would get both cars compared to the last detail, and with a couple of other cars too…