Adrian Sutil: My thoughts

Photo: Morio

Force India look set to replace Adrian Sutil with Nico Hulkenberg for 2012, but Sutil's recent performances have some people questioning this move.

However, I find it very hard to see why Sutil deserves a drive in that team over Paul di Resta or Hulkenberg.

Comparing Sutil to di Resta, the German has scored more points this year. However, does that make him better? Let's look at the facts here...

Prior to 2011, di Resta had raced touring cars in the DTM (I don't care what you say about whether the DTM are actually touring cars or not - the truth is they are not single-seaters!) for four years.

In that same period of time, Sutil had been racing in F1 for four years. For the very same Silverstone-based team that we know today as Force India.

I don't know about you, but I feel that based on that, Sutil really ought to have been thrashing di Resta this year. The difference really hasn't been that great at all though.

Sutil only got his original chance in F1 thanks to his sponsorship. Being Japanese F3 champion simply does not earn you an F1 drive.

When he got into F1, he performed very well - and continued to do so to the point that he warranted being retained year-on-year by Force India.

However, I don't think he has done well enough vs di Resta to force the Scot out of a seat, and Hulkenberg is a far greater talent than Sutil ever was. If Schumacher (hopefully) retires again for 2013, expect his replacement at Mercedes to be one of di Resta or Hulkenberg.

Despite this opinion, I do not feel Sutil's days in F1 are over. If I were senior management at Williams I would be signing him up immediately. His combination of experience, pace and sponsorship money makes him a far better option in my opinion for Williams than Valtteri Bottas.

This might sound odd to you, seeing how much I like to champion young talents. But I feel that a Bottas-Maldonado combination would destroy Williams' season before it has even started. It took Hulkenberg, a GP2 champion, half a year to acclimatise to F1. Bottas on the other hand has never raced a high-powered single-seater before in his life.

Bottas could of course just be another Raikkonen, who seamlessly leaped from Formula Renault 2.0 to F1. But I don't see why it is worth the risk for Williams next year. If it was a case of putting Bottas alongside Barrichello - then go for it. But you need someone to lead the team and I can't see Maldonado doing that job.

So yes, I want Sutil out of Force India - but the F1 ride ain't over for him just yet.

Another potential problem with the young driver test

There has been widespread criticism this week of teams who sold their seats at the Young Driver Test to drivers with money, rather than necessarily those with talent. And while I do see this as a problem, I have noticed another trend that threatens the whole purpose of the test.

My fears surround McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes, and the drivers they used in the test. McLaren used long-term test driver Gary Paffett as well as Oliver Turvey, who does simulator work for the team as well as driving in their GT programme. Ferrari used their reserve driver Jules Bianchi, while Mercedes used Sam Bird. All three teams used exactly the same lineups as in 2010. And there is where my fears are.

Not only is the Young Driver Test a chance to give young drivers a chance to drive current F1 machinery, but it also gives the teams some vital extra running that they can use to collect data.

With the test being so crucial to the teams for car development, I fear that the aforementioned drivers could become career 'young driver test drivers'. Obviously it is in the interests of the teams to put the most suitable driver available to them in the car. Doing so allows them to make the most of the test in terms of car development. For that reason, should the likes of Turvey, Bianchi and Bird all fail to secure a race seat in F1 in the coming years (which looks very possible with the current requirement of having money), then McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes will continue to use them.

All three are highly accomplished drivers who have been very successful in their careers to date and racked up plenty of experience. I firmly believe that all three would do a good job if given an F1 seat. But for as long as they do not get a race seat, they will continue to be eligible for the Young Driver Test. The more mileage they do for the team, the more valuable they will be for them. Therefore, there is very little motivation for any of these teams to use a different driver each year in the Young Driver Test.

In this way, Turvey, Bianchi and Bird could all be more valuable for their teams then established ex-racers such as Pedro de la Rosa, who are not able to drive in this test. With the race drivers available for pre-season testing, testers with race experience are not really needed at all. De la Rosa himself raised this issue this week. However, he was just looking after his own interests. He has had his chance in F1, and I say that testing should be left for rookies as a way of building up their experience.

Going back to the real issue here, the likes of Turvey, Bianchi and Bird could become so valuable to their teams that they are not even released to other teams to get a race drive. But more importantly they are preventing other young drivers from getting chances in these teams. This therefore defeats the whole object of the Young Driver Test.

Between them the teams really ought to come up with some kind of rule to force teams to run a new driver to the team each year. Otherwise the Young Driver Test becomes completely pointless.

Of course, as I have said many times before, the real solution to giving young drivers some experience is to force teams to run them in Friday practice at each Grand Prix. But then again, you might find we have just the same problems.