Red Bull Content Pool
Column
Opinion | Why the De Vries-Ricciardo switch was unnecessary and strange
- Ludo van Denderen
There he was again at the AlphaTauri factory. That familiar big smile on his face, joking and grinning, exactly how everyone knows Daniel Ricciardo. After six months on the sidelines - partly because he only wanted to pursue his F1 career for a competitive team - the Australian will start the Hungarian Grand Prix in a week's time on behalf of the worst team on the grid. However you look at it, swapping Nyck de Vries for Daniel Ricciardo has been a strange AND unnecessary move.
At AlphaTauri, talents from the Red Bull Junior programme are normally allowed to mature, eventually making the move to the big Red Bull Racing. Nothing more has come of that maturation as yet. First there was Nyck de Vries, who was given the chance at the age of 28, only to be rigorously pushed aside after only ten races in favour of a 34-year-old driver who has hardly performed anything for years. As if this man - not for nothing shown the door by McLaren, after which there was no serious interest from other teams - is suddenly the Messiah. I dare make this prediction: with Ricciardo behind the wheel, the AlphaTauri is suddenly not the midfield car.
No test to replace Perez?
The logic of putting Ricciardo in the AlphaTauri still eludes me. If the remaining 12 Grands Prix count as a test to determine how good (or bad) the Australian currently is, then I wonder why Red Bull wants to know at all? After all, the team has let it be known time and again that Sergio Perez is not in question and has an ongoing contract for '24. For '25 - when Perez is thus no longer committed to the Austrian - there will be plenty of strong drivers on the market to replace the Mexican. Anyway, at Silverstone, Christian Horner still expressed that Ricciardo is not being considered for a place at his Red Bull Racing.
So if the changing of the guard at AlphaTauri is not so much motivated by wanting to see exactly where Ricciardo stands, it must have to do with Nyck de Vries. Thinking back to the races he drove, was he really that bad? Certainly not. Only - and De Vries can blame himself a bit - he blamed himself too often. Just check the reports: 'I made a mistake' or 'I wasn't fast enough'. In the world of Formula 1, and certainly with the Red Bull family, this is an expression of weakness. Such vulnerability has certainly not done his cause any good.
Red Bull could have known this
Did De Vries have material to score points? No. Was De Vries showing positive development? Yes. Should Red Bull have seen that too? Absolutely! Throughout his career, De Vries has been a diesel; someone who always needed a while to acclimatise to a new class. When contracting the former Formula 2 and Formula E champion, Red Bull knew exactly who it was bringing in.
Or did it? The day after De Vries surprisingly took points on his debut as a stand-in at the Monza circuit, Helmut Marko suddenly had the inspiration: 'That Nyck, I must have him'. And so it happened: within days, the remarkable deal was done. Red Bull, which always prides itself on making such considered decisions, made an impulse purchase. As if Nyck de Vries was a new television. In retrospect, it can be said that Red Bull should never have committed De Vries at the time. That De Vries accepted the offer without thinking long and hard cannot be blamed on the Dutchman. Anyone would have done that. Red Bull's miscalculation ultimately cost the Dutchman a huge dent in his image, perhaps even with adverse consequences for the course of his career. And why exactly did it all have to be this way? Hopefully we will find out one day.