You won't be in the least bit surprised that we start with Sebastian Vettel and the by now familiar team orders business (perhaps for convenience someone should just label it 'Sebgate'?). One thing that struck me about Vettel's behaviour immediately after the Sepang race was that he, initially at least, seemed genuinely surprised by the negative reaction he got. An apology did follow from him fairly quickly once the reaction registered, but certainly his victory celebrations on the slowing down lap and then in parc ferme showed no outward sign of contrition, embarrassment or conflict.
|Did Sunday reflect the conflict of the two Sebastian Vettels?|
Credit: JerichoNation / CC
But part of the answer may be on the broader level, in that Seb - rather like Ayrton Senna - appears a very different animal out of the car compared with in it, at least judging by what we see in front of the media anyway. Out of the car Seb is engaging, well-mannered, and also more than most F1 drivers seems rather minded of being liked and having a positive legacy. But in the car, seen plenty of times before last Sunday's race as well as in it, he becomes demanding, self-centred, rather petulant and short-fused as well as displays a strong and unattractive sense of entitlement. And apparently how he's viewed more widely didn't enter his considerations when he decided to attack Mark Webber for the win in Sepang.
Of course, all of us are different in different situations, but in Seb's case the disconnect seems chasm-like. Perhaps his surprise and apparent contrition after the Sepang race reflected genuine conflict between the two Sebs? Perhaps one of the two Sebs is the real one, and the other a construct which he feels is necessary to act out in order to help him prevail?