By: Formula 1 is built on delicate balances, and one of the most difficult concerns the relationship between team-mates. United by the goal of scoring points for the team, they are also rivals—often the most important ones—because they are competing in the same machinery.
History is full of internal rivalries that became legendary: Senna and Prost at McLaren, Mansell and Piquet at Williams, Alonso and Hamilton again at McLaren, Hamilton and Rosberg at Mercedes, right through to Norris and Piastri. Such rivalries are natural when both drivers are fighting for the World Championship, but less understandable when the clashes chiefly risk hurting the team—and unfortunately, the latter scenario is the most fitting description of Ferrari in recent years, far from the top and at the centre of countless controversies. Often at the heart of those discussions is the “Predestined One”, Charles Leclerc: tensions with Vettel, Sainz and now Hamilton.
Charles is an extraordinary talent, deeply loves Ferrari and his desire always to get the most from every opportunity has delivered thrilling performances and memorable victories. That same trait, however, has at times led him to demand more than the car can give, resulting in costly errors for both him and the team.
The 2026 season captures this situation well. Leclerc has recorded more accident-related retirements than podiums, is far from the front and is now out of the title fight. Hamilton, despite making mistakes of his own, has generally made better use of his opportunities and remains in contention for something significant.
Monza encapsulated it all in just a few corners. Lewis found room at the first corner, Charles did not accept the overtake and forced him off track, costing him positions. Shortly afterwards, Leclerc made another mistake, crashing heavily into the barriers while once again trying to extract something more from the Ferrari.
The reaction was fierce. That is why we asked our readers one very simple question: “Should Leclerc accept the role of second driver?”
More than 1,500 comments
The question generated a huge debate: 1,544 contributions were analysed, including 1,056 direct comments on the post and 488 replies between users. The discussion soon broadened from driver hierarchy to the responsibilities of Leclerc, Hamilton, Vasseur and Ferrari itself. Before examining the responses in detail, we believe it is right to show readers’ overall sentiment in the current context.
| Sentiment towards Leclerc | Comments | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Negative | 900 | 58.3% |
| Positive | 260 | 16.8% |
| Neutral | 254 | 16.5% |
| Mixed | 93 | 6.0% |
| Undetermined | 37 | 2.4% |
The first figure is clear: 58.3% of comments are negative towards Leclerc. Among top-level comments alone—those more directly linked to the original question—the figure rises to 61.9%.
But beware: “negative” does not automatically mean being in favour of Leclerc becoming the second driver. Some criticise the Monegasque heavily while also believing it would be wrong to establish a hierarchy.
Second driver? “No” wins
Among the 1,056 direct comments, we isolated the explicit and immediately recognisable answers: “yes”, “certainly”, “obviously” on one side; “no”, “absolutely not”, “never” on the other. There were 243 such contributions, the sample least open to interpretation.
| Answer | Comments | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| No | 161 | 66.3% |
| Yes | 82 | 33.7% |
Among those answering without hesitation, then, two readers out of three say no: Leclerc should not formally be considered Ferrari’s second driver.
The result becomes less clear-cut, however, when more detailed arguments are also analysed. Of the 484 contributions focused primarily on Ferrari’s hierarchy, around 343 expressed a sufficiently clear position: the estimate is roughly 56% opposed and 44% in favour. “No” remains ahead, but the divide is less pronounced.
Many readers therefore reject the second-driver label, or do not see it as decisive in solving the problem, but that does not mean they absolve Leclerc. The Monegasque is being asked for greater discipline, more collaboration with Hamilton and, above all, the ability to recognise when the race situation requires Ferrari’s result to take priority over a personal battle.
Leclerc divides the fans
On one side are those who still regard Charles as Ferrari’s reference point and point out that he has never had a car capable of consistently fighting for the World Championship. On the other, there is a growing group questioning the “Predestined One”, including those who would like to see him away from Maranello. Curiously, others reach the same conclusion for the opposite reason: Leclerc should leave Ferrari in order finally to find a competitive car.
The issue is not the label
In the end, the readers’ answer is fairly clear: the majority do not want Leclerc as the second driver, but a very substantial proportion believe the situation nonetheless requires priorities in Hamilton’s favour.
The real issue, therefore, appears to be less about the label and more about behaviour on track. Nobody is asking Charles to stop being quick, aggressive or ambitious. But when his personal season or race is already compromised and his team-mate can still fight for something important, many fans expect one thing above all: put Ferrari ahead of the internal battle.
Cover photo by Luca Martini / WHYOUT Images
