The Scuderia Ferrari badge, the iconic Prancing Horse, is meant to represent excellence, passion, and an unyielding will to win. Yet, for nearly two decades, the reality has been an endless cycle of turmoil, underperformance, and public humiliation.

As the Formula 1 season draws to a close, with the team facing the grim prospect of a second consecutive winless campaign, the pressure in Maranello has reached a critical, và intensely personal, breaking point. The traditional villain has always been the Team Principal, but a wave of scathing analysis from F1 veterans suggests the rot runs deeper, pointing the finger squarely at the highest level of leadership: Ferrari President, John Elkann.

The latest crisis began with a move rarely seen in corporate sports: the public shaming of star employees by the company chairman. Following a season marked by inconsistency, Elkann publicly criticized both Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc, declaring that the team’s drivers “need to focus on driving and talk less.”

This act of deflection, designed to shift the spotlight away from institutional failures, has ignited a firestorm, pulling the curtain back on what many insiders believe is the true source of Ferrari’s stagnation: a toxic culture of internal politics and flawed leadership.

The Vasseur Pressure Cooker and the Shadow of Horner

The immediate fallout centers, once again, on the fate of Team Principal Fred Vasseur. Despite being handed a fresh multi-year contract, Vasseur was recently subjected to the historic kiss of death: the “dreaded vote of confidence” from Elkann. As history has proven in Formula 1, such public endorsements rarely precede stability; they often serve as the prelude to a sacking.

Naturally, the vacuum created by this intense pressure has amplified the rumors of Christian Horner’s potential arrival. Horner, who was shown the door at Red Bull, remains the most successful Team Principal of the modern era, renowned for assembling multiple world championship-winning squads. His credentials, temperament, and sheer resume make him the “most qualified man available.” The idea of him sweeping into Maranello, taking on a ‘Team Chef’ role—much like Franz Beckenbauer coached West Germany without the formal license—is a compelling narrative for a team desperate for structure and winning pedigree.

However, the Formula 1 rumor mill has also spun up a far more logical, in-house solution: Antonyello Coletta. Coletta is currently the architect of Ferrari’s extraordinary success in the World Endurance Championship (WEC), having recently guided the team to a third consecutive victory at the prestigious 24 Hours of Le Mans and capping the year with a championship double. This phenomenal achievement stands in stark, almost agonizing contrast to the F1 team’s struggles. On the very day Lewis Hamilton was unceremoniously dumped out of Q2, Coletta’s crew was celebrating dual WEC titles. Promoting Coletta, a man already delivering championships under the Prancing Horse banner, would be the most obvious and least disruptive move for the organization.

But whether Vasseur stays, Horner arrives, or Coletta steps up, the question remains: are any of these moves enough to fix a problem that is fundamentally structural?

Exposing the Political Disease

Former F1 driver Juan Pablo Montoya believes the answer is a resounding no. In a blunt and scathing assessment of the Scuderia, Montoya argued that the political maneuvering inside the team is Ferrari’s single biggest obstacle to success. Speaking to AS Colombia, Montoya did not mince words when discussing Elkann’s public criticism of Hamilton and Leclerc.

“The reason he said that is because there’s some internal pressure against him. The best way to combat it is to reflect it outward,” Montoya stated. He then delivered the ultimate verdict: “But you have to realize at some point that the way things are being done isn’t working. The biggest problem at Ferrari is politics. A lot of politics.”

Montoya’s view suggests that the continuous cycling of team principals and the public targeting of drivers are merely symptoms of a deeper ailment—a fear-based culture where internal politics dictate decisions over performance, and where blame is routinely deflected upwards from the ultimate source of power.

This analysis was powerfully echoed by former F1 team boss Gunther Steiner, who weighed in on Elkann’s criticism of the drivers, calling it “weird to say the least.” While acknowledging that the chairman is “allowed to critique because in the end he’s the boss,” Steiner strongly rejected the public nature of the rebuke, particularly toward Charles Leclerc, a driver who “puts his heart and soul into this, everything. What more do you want from Charles?”

Steiner highlighted the fundamentally flawed leadership exposed by Elkann’s remarks: “It is not showing good leadership saying this guy is doing it right, the mechanics are good, the engineers are good, but you guys are bad in public.” Crucially, Steiner noted the conspicuous absence of Vasseur’s name from the public scolding, suggesting a calculated strategy to isolate the drivers while the Team Principal position remains under review.

The Man Who Needs to Look in the Mirror

The collective feedback from F1’s most outspoken personalities points to the inescapable truth: the problem at Ferrari lies not in the garage, not with the engineers, and certainly not exclusively with the drivers—it lies in the corner office.

John Elkann’s tenure as Ferrari Chairman has been defined by a shocking lack of championship success. Under his watch, the team has managed just 15 wins in 160 races and has failed to secure a single constructors or drivers championship. This is despite having three world champions pass through the team and with Charles Leclerc proving himself to be one of the most talented drivers on the grid, well on his way to becoming the “most point-rich driver never to win a title.”

The only person left to blame in this scenario is the Team Principal—the one person Elkann has praised, along with the engineers and mechanics. But as Steiner deftly pointed out, Elkann himself must accept ultimate responsibility for the personnel he approves. He questioned the logic of criticizing Lewis Hamilton, a seven-time World Champion and Ferrari’s prize signing, when Elkann himself would have had to approve the signing in the first place.

“Also, who decided the drivers? Sometimes you have to look in the mirror for sure. He agreed to hire Lewis. That’s my understanding,” Steiner stated. He suggested that if Elkann truly felt the decision to hire Hamilton was wrong, he should have acknowledged his own error, rather than deflecting the blame onto the driver. The public criticism, especially when made after a devastating Grand Prix in which both cars dropped out of the points—a day when the WEC team won a championship—likely stemmed from emotional reaction rather than strategic thought.

Ultimately, the relentless political culture, which Montoya describes as the “biggest problem,” ensures that the Scuderia is constantly chasing its tail. The focus is diverted from engineering deficiencies—like the SF-25’s poor performance over bumps noted by Montoya—and placed onto individuals. Team Principals are sacrificed, drivers are publicly humiliated, and the cycle of blame and failure continues, while the core issue of stability, strategic clarity, and political infighting at the top remains untouched.

Until John Elkann looks in the mirror and confronts the role his own leadership—or lack thereof—has played in Ferrari’s ongoing stagnation, no Christian Horner, no Antonyello Coletta, and certainly no amount of ‘focus’ from the drivers will be able to reverse the Prancing Horse’s downward trajectory. The real crisis isn’t about replacing Vasseur; it’s about whether the man at the very pinnacle of the company will finally allow the team to heal itself, or if he will continue to prioritize internal politics over world championships.