Daniel Ricciardo’s unceremonious sacking via social media was a Red Bull “own goal” that did an injustice to the Australian’s career, according to Fox Sports and Speedcafe podcast Pit Talk.

Ricciardo had his fate sealed by an overnight post on RB’s social media channels confirming speculation that he would leave the team to make room for Red Bull rising star Liam Lawson.

The Australian later announced via a post on his own Instagram channel that he would be retiring from Formula 1.

Every qualifying session and race from the 2024 FIA Formula One World Championship LIVE in 4K. New to Kayo? Start Your Free Trial Today >

It was a surprisingly brief farewell to the eight-time grand prix winner from a team indelibly linked to his career.

It also knocked on to an unusually subdued welcome to Lawson, the long-time Red Bull junior who has finally got his F1 chance, with just 151 words dedicated to his arrival in a brief press release.

PIT TALK PODCAST: After a week of speculation, Red Bull has confirmed Daniel Ricciardo has raced in his last grand prix, with Liam Lawson set to take the wheel from the next race in Austin. Where did it go wrong for the Aussie’s comeback, and was he dealt with too harshly in the end?

Pit Talk host Michael Lamonato said the situation did Ricciardo’s status in the sport a considerable disservice.

“I find this whole thing almost unbelievable,” he said.

“We’re talking about an eight-time grand prix winner. Seven of those wins came with Red Bull Racing during what we sometimes forget was a pretty fallow inter-title era for Red Bull.

“In that time he comfortably made himself one of the biggest stars in the sport — that was before Drive to Survive. He was one of the first Formula 1 drivers to really crack the United States, which is remarkable considering the sport’s history there before Drive to Survive.

“Netflix then cemented him as, for want of a better phrase, an F1 main character. He is one of the guys.

“While Red Bull has given a lot to Daniel undoubtedly — it gave him his Formula 1 chance, it brought him up through a couple of years of junior racing as well and gave him his second chance, in fact, when I think a lot of people didn’t think he’d get one — he also gave a lot back to this brand, including those wins.

“His dedication to the reserve driver role at the start of last year … was always professional. He committed to it hard. Likewise, his second stint in the cockpit — he committed to that immensely.

“His brand played a massive role in bringing two enormous sponsors to both teams in Visa and Cash App.

“I don’t object to him being let go early, because there are reasons to justify that.

“I just don’t get how a social media post between races while Daniel’s sitting on his farm in Perth justifies that career status.”

DANIEL RICCIARDO’S LAST LAP

‘TRUE GENTLEMAN’: Tribute flow for Ricciardo after Red Bull swings axe

‘KILLER INSTINCT WAS GONE’: Red Bull powerbroker explains brutal Ricciardo call

OPINION: No send-off — and no respect. It never should have to end like this for Ricciardo

DRIVER DILEMMA: The cruel twist of fate that set Ricciardo disaster in motion — and the ‘bigger question’ that still lingers

RIGHT PLACE, WRONG TIME: The missteps and brutal bad luck that derailed Ricciardo’s career

Red Bull has long been the forerunner in sports marketing and branding, and its arrival in the sport in the 2000s forced rival teams to lift their games at a time Formula 1 did no meaningful self-promotion.

Lamonato said that history made it particularly surprising that Red Bull was the team to mishandle Ricciardo’s exit.

“I’m really surprised with Red Bull in particular because this was the brand — to give it its full credit — that before Liberty Media arrived essentially was the F1 marketing department,” he said.

“Red Bull was what made F1 grow in the decade before Liberty Media rocked up because they were so good at this stuff. This is what they did. It’s part of the reason Ricciardo was such a big star, because he was one of the few stars that had a team behind him backing him, and that was such a big deal.

“That’s what I find almost most surprising about this — that’s its Red Bull that has managed to badly handle this. I’d expect this from half a dozen other teams, but from Red Bull it’s surprising.

“I know there’s no room for sentiment in Formula 1 — it’s performance at the end of the day — but this is just such a massive own goal for the Red Bull organisation, the way this has been handled, and if I were Formula 1, I’d be pretty disappointed by this saga.

“It’s not in F1’s hands at the end of the day, but you’ve seen — again I use the phrase — a main character ushered off stage quietly. Fans are going to tune in at Austin and it’s going to be a different driver there.

“I just think the whole thing has come across — and I know there will be reasons for it and there’ll be justifications for it — as so shambolic.”

Co-host Mat Coch agreed that Red Bull should have handled the situation more cleanly but argued that Ricciardo knew he was singing up to one of Formula 1’s most ruthless driver programs when he returned to the Red Bull fold.

“Daniel hasn’t retired; Daniel was retired,” he said. “He didn’t have a choice in the matter really, and that’s a little bit sad, but I guess it’s also a product of being in the situation he put himself in here.

“He willingly walked into this midway through last year. He picked up the baton from Nick de Vries, who suffered exactly the same fate. Countless other Red Bull drivers have had this happen to them as well. It’s not unprecedented.

“It’s perfectly normal if you’re going to lose your drive mid-season that this is the way it’s handled. The difference here being that most drivers who lose their drive mid-year haven’t got 257 grand prix starts their name, eight wins and 32 podiums. Daniel does deserve a little bit of respect for that.

“He’s also just a likeable guy, so there’s just that human element that feels missing. I think that’s what it is. We all saw the emotion in Singapore. We can all relate to that.

“But while I see your point and I agree that Red Bull probably ideally would’ve handled this differently, Daniel had a second opportunity that most driver will never get.

“To have a second bite at that [career], he can’t be too upset, because he experienced something that very few people who make it to Formula 1 have. Very few people make it to Formula 1 full stop, but he’s won races, he’s stood on podiums, he’s taken fastest laps.

“He’s done so much more than could realistically ever be hoped for. That he didn’t get this one thing — yeah, he can be upset and sad about it, but I don’t think he can be overwhelmed by it, because he’s already had it. He had it at McLaren.

“I don’t like the way it was handled either, but I don’t think it bothers me as much as it bothers you.

“I guess I’m less emotive when it comes to this than you. I’m more pragmatic in that if it doesn’t stack up from a business perspective — Formula 1 is a business. It’s a sport, yes, but it’s a business.

“We’re talking about teams that are worth hundreds of million dollars. There are cost caps that need to be managed. You cut your losses. There’s an economic theory where your first loss is your least, so you cut and run. It doesn’t make sense to prolong that. What benefit do you get other than making a bloke feel good?”