|
Just curious but what number will MS's car be?
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 17 2010, 10:40 PM (1,635 Views)
|
|
Lord Tau
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:11 AM
Post #76
|
- Posts:
- 18,298
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #56
- Joined:
- March 17, 2006
|
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 10:54 AM
- GordonB,Jan 22 2010
- 10:40 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 10:13 AM
John, lets face it, you and me will never agree on this one. The fact is that Ferrari got rumbled about how they were treating RB and, may be RB shouldn't have reacted so overtly, but by rights he deserved that win and I am glad that he proved his point. You may think that the win was necessary for schumacher but his lead was so commanding in the championship that I really don't believe that there could have been any other contender except for his own team mate. Remember that he had double the points of his nearest rival (JPM, not RB as I accidentally stated before). The 2002 ferrari was the best car by a significant margin, allied to the fact that the bridgestones were pretty much taylored to the car.
Anyway, you know my stance on team orders. My issue is with the way in which it was done (i.e. suddenly realising that with 10 laps to go, MS couldn't catch RB and then ordering RB to slow down or be sacked). I suspect that your true feelings of distaste towards RB on this matter are due to the fact that he dared to question the Schumacher/Ferrari ethos of only allowing Schumacher to win.
It's just not John you'll not agree with - I think there's a large number of people in the world who can look past your 20-20 hindsight. - Yes Schumi was in a dominant position points-wise but this was with two-thirds of a championship to go. Ferrari had NO WAY OF KNOWING that they would be dominant for the entire season. - What they did (i.e. order their drivers to swap places) was NOT ILLEGAL. It was an accepted part of the way that races were run and had happened many times previously. - Who cares that they were "rumbled over how they were treating RB" - what planet does that come from? He had a contract which he willingly signed, which said that he had to do what the team said. In return the team paid him millons of dollars. Your last sentence about the 2002 car and the tyres is a statement which can only be made AFTER the season is complete. You only need to look at Brawn last year to see the validity of this point. The simple fact is that you, and all the other people who continually harp on about it, just didn't like it - for whatever reason. I'm not saying that you have to like it, but don't dress up your arguments with pseudo justifications, and words like "deserved" and try and make out that Ferrari or Schumacher were somehow in the wrong. Just say "I really didn't like it" and move on for goodness sake.
I think you have got me wrong there. It is not the fact that team orders were used, it was the manner in which they were done. RB obviously expected to be allowed to win on merit and did not expect to be ordered to slow, otherwise he would not have kicked off in the way he did. That, to me, suggests that Ferrari were not 100% honest with Rubens when they signed him. Lets not forget how much people used to (and occasionally still do) harp on how "evil" McLaren were/are because they ordered DC to let Mika win at Jerez 97 or Oz 98 (despite that being rumoured to be between the drivers alone). How come it is that when McLaren do it, they are "awful race fixers" yet when Ferrari do it, it is business as usual? Like I said, if Ferrari wanted RB to be a No. 2, ceeding to Schumacher where ever possible, then fine by me, but at least let the No. 2 driver know before the event instead of threatening them at the time (though I suppose a similar accusation can be levelled at McLaren over Jerez 97, though DC did hush this up for 10 years, which is a tiny bit suspect).
I've often wondered the same thing.
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:13 AM
Post #77
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:08 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:05 AM
you don't take my arguement as genuine.
I believe that you belive in what you are saying... I just don't believe that what you are saying is right.
Like wise.
|
|
|
| |
|
John
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:18 AM
Post #78
|
- Posts:
- 11,435
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #211
- Joined:
- January 27, 2007
|
- Lord Tau,Jan 22 2010
- 11:11 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 10:54 AM
How come it is that when McLaren do it, they are "awful race fixers" yet when Ferrari do it, it is business as usual?
I've often wondered the same thing.
because when Ferrari did it open and legitimately teams such as Ron Dennis McLaren decried the practice claiming to be holier than thou... yet have on numerous occasions been found to do the same... there is a word to describe such practice... Hypocrites.. not a nice word but an apt one all the same...
As for the 'locked' poll... you forgot Option 4: this poll is POINTLESS
|
|
|
| |
|
John
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:18 AM
Post #79
|
- Posts:
- 11,435
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #211
- Joined:
- January 27, 2007
|
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:13 AM
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:08 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:05 AM
you don't take my arguement as genuine.
I believe that you belive in what you are saying... I just don't believe that what you are saying is right.
Like wise.
The difference is I state FACT.
|
|
|
| |
|
Lord Tau
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:29 AM
Post #80
|
- Posts:
- 18,298
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #56
- Joined:
- March 17, 2006
|
Didn't they try the same thing at the US Grand Prix that same year, but arsed it up?
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:33 AM
Post #81
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:18 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:13 AM
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:08 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:05 AM
you don't take my arguement as genuine.
I believe that you belive in what you are saying... I just don't believe that what you are saying is right.
Like wise.
The difference is I state FACT.
No, it is your opinion. There is a world of difference between fact and opinion.
The fact is that
1) Rubens was leading the race by a healthy margin over Schumacher
2) The Ferrari management asked Rubens to Slow and let Schumacher win
3) Rubens was not happy with this arrangement
All other comment over this is pure speculation and opinion, especially the interpratation of RB's status within the team, which was obviously no 100% clear between RB and the Ferrari management.
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:34 AM
Post #82
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- Lord Tau,Jan 22 2010
- 11:29 AM
Didn't they try the same thing at the US Grand Prix that same year, but arsed it up?
Oh yeah, the imfamous "attempted dead-heat".
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:35 AM
Post #83
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:18 AM
- Lord Tau,Jan 22 2010
- 11:11 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 10:54 AM
How come it is that when McLaren do it, they are "awful race fixers" yet when Ferrari do it, it is business as usual?
I've often wondered the same thing.
because when Ferrari did it open and legitimately teams such as Ron Dennis McLaren decried the practice claiming to be holier than thou... yet have on numerous occasions been found to do the same... there is a word to describe such practice... Hypocrites.. not a nice word but an apt one all the same... As for the 'locked' poll... you forgot Option 4: this poll is POINTLESS
I offered all viable options, including a neutral stance. You can't say fairer than that.
Besides, there is always a point somewhere.
|
|
|
| |
|
Red Andy
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:36 AM
Post #84
|
- Posts:
- 10,042
- Group:
- Moderator
- Member
- #236
- Joined:
- February 8, 2007
|
- Lord Tau,Jan 22 2010
- 11:29 AM
Didn't they try the same thing at the US Grand Prix that same year, but arsed it up?
I think the difference there is that in Austria the team clearly wanted Michael to win for reasons related to the championship .... in the USA the Ferrari drivers took it upon themselves to try and engineer a dead-heat for a bit of a giggle. Unfortunately for Michael he slowed down a little too much (not that it mattered at that stage).
|
|
|
| |
|
John
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:36 AM
Post #85
|
- Posts:
- 11,435
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #211
- Joined:
- January 27, 2007
|
From this...
- Steelstallions,Jan 17 2010
- 10:40 PM
I am sure there is a quick and accurate answer to this, but as the internet is not forthcoming I wonder if those of you who are more familiar with the rules could tell me what number will be given MS's Mercedes.
to this...
- SaveOurSilverstone,Jan 22 2010
- 10:57 AM
perhaps a poll would find out what people think.. no comments allowed, just choose your opinon...
|
|
|
| |
|
Pasta
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:39 AM
Post #86
|
- Posts:
- 4,214
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #801
- Joined:
- November 3, 2007
|
Not sure how we got to this stuff about team rules, but MS is car number 3. He made a deal with the team and Nico. He believes that even numbers are bad luck for him, and wanted an odd number. Honestly I think that is a bit of nonsense, and in truth he deserves the first number in the team. Interesting way to explain it, though.
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:40 AM
Post #87
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- Red Andy,Jan 22 2010
- 11:36 AM
- Lord Tau,Jan 22 2010
- 11:29 AM
Didn't they try the same thing at the US Grand Prix that same year, but arsed it up?
I think the difference there is that in Austria the team clearly wanted Michael to win for reasons related to the championship .... in the USA the Ferrari drivers took it upon themselves to try and engineer a dead-heat for a bit of a giggle. Unfortunately for Michael he slowed down a little too much (not that it mattered at that stage).
Hey, wouldn't you do the same thing regarding Indy. Team mate slows. boot it past him
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:44 AM
Post #88
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:36 AM
From this... - Steelstallions,Jan 17 2010
- 10:40 PM
I am sure there is a quick and accurate answer to this, but as the internet is not forthcoming I wonder if those of you who are more familiar with the rules could tell me what number will be given MS's Mercedes.
to this... - SaveOurSilverstone,Jan 22 2010
- 10:57 AM
perhaps a poll would find out what people think.. no comments allowed, just choose your opinon...
Well, these things happen, though the question of No. 1 team status did arise, which I suppose does relate a little to car numbers.
|
|
|
| |
|
John
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:47 AM
Post #89
|
- Posts:
- 11,435
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #211
- Joined:
- January 27, 2007
|
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:33 AM
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:18 AM
The difference is I state FACT.
No, it is your opinion. There is a world of difference between fact and opinion.
well of course it is my opinion...I wrote it... but the point here isthet my opinion is based on facts... the fact Rubens was having a hit and miss season... the fact Schumacher was leading the WDC and had to that point delivered 88% of Ferrari's WCC points... The fact Ferrari cannot see into the future (unlike you it seems)... the fact Rubens was paid millions to drive for Ferrari and that meant doing as they requested... the fact the practice was common place in F1... the fact... the fact... the fact...
|
|
|
| |
|
AndyW76
|
Jan 22 2010, 11:54 AM
Post #90
|
- Posts:
- 12,405
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #178
- Joined:
- December 6, 2006
|
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:47 AM
- AndyW76,Jan 22 2010
- 11:33 AM
- John,Jan 22 2010
- 11:18 AM
The difference is I state FACT.
No, it is your opinion. There is a world of difference between fact and opinion.
well of course it is my opinion...I wrote it... but the point here isthet my opinion is based on facts... the fact Rubens was having a hit and miss season... the fact Schumacher was leading the WDC and had to that point delivered 88% of Ferrari's WCC points... The fact Ferrari cannot see into the future (unlike you it seems)... the fact Rubens was paid millions to drive for Ferrari and that meant doing as they requested... the fact the practice was common place in F1... the fact... the fact... the fact...
I never said that team orders were wrong. I said that it was clear that Rubens was not adequately informed by Ferrari of what his duties were to the team should this exact situation arise. If the cars were running line-a-stern, then it is understandable but Rubens had a significant lead, so it was reasonable for Rubens to expect that the order would not have been issued, which was obviously what he thought, demonstrated by his initial refusal to comply.
|
|
|
| |