Hilarious! Sad but true. After Vettel's unscheduled stop, the race in Turkey was like watching paint dry. Red Bull even stole any drama that there could have been at the end by ordering Vettel to concede the position to Webber. Too bad.
Somebody at the Marketing Divisions for these two companies need to get a brain and wake up and realize their opportunity. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
I have to jump in here and say that it is somewhat Ironic to me that people are calling this season boring, when during the years of Schumi we had the same boring yawn races we have now. For Y E A R S all I had to look forward to is the Ferrari team telling RB to move over to let MS win every now and then, but other than that is was bye bye MS and the race was over after 10 laps. Now Brawn is doing the same thing and it's boring? No more so than when MS was doing it, right? What am I missing here? Passing on track this year has been better than the last 10 years combined (meaning there has actually BEEN some) and it's not the same parade of McLaren and Ferrari at the front, but now it is BORING? You guys crack me up. MB
LOL. I have said the same basic thing in other posts. Hey I am a huge Ferrari fan and F1 fan. I am not a fan of the Brawn team just because it's kind of like dating the ugly twin, but it just shows that Brawn knows his stuff. I hope Ferrari can step up to the plate if there is a legitamate F1 series next year.
Okay, this season is just as boring as the Schumi years. The only difference is that it's not Ferrari winning right now. That's a huge difference though to any tifosi. So can you blame them?
My thoughts exactly. It's different than having Ferrari or McLaren always at the front. At least they are interesting teams. Brawn, on the other hand, just lead the parade with their boring-looking car and boring team, race after race. Yawwwwwwn.
First, understand that sometimes, there is an attempt for humor on FChat. Not often, but sometimes. Second, the season started off with a bang, different chassis and different faces on the poduim the first 2-3 events, even looked like there was a chance that 2-3 other teams could potentially win and make this a real championship fight. There was even a few passes on the circuit and not just in the pits. I would not go so far as to say that passing this year was better than the previous 10, I did not see much this past Sunday except the passing of backmarkers. In fact, the issue with dirty air still exists preventing passing by the leaders. Third, as a fan of the Scuderia, of course you want them to win everything, all of the time, but the reality was, when Schumacher made it look easy prior to 2005 it WAS boring (to me anyway). It was a red boring, not a white boring. Big difference. This year now has the appearance of being really really boring. In 2007 and 2008, at least you had a Ferrari/McLaren battle that went down to the wire. I don't think this year it will come down to the excitement of the last race of 2008, the WDC and the WCC will be won probably by Monza. Ferrari and Red Bull may before long actually give the Brawn some competition, but that could only be in a dream. But that doesn't mean one can not enjoy watching the races, and frankly, I don't watch F1 for the passing or side-by-side battles. And it doesn't mean that despite all the politics, we can't laugh at F1 humor. Thanks.
Yes but those cars were the pinacle of motorcars. The best was allowed to be the best. The rules back then were not changed to overthrow the better teams. Unlike this season....if the rules had not been changed....Would Brawn be on top? I doubt it. Besides its never as boring when Ferrari is winning seeing as this is a Ferrari site. Also Mike was making the Ferrari look better than it actually was whereas the Brawn car is making Button look better than he actually is.
There were plenty of us who thought the years of Ferrari dominance grew boring. I myself stated how I found Ferrari easier to cheer for when they were struggling.
You must not have been around that long. People also complained that F1 was boring when Schumi was winning everything.
This is just a joke, not meant to be taken seriously. F1 is 98% of the time boring unless you are a motorhead, then it is actually fun. I watched the Turkish GP twice, and did not fall asleep either time. And it was a boring race.
Wow, easy fellas! I get that people joke and are sarcastic here on fchat. That is why I said you guys crack me up - I was actually laughing in a good way when I said that. I also wasn't sure this was FERRARI chat, but now I am clear I guess I have always been a fan of a particular driver, whether it was Senna, or now Barrichello, so I have rooted for different teams, because both of these guys raced for different teams through thier careers. Point taken on the Tifosi here though, and I love Ferrari too, but F1 just like other sports seems to be cyclical. I remember when Williams was dominating, but now most young lads don't even know who that team is... In any case, this season is no worse to me as far as competition goes than any other. 355, I usually don't agree with most of your posts, but you are spot on with MS making the Ferrari look better, and the Brawn car making JB look better. I have always said that F1 is 80% car, 20% driver, and that is a generous donation to the driver if you ask me. Chill out guys, Ferrari will be back. They just need to shuffle the deck behind the wall. The drivers are pretty good. As a more neutral observer, if you had a pool going and gave me Kimi and Massa for my two drivers and we didn't know what cars they would be in, I would be ok with that. You know what they say in sport, winning solves everything, but when you are not the fingers start pointing. MB
Hardly Ferrari had a (unknown at that time) veto power to the rules. This was allowing them to stack the deck in their favor. The only thing being allowed was Ferrari to be the best. Of course not, see post above. That's only because Ferrari was unaware of the loophole in the rules. Do you really think that if they'd seen it they would, with their veto power, allowed the diffuser rule to go forward? No they wouldn't. But I don't think Ferrari in its hubris thought anyone other than McLaren or possibly BMW would build a better mouse trap. Ah! For once we're in agreement. Different reasons for it, but in agreement none the less. As long as there's a good fight involved, agreed. Hardly. While he certainly was doing so up until 2000 "Mike" as you put it, was driving a car that was designed and built to compete against a field that was being hamstrung as the FIA was allowing Ferrari to veto rules that might give the other teams a technological advantage. For many of his seasons from 2000 on he'd brought a gun to a knife fight. Now I'm no real fan of Buttons (I've often said Sato was the better of them while he was at Honda) but when Ross Brawn continuously praises Button, the same Brawn who guided "Mike" to so many championships, I'm going to sit up and pay attention. From Brawn's description of Button's drive this past weekend Jenson pulled a Schumacher. He did everything perfectly. The pit wall told him exactly what needed to be done to win the race, lap times, tend the tires, ect... and he delivered just as Schumacher used to when Ross would tell him the same. J.B. + Brawn = Winning (combination).
Come on! Taking each of your points in turn: - Those cars were designed and built to the exact same regulations as everyone else's car. The rules were, and remain [at least for now ] the same for everyone. How is that in any way causing the field to be "hamstrung"? - They were being allowed to veto rule changes that would apply to all. One could make a pretty strong argument that this veto right was for the good of all competitors - "We want rules stability!" is the common comment from all the teams. Ferrari were given the right to stabilize the rules - For the benefit of all..... - How would a rule change give the other teams a technological advantage that didn't also apply to Ferrari? You're implying that Ferrari were building cars to a different set of regulations, and that's simply not true. BTW, both Frank W and Super Mario are on record as saying they had no problem with the agreement. Cheers, Ian
Have to agree with you Ian. I don't recall when and fi Ferrari used their veto power in the past. Seems that they had a moving floor the got vetoed on them. Can anyone give an example of when Ferrari used veto poswer against proposed rules? And won?
There had been mention in an article (either Autosport or Pitpass) recently that mentioned Ferrari vetoing a kinetic-recover device (I'm assuming similar to KERS) by another team, I believe Williams. The veto power gives them a lot of power to keep the rules moving in a direction that is beneficial to them. Imagine if they didn't have it and suddenly Williams showed up with the ability to push a button and "boom" 100 extra HP as often as they could recharge the system. I'm sure Ferrari took a look at that and said "OH F&CK... veto." It'll be hard to find other examples as I'm sure both Ferrari and the FIA (Max) aren't all that keen on having their dirty little secrets aired and what they've prevented others from developing. The moving floor is a separate issue as it was in violation of a current standing rule, but circumvented the standing test for the rule. Once the test was changed it was obvious the rule had been violated.
Err, no - "Veto power" (supposedly) gave them the ability to stop the rules moving in a direction detrimental to the rest of the grid - *Possibly* the mass damper, Mclaren's 4th pedal etc would have been deemed legal without their input, but at the end of the day it's Charlie who decides what's legal, not Ferrari. They didn't have the right to change the rules, but rather stabilize the rules as all of the entrants want. I honestly also believe their veto powers are limited - I'm sure they (and the rest of the grid) would have much rather stayed with V10's and no rev limits - Why didn't they veto those changes if they had the "power" you claim? Not to mention the great double diffuser - Would have been found to be illegal if what you claim is true..... BTW, that wasn't a "loophole" as you said but rather an interpretation (found by 30% of the entrants) that Charlie said was legal. They're big and powerful (rightfully so as the only consistent entrant), but not even they can make stuff up as they go along. Cheers, Ian
