|
|
Post by chrisb on Nov 10, 2019 10:01:29 GMT
quite right Carl, before the war Achille Varzi won a race I think it was Tripoli and the mayor saluted possibly Stuck and said he was the real victor, Varzi knowing nothing of any prearrangements and with a huge ego to boot couldn't cope with that and this led to his morphine addiction, or so it was said,
I cannot abide 'fixed' results, yet Mike Hawthorn and John Surtees both won their respective WDC's with the aid of their team-mates pulling over and letting them pass, now is that any different to Michael being let through to win by Ruebens or 'Fernando is quicker than you?" interstingly all drove for the same team, no idea what to make of that. So, is what MB are doing any different to any other team in history? does it make it any better or worse?
BSB coverage on Eurosport reminds me what good commentators are really like, the excitable sycophantic ones on MotoGP drive me nuts, with a mention of Marquez every sentence, the BBC radio commentators are so bleep bleep patronising although I do like Jolyon Palmer and he does interject with sense, but I can only bear so much of the screeching before it is turned off, as for C4, whathisname used to be good on Eurosport but now has joined the hysterical ones and DC is someone I could throttle at times with his ishooos and wish he would get out his tisshoos and ooo off, when I watch the highlights on utub I hear what everyone is ranting about Crofty et al, and concur by turning off the sound - but BSB and occasional WSB with the great James Whittam and Jack Burnicle and they are are just so good - dry - informative and with mistakes, you know they are allowed - the great Murray proved that - but genuine enthusiasm for something they both love and adore, and the grid walks, nauseating on C4 - it is switched off then, brilliant on BSB, why is that? less star gazing more racing interest and most importantly - respect
going onto what you say about cars being made to suit a certain style of driving or the teams preference I did wonder how DC felt about Mika's relationship with Uncle Ron
does anyone get the Liberty TV covergae, has it started yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Nov 10, 2019 11:19:20 GMT
I cannot abide 'fixed' results, yet Mike Hawthorn and John Surtees both won their respective WDC's with the aid of their team-mates pulling over and letting them pass, now is that any different to Michael being let through to win by Ruebens or 'Fernando is quicker than you?" interstingly all drove for the same team, no idea what to make of that. I remember Ronnie was on a tight leash in 1978 and that was not in the red team. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Nov 10, 2019 12:32:02 GMT
Just to make it clear in my previous comment I wasn't saying that I liked "team orders", only that the emphasis was on having a clear N0. 2 driver made it easier to win championships. It is obviously preferable if that No. 2 is exceptionally good himself so that should anything befall the "team leader" then they can pick up wins , or take points away from the opposition.
"Team orders" have been part of the sport from the very outset, that is why they are called "Teams", however I despise "Team orders" when they are applied so cynically as has been the case so many times in recent years. Also the hypocrisy that some display, Tonto being one of the biggest exponents in recent years. To my way of thinking Tonto got badly burnt during the Hamilton/Rosberg years, and also proved very duplicitous in his dealings during that time.
It has to be acknowledged that Ferrari have always been a big exponent of "Team Orders" over the years but when one really studies the history of the sport most teams have done similar things. Ferrari probably being tarnished by the Schumacher years more than anything else, where we have Mr Brawn to answer for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Nov 10, 2019 16:56:44 GMT
Just to make it clear in my previous comment I wasn't saying that I liked "team orders", only that the emphasis was on having a clear N0. 2 driver made it easier to win championships. It is obviously preferable if that No. 2 is exceptionally good himself so that should anything befall the "team leader" then they can pick up wins , or take points away from the opposition. "Team orders" have been part of the sport from the very outset, that is why they are called "Teams", however I despise "Team orders" when they are applied so cynically as has been the case so many times in recent years. Also the hypocrisy that some display, Tonto being one of the biggest exponents in recent years. To my way of thinking Tonto got badly burnt during the Hamilton/Rosberg years, and also proved very duplicitous in his dealings during that time. It has to be acknowledged that Ferrari have always been a big exponent of "Team Orders" over the years but when one really studies the history of the sport most teams have done similar things. Ferrari probably being tarnished by the Schumacher years more than anything else, where we have Mr Brawn to answer for that. John Charles, I understood much later that I should have posted my diatribe separately rather than as a response. I knew your comment was correct and regret the clumsy placement. Mea culpa.
- Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Nov 10, 2019 19:01:19 GMT
With that being understood there can only be two reasons why MB were prepared to dispense with Ocon's services:- (1) He could have been deemed to be too feisty as a "team mate" to the all conquering Lewis Hamilton which would have disrupted the teams equilibrium. Or (2) Having seen all of the telemetry from what Esteban has done on the simulator they do not see him as the future, my guess being that George Russell has shown to be far more impressive and he is the future. Thinking about this a bit more I must say option 2 does sound more and more likely to me. Okay, team balance is important and Lewis and Valtteri get along but, but.... if the telemetry/simulator data from Esteban showed anything near Verstappen/Leclerc level, would they have let him go? Don't think so. |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Nov 10, 2019 19:08:46 GMT
Just to make it clear in my previous comment I wasn't saying that I liked "team orders", only that the emphasis was on having a clear N0. 2 driver made it easier to win championships. It is obviously preferable if that No. 2 is exceptionally good himself so that should anything befall the "team leader" then they can pick up wins , or take points away from the opposition. "Team orders" have been part of the sport from the very outset, that is why they are called "Teams", however I despise "Team orders" when they are applied so cynically as has been the case so many times in recent years. Also the hypocrisy that some display, Tonto being one of the biggest exponents in recent years. To my way of thinking Tonto got badly burnt during the Hamilton/Rosberg years, and also proved very duplicitous in his dealings during that time. It has to be acknowledged that Ferrari have always been a big exponent of "Team Orders" over the years but when one really studies the history of the sport most teams have done similar things. Ferrari probably being tarnished by the Schumacher years more than anything else, where we have Mr Brawn to answer for that. John Charles, I understood much later that I should have posted my diatribe separately rather than as a response. I knew your comment was correct and regret the clumsy placement. Mea culpa.
- Carl
Carl, No clumsiness on your part at all, it could easily have been construed that was my initial thoughts and that is why I followed up so as to make certain everyone who read it would know where I stood. I should have clarified in my earlier post. John Charles |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Nov 10, 2019 19:14:29 GMT
With that being understood there can only be two reasons why MB were prepared to dispense with Ocon's services:- (1) He could have been deemed to be too feisty as a "team mate" to the all conquering Lewis Hamilton which would have disrupted the teams equilibrium. Or (2) Having seen all of the telemetry from what Esteban has done on the simulator they do not see him as the future, my guess being that George Russell has shown to be far more impressive and he is the future. Thinking about this a bit more I must say option 2 does sound more and more likely to me. Okay, team balance is important and Lewis and Valtteri get along but, but.... if the telemetry/simulator data from Esteban showed anything near Verstappen/Leclerc level, would they have let him go? Don't think so. That is where I was going with my analysis, and therefore (2) is my preferred option. Esteban is very good but I do not see him as a Leclerc or Verstappen, as he was very even with Perez who is no more than second level at best. Although I did read a very interesting piece by Jensen Button who mentioned that Perez was the one team mate who shook him, or should I say surprised him, as to his speed in certain situations which I believe was in fast corners. So yes, I would say that Russell has more or less confirmed to MB that he is the real deal and in his hands lie their future, shame it is not next season as another in a Williams must be hugely depressing for the young man when he sees how land Norris and Alexander Albon are going. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2019 0:16:53 GMT
I think if you include Hulk then you really need to include Perez...who i feel is badly underrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Nov 12, 2019 19:03:46 GMT
I think if you include Hulk then you really need to include Perez...who i feel is badly underrated. Yes I would agree. I've always rated Perez more than the Hulk (I know most here won't agree but still). |
|
