Nico Rosberg retires from F1
Discussion
PeterY27 said:
what i want to know is what everyone thinks is a better way to retire?
Better for who? What Nico has done is the best for him. To retire at the top of his game and nicely in the afterglow of his WDC. Two fingers to his team, buy out his contract and off into the nice safe cash lined sunset.For Mercedes, the best way would have been for Nico to work through the contract that he's just signed and leave when that expires, help finish the development of the 2017 car, help the team towards another WCC, get to the end and follow on with some consultancy and a 'brand ambassador' role.
The worse way for all concerned is to stay in a sport when your heart is no longer in it.
sparta6 said:
ferrisbueller said:
Ironically, the majority of those things weren't against the rules but were so good rules were changed.
The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
What specific cheating are you referring to ?The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
I would say hidden traction control and modified refuelling rigs would be examples of cheating in the same way that adding lead shot to water tanks after a race is cheating.
Active suspension, CVT and double diffusers are examples of ingenuity.
37chevy said:
Just shows Rosberg's total disrespect to the team and complete lack of class.jm doc said:
37chevy said:
Just shows Rosberg's total disrespect to the team and complete lack of class.
Behave!
Disastrous said:
jm doc said:
37chevy said:
Just shows Rosberg's total disrespect to the team and complete lack of class.Behave!
All jokes aside... there's many who think as Lauda does. Why sign a new contract if you weren't going to race again?
Disastrous said:
jm doc said:
37chevy said:
Just shows Rosberg's total disrespect to the team and complete lack of class.Behave!
t.Hungrymc said:
The final sentence : He's annoyed that they won't have two WDC drivers (extra value if both have won a WDC in the Merc obviously). I'm surprised he said that, might even revive a few conspiracy theorists.
To be honest, Mercedes confirmed those theories themselves didn't they when they actually gave a formal instruction several times during the last race of the season to Rosberg's only rival telling him that he had to help Rosberg win the title, rather than let him try and win it himself.Wolfe and Lauda were visibly desperate men that day, under huge pressure which surely could only have come directly from the Mercedes board itself. And roping Paddy Lowe into making those radio calls was shameful.
Nice to see them reaping the rewards...
ferrisbueller said:
sparta6 said:
ferrisbueller said:
Ironically, the majority of those things weren't against the rules but were so good rules were changed.
The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
What specific cheating are you referring to ?The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
I would say hidden traction control and modified refuelling rigs would be examples of cheating in the same way that adding lead shot to water tanks after a race is cheating.
Active suspension, CVT and double diffusers are examples of ingenuity.
sparta6 said:
ferrisbueller said:
sparta6 said:
ferrisbueller said:
Ironically, the majority of those things weren't against the rules but were so good rules were changed.
The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
What specific cheating are you referring to ?The things which were referred to, some of which were on that list, were against existing rules.
There's a difference between ingenuity and cheating.
I would say hidden traction control and modified refuelling rigs would be examples of cheating in the same way that adding lead shot to water tanks after a race is cheating.
Active suspension, CVT and double diffusers are examples of ingenuity.
ferrisbueller said:
Nope. Can't find any concrete documentary evidence of those items.sparta6 said:
ferrisbueller said:
Nope. Can't find any concrete documentary evidence of those items.ferrisbueller said:
The Independent, Saturday 3, 1994
Brawn's claim that the system had not been used during the 1994 season could neither be proved nor disproved; the FIA's decision to publicise their findings suggested that they had their suspicions. After all, if Launch Control was now redundant, why had it had been left sitting in the software? Because, the Benetton people said, the task of isolating and removing it was one of impossible complexity. (The concealment, they added, was simply to prevent somebody switching it on by mistake.)
In the very next race, at Hockenheim, Schumacher suffered his first retirement of the season in front of his home crowd. And Jos Verstappen's car briefly disappeared inside a fireball when fuel spurted out of a hose and ignited on the hot engine - the result, said the equipment's manufacturers, of Benetton's illicit removal of a filter, by which they speeded up the fuel-flow (perhaps saving a second per stop, which Senna would have been interested to hear) but which had allowed a piece of dirt to jam a valve open. In their own defence, Benetton claimed that the modification had been verbally agreed with the FIA's technical observer, and commissioned an independent investigation which, unsurprisingly, exonerated them.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff