Ferrari criticise new teams.....
Discussion
Luca Di Montzemelo has been cricising the new teams again, claiming they have no place in F1. I used to be a Ferrari fan, but finally my patience has been tested.
I was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut up.
I was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut up.
Redlake27 said:
Luca Di Montzemelo has been cricising the new teams again, claiming they have no place in F1. I used to be a Ferrari fan, but finally my patience has been tested.
I was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut up.
It's more to do with them wanting three car teams than anything. However; I do agree with your rant I was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut up.
Redlake27 said:
Luca Di Montzemelo has been cricising the new teams again, claiming they have no place in F1. I used to be a Ferrari fan, but finally my patience has been tested.
I was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut the f
k up.
EFAI was a Ferrari fan in 1980 when they were struggling to break the top 20. I was a Ferrari fan in 1986 when their cars often finished 2 laps behind the Williams. I was even a Ferrari fan in 1992 when Capelli and Alesi could rarely get within 4 percent of pole position.
In fact, I was a Ferrari fan in many seasons when they were further away from the pace than Lotus, HRT and Virgin have been this year.
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Luca. Shut the f
k up.
Redlake27 said:
Oh, and I think Luca started managing Ferrari in 1973, when they were so bad that even rentadrivers wouldn't sign for the team.
Jacky Ickx drove for them in '73, the next season they had Lauda and Regazzoni. All superb drivers.
It occurs that Ferrari may have been concentrating on their World Sportscar Championship in '72 perhaps more than their F1 development for '73.
They won every race they entered that year.
I can see what he means to an extent. The new teams are amateurs. The likes of Ferrari, RBR, McL, Renault, etc are very professional. If it wasn't for the rules about budgets, wind tunnel, testing and engine power these teams would have been lapped after two laps. Given these limitations, should they be so slow?
The fault lies with that bloke who used to throw his weight around before Todt took over. There is no way teams can brush up the required skills to compete in lower formulae. It is almost as if the bloke in charge deliberately ran F2 and F3 down to a sort of glorified TVR Tuscan Challenge. So top that extent I'm with him.
That said, there's no option at the moment (apart from three car teams and we don't want that). What Monte should do is press for better structure to the sport. Then, perhaps, there would be a selection of teams trying to get in the big time but with necessary CVs.
We have the FIA picking up the discarded crumbs of GT1 from the ACO and suggesting it would make a great basis for WSC. It's got that bad.
The FIA has really fallen down. Todt has his work cut out at the moment and there are no short-term fixes. Monte should accept this and work with what we've been lumbered with. Especially as, as those with long memroies have said above, Ferrari have been back-markers in the past.
Todt needs to pull his finger out. Everyone knows what a mess he inherited but his job is to move F1 forward. There is also WRC, WSC, WTC and the other disciplines which were run down over recent years, to save from the brink. Establishing F2 as a feeer series for F1 will probably have to wait for some time.
The fault lies with that bloke who used to throw his weight around before Todt took over. There is no way teams can brush up the required skills to compete in lower formulae. It is almost as if the bloke in charge deliberately ran F2 and F3 down to a sort of glorified TVR Tuscan Challenge. So top that extent I'm with him.
That said, there's no option at the moment (apart from three car teams and we don't want that). What Monte should do is press for better structure to the sport. Then, perhaps, there would be a selection of teams trying to get in the big time but with necessary CVs.
We have the FIA picking up the discarded crumbs of GT1 from the ACO and suggesting it would make a great basis for WSC. It's got that bad.
The FIA has really fallen down. Todt has his work cut out at the moment and there are no short-term fixes. Monte should accept this and work with what we've been lumbered with. Especially as, as those with long memroies have said above, Ferrari have been back-markers in the past.
Todt needs to pull his finger out. Everyone knows what a mess he inherited but his job is to move F1 forward. There is also WRC, WSC, WTC and the other disciplines which were run down over recent years, to save from the brink. Establishing F2 as a feeer series for F1 will probably have to wait for some time.
A bit of selective memory by our Italian friend but I agree with Derek, there is an element of truth to what he says amongst his amnesia. 
Regarding the FIA, personally I think it has all the issues of 'absolute power' Fine when the grass is green but IMO the FIA is in serious drought territory and motorsport is suffering all the more for it.
Todt certainly has a task on his hands not to make a pigs dinner of things.
Regarding the FIA, personally I think it has all the issues of 'absolute power' Fine when the grass is green but IMO the FIA is in serious drought territory and motorsport is suffering all the more for it.
Todt certainly has a task on his hands not to make a pigs dinner of things.
Derek Smith said:
I can see what he means to an extent. The new teams are amateurs. The likes of Ferrari, RBR, McL, Renault, etc are very professional. If it wasn't for the rules about budgets, wind tunnel, testing and engine power these teams would have been lapped after two laps. Given these limitations, should they be so slow?
I think calling them 'amateurs' is a huge insult. In their first years, Red Bull and BAR were hardly paragons of speed; now one of them has won a World Championship and the other has the fastest car on the grid this season. Getting the right people and resources in place is partly about money and partly about availability and timing.I would prefer a grid of racing teams in it for the motorsport than solely manufacturers using F1 as an advertising board. I seem to remember Williams and McLaren being in it for those reasons and not many people would declare them 'amateurs' for having that objective (though I accept McLaren are now moving in a commercialist direction).
Yes, F1 has gone too far in stifling car development and design freedoms but, at the same time, I think larger grids of varied teams all able to compete in one way or another is more valuable a spectacle than a handful of teams with 3 cars a piece orchestrating a bore fest.
If he's talking about speed then I remember some bloke called Badoer that was clunking around at the back of the grid and would have been 'had' by the newer teams.
Just bring back the 107% rule and then STFU.
Anyway - all he is doing is passing on Failonso's moan about getting taken by the McLarens last week.
Just bring back the 107% rule and then STFU.
Anyway - all he is doing is passing on Failonso's moan about getting taken by the McLarens last week.
Asterix said:
If he's talking about speed then I remember some bloke called Badoer that was clunking around at the back of the grid and would have been 'had' by the newer teams.
Just bring back the 107% rule and then STFU.
Anyway - all he is doing is passing on Failonso's moan about getting taken by the McLarens last week.
All he's doing is moving attention away from his own team's relatively mediocre performance over the past two seasons. Simple straight forward commercial behaviour. I'd like to hear him moan more and more because, the more he does it, the worse a job his team must be doing.Just bring back the 107% rule and then STFU.
Anyway - all he is doing is passing on Failonso's moan about getting taken by the McLarens last week.
10 Pence Short said:
I think calling them 'amateurs' is a huge insult. In their first years, Red Bull and BAR were hardly paragons of speed; now one of them has won a World Championship and the other has the fastest car on the grid this season. Getting the right people and resources in place is partly about money and partly about availability and timing.
I would prefer a grid of racing teams in it for the motorsport than solely manufacturers using F1 as an advertising board. I seem to remember Williams and McLaren being in it for those reasons and not many people would declare them 'amateurs' for having that objective (though I accept McLaren are now moving in a commercialist direction).
Yes, F1 has gone too far in stifling car development and design freedoms but, at the same time, I think larger grids of varied teams all able to compete in one way or another is more valuable a spectacle than a handful of teams with 3 cars a piece orchestrating a bore fest.
The biggest change in the time I've been watching F1 is the level of professionalism in the sport. The originators were, to a great extent, Williams and then McLaren. It gave them all but ten years of domination. Other teams struggled until they realised that the only way to compete was to copy. Ferrari, in a way, went one better, reducing the idea of team to basics.I would prefer a grid of racing teams in it for the motorsport than solely manufacturers using F1 as an advertising board. I seem to remember Williams and McLaren being in it for those reasons and not many people would declare them 'amateurs' for having that objective (though I accept McLaren are now moving in a commercialist direction).
Yes, F1 has gone too far in stifling car development and design freedoms but, at the same time, I think larger grids of varied teams all able to compete in one way or another is more valuable a spectacle than a handful of teams with 3 cars a piece orchestrating a bore fest.
(Note that I know other teams moved the sport in that direction before Williams and Mclaren. But those two fed off one-another and became the teams not to beat, as that was too much to hope for, but to emulate.)
I would suggest that Ron Dennis, Frank Williams and patrick Head epitomise to me what professional level sport is all about. All of them love F1. Yet they have moved it onto another plain.
I don't want a full grid if those at the back hold others up. The place to learn the necessary skills and application is at a lower level of the sport. This should be F2 and even F3, stepping stones for aspirants to the highest level.
I remember Hunt saying that he didn't believe it when his team told him he had won the WDC because he couldn't trust them to count the laps properly.
We fondly mention Minardi now but I can remember exasperation in the tone of Hunt, and others, when the car got in the way of real racers.
I accept that it is not the teams' fault that they haven't had an apprenticeship so to speak. Nor the opportunity for one. It was deliberate policy at the time, for reasons that many have speculated about. And, as the situation exists at the moment, I've got to say some have done a brilliant job.
But what if all the teams were performing at the same level as Mercedes? Now I'd love to see a full grid like that.
Over recent years F1 was blighted by politics. And the result is, in part, the current grid and its variations in performance. There's nothing any of us can do about it. We are stuck with it.
The regulations have been fiddled with this season to close the performance gap 'artificially' but, in essence, it has made little difference apart from those at the top. How much more sensible to limit the performance gap by increasing the professionalism of the teams.
I will modify my decription of the new teams. They are not amateurs and i was wrong to describe them so. However, in comparison to those at the top they are amateurish. They are not, as you suggest, 'able to compete' but merely able to share the track. A big difference I believe.
I used to be a Ferrari fan (of the team in general) but of late they do seem to be a little bitter and soul less.
On the 107% rule, I would prefer to see that expanded to 115% and open up the field to even more (two car) teams. More cars on track, more happening all the time, more overtaking and more drivers in general. The chaps at the front would have more work to do getting through the back markers and less chance to just charge off.
On the 107% rule, I would prefer to see that expanded to 115% and open up the field to even more (two car) teams. More cars on track, more happening all the time, more overtaking and more drivers in general. The chaps at the front would have more work to do getting through the back markers and less chance to just charge off.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff