Well, yeah!! if they had consistently been told they were #2 and instructed to "move over", they would also have looked inferior.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Printable View
Well, yeah!! if they had consistently been told they were #2 and instructed to "move over", they would also have looked inferior.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
actually it does as his "amazing ability" was boosted by poor drivers in the second seat of the team.Quote:
Originally Posted by F1boat
had he done the same with hill villeneuve hakkinen alonso or raikkonen then there would be no denial of his superiority. as it stands to me he is not the best.
:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by ratonmacias
How do you know that the drivers you mention were not offered a seat along MS and turned it down knowing they will lose in a direct battle?Quote:
Originally Posted by ratonmacias
You just look to your side of the story and post rubbish you can't substantiate.
What is sure is that at 41 MS is still out there racing in a top team and I understand that it bothers you when you think that JV has to be happy with his guitar.
Nor should he.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
It is only internet critics who give a toss about it.
Common sense says there is no point having a team-mate capable of challenging as it just makes the job harder.
The job, by the way, is to win. There are no degrees of victory.
Michael was in a position to recieve outright No1 status and only a fool would not have taken that opportunity if they were offered it.
No other driver would have turned it down had they been good enough to have been made the offer.
I don't think anyone can argue against that. My only uncertainty here is whether SchM was offered the #1 spot or whether he insisted on the #1 spot at Ferrari. But the number of wins for both is proof that it worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
as for the thread's question, it depends on your view of success. if by success you expect the sort of results and performances from before, i say no, he will not succeed.
however if you think being competitive would be a mark of success for his comeback (which i do) then yes, he already has been successful. he may fight for a few wins, if the car is up to it.
for me the comeback is already a success, even if he appears to have lost a little (and i mean a little) of the old magic, to be competitive amongst the current crop is better than most new drivers manage
Thinking about this quite seriously, let's look at this from a totally different perspective. Just suppose that the FIA has not "outlawed" team tactics, and we are running a team which is as good as the other top two teams, but we have just hired a new sensational driver called, for argument sake, Gary Ablett. This guy Gary is really good and can drive at least .2 seconds faster around any track than anyone else. Now we hear there is another reasonably good driver called Cameron Ling who is desperate to get into a good team. Now we know that if we can have full support from Cameron for Gary, then we will win the premiership. So we ask Cameron if he will drive his races to support Gary, to help him win if at all possible, and he agrees.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
And we win both premierships. So! what's wrong with that?
I don't disagree with any of your points here. But maybe you should be reminded that you yourself are also, in posting on here on various subjects, nothing more than an 'internet critic' either.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamburello
Just as a matter of interest, what makes you think there will be any Bunsen vs Hamilton battles? :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88