I was talking about Ferrari leaders, be patient...Rom wasn't builded in one day ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Printable View
I was talking about Ferrari leaders, be patient...Rom wasn't builded in one day ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
the problem is that Rome already stands but the Mayor is not doing his job seriously enough! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by pino
i do think ferrari will bounce back from this as it just one race but i think with
a new man in charge will take sometime getting used to
kimi well...starting 16 he did panic though the race tryed to hard...why do you think he made so many mistakes
Massa well...the crash with DC was a racing incident in my view neither driver wanted to give way and DC going off was consequences
How can you say that just after one race ? :sQuote:
Originally Posted by ioan
http://english.gazzetta.it/Motor_spo...tofereng.shtml
ps: Yes finally gazzetta.it has an english version now :up:
That was a rare catastrophe. I hope it won't be repeated this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by pino
But then what will happen at the race after that, and the one after that? Todt can't be there all the time. The new people need time to bed in on race weekends, and making mistakes is part of this. How else will they (hopefully) learn?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
They could always hire ioan and learn from him :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
No no Pino. You've got it all wrong. From only one race we can easily see that the Ferrari's will never win a race again, DC will ALWAYS crash out, Bourdais will always have engine trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by pino
Apparently you can judge the whole season by what happens in Australia.
...and Jarno's car will broke in every single race ? :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
That or he will put it off the road or into another car DC style :DQuote:
Originally Posted by pino
That will only serve to distabilise the team, undermining/questioning their abilities, won't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
I don't really see what the big deal is here. Ferrari had a component failure in Kimi's car in practice, Massa and DC had their racing incident and Kimi took the car off road which may have had something to do with the engine failure. The only bad decision for them was not to bring Kimi in during the SC period. McLaren made dumb decisions last year also. Were the same people who are making a mountain out of a molehill now pointing out the big holes in McLaren's strategy?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I personally think the F1 teams should fire these people who are being paid lots to work race strategies out and hire some of the geniuses from the forum :) Funny how people on this forum can only point this stuff out AFTER it's happened. If they pointed these things out before the race or the season I'd be impressed.
I'm sure if Jean Todt was around Kimi wouldn't have had engine issues in qualifying, Massa would not have spun, DC would not have taken Massa out and Kimi's car would have made it around that corner and not gone through the kitty litter.
:dozey:
These are professionals. Not a bunch of school kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I wish I knew the lottery numbers before they were drawn........Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
How can you question three engine failures before the three engines that failed, failed, probably due to a failure? ;) :confused:
Are you sure?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Daniel is wrong, Montezemolo and Todt hired those people whilst walking in the city of Bologna in a sunny day...Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
You can't. These things happen. I wouldn't be surprised if the Ferrari engines are fine next weekend. If you want to see a PROPER trend of engine failures you need to look at when Peugeot used to supply engines. Now those engines WERE unreliable.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Not so sure now Pino has said what he said :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
As I've said several times in various threads, I quite agree and think it's WAY too early to write Ferrari off on the basis of Melbourne, or even criticise them too much. My point is that when you've appointed a new team of people, no matter whether it's in F1 or another line of work, that team needs time to gel while doing the job. Bringing someone from the past back often isn't a good idea, and certainly not this soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
But was it really a big team failure? The only one I spotted was not bringing Kimi in when they should have. Other than that it was square jawed Scot's, wayward engine parts and a somewhat wonky Finn that ruined their weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
No, it wasn't. That's one reason why I think any such action as bringing Todt back, even for one race weekend, is a complete over-reaction. In truth, I don't think it will happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Yeah sure! And if Hakkinen showed up in the McLaren pits next week end than they would also be destabilized. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Honestly, when one needs help than he/she should ask for it and learn from it instead of feeling "destabilized"!
One a side note I think you read to much tabloids over there. How else can you think that help can destabilize???
There was another mistake at the very beginning. They brought Massa in twice, once for changing the nose and once more for refueling, when it could have been done the first time around.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Wrong. Hakkinen was in the silver car. If a figure from the past comes into the silver car garage place it's called support. But if it's a red car it's destabilisation!!111111111111111111111111111111111 11111Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
That's rather different to the previous team boss showing up. If Hakkinen tried to show the two McLaren drivers how to drive, that would surely be unwelcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
By all means do it if things keep going wrong further down the line, but not yet. To do anything like this at this early stage would not be a big vote of confidence in the current set-up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Many business/management experts would surely say exactly the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
Wasn't the safety car out at that point, thereby preventing refuelling?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
You mean that id the SC is out they can't refuel, but they can still change a broken nose cone?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
If that's right than the rules are even stupider than I thought they are. I thought that the pit road is either closed or open, not that it's open for certain activities but not for others. These rules are so stupid it's difficult to imagine how did they come up with them.
You might be sarcastic, but I actually think you are right. Ferrari wasn't good last year at very hot GPs, and the story continues this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
I think they still have the fastest car out there, though McLaren is very close.
Tactics were very wrong this race... makes you wonder about the new personnel in charge...
I still think they have a very high chance of winning the WCC if they can minimise reliability issues.
Maybe if you read this one you get better picture of the ruleQuote:
Originally Posted by ioan
http://www.motorsportforums.com/foru...d.php?t=125551
Ferrari had seven full GP simulations during the winter test season, in three of them they had problems so they have had reliability issues even before OZ GP. Some of these problems are related to heat so would not be a surprise to see similar engine or other component failures due to high temperature in coming GPs in Malaysia and Bahrain as they don't have time to test and find a solution for the problem(s).Quote:
Originally Posted by aryan
remember all the problems Red Bull had cooling the Ferrari motors......Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJippo
.....before Newey insisted they switch to Renault......?
What does Adrian know about the Ferrari motor that Ferrari don't?
People - it's only one race! I believe something like this happened last year and look how that turned out....
It's not like RedBull is beating STR either! :p :Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
'06 was a bad start for Ferrari, with I think some piston issues, but they managed to take the championship to the wire that year, so all is not lost....Quote:
Originally Posted by N. Jones
That is exactly the case, unless my understanding of this rule is totally wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
It is indeed utterly stupid.
EDIT — I ought to clarify that, of course, refuelling CAN take place under the safety car but only after the race director has permitted it. When Massa came into the pits for the first time after his first corner accident, refuelling wasn't permitted but a repair was. Then, as far as I understand it, permission for cars to come in and refuel was given, so he came back in. Someone please correct this if it's wrong, but I don't think it was a Ferrari error.
Maybe Ferrari should ask Mike Coughlan and Nigel Stepney to find out! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
As far as I know you're right. It's the reason that Barrichello got the stop-go penalty. He had no choice but to refuel under the safety car as he would have run out of fuel. Honda chose to take the penalty instead of the DNF. It turned out to be academic as Rubens ran the red and got DQ'ed.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I can't see why they have banned refuelling under the safety car. I think it has something to do with not wanting the pits flooded with cars when the SC is called but what's the big deal with that?
As for Ferrari, three things have been questioned:
1. Strategy - On the face of it I'd say that they should have stopped Raikkonen under the SC but I think the stupid SC rules played a part in this one. Without being able to refuel straight away maybe the timing wasn't right? They certainly got the 1 stop strategy for Kimi right and made the correct call on switching Massa to an effective 1 stopper after his spin. The car is way easier on it's tyres than anything else out there and they took advantage of it.
2. Reliabilty - Definite problem here. Three of the six Ferrari engined cars DNF'd due to engine problems, including the two works cars. The other 3 retired due to accidents so we don't know how they would have fared. Hopefully it's something ancilliary to the engine and not a fundamental flaw with the unit.
3. Drivers - This area is easily fixed. The drivers simply have to stop throwing the car at the scenery. Errors are forgivable but making the same mistake twice? Not so much, Mr Raikkonen, not so much.
I know it's hard to tell from the way the race played out but the F2008 doesn't appear to be as quick as the MP4-23. The McLarens were over 0.4 seconds quicker on fastest race lap than Raikkonen and even further ahead of Massa. That's a concern. Traffic played a part and the Ferraris were on differeing strategies to the McLarens but it's something I'll be keeping a close eye on in Malaysia.
The overwhelming positive from the weekend was the way the F2008 used it's tyres. From memory the Ferraris were the only cars to start the race on the softs and they used them for more than half distance. Compare that to everybody else who went for two stints on the hards and a short final stint on the softs. This could be a huge advantage for the Reds as the season progresses.
Which is as it was last year. Compared to the Ferrari in '07, the McLaren ate its rears.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkmoon
Now, they will have worked on this for '08. Clearly, they can get the heat in tyres for qually, which Ferrari still seem to have a big problem with.
If their drivers are having issues keeping on the road when coming from behind, they really might struggle if other teams can show better qually performance.
Ferrari will be further hindered if they have to run lighter to make up the defecit.
One thing I noticed from Oz, was that Massa was using his fronts much quicker than Kimi, so they might have put the weight too far forward this year.....
That was only on Lewis' car.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
It didn't look like that to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
They both had the left front tire with more wear than the right one, but other than that it was pretty much the same.
And given that they went half +, of the race on the softer tires compared to the McCheats using them only for the last stint for not even half as many laps, I would say that the Ferrari have the bets balanced cars and this will be obvious as soon as they stop stuffing things up like kids.
Talk about reading too much into ONE race.....Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko