Over MS' No.1 position in the team (no such in the contract)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Ron and Norbert said that they think KR will stay at McLaren for most of last season too, are they also liars?
Did you ever think that they all knew the truth but for commercial reasons couldn't say it?

Last year Rubens declared that he had no No 2 clause and got equal equipment from Ferrari when he was already a Honda man, did he lie too?

Don't measure the truth with 2 different weight sets.

---

Ron and Norbert liars? Absolutely. They knew it all when they signed Alonso. And youre spot on the reason: if youre looking or negotiating a new sponsor you sure as hell wont say that youre loosing a top driver.

Rubens didnt have to have No2 clause, if Michael had No1 clause :)
And just FYI on F1 driver mentality: they all think they are the fastest out there. They will never admit being 2nd class material. Never. Just remember what Ralf said a few days ago being one of the top 3 drivers. Has he gone mental? No, he really believes that.

And your last comment I dont even begin to analyze. You are talking about thruth, Im talking about facts. Your truth seems to deny and contradict every possible fact. And that should not be called a truth, cause theres a much better word for it. Faith.

And I still cant get it: why is having no1 status such a bad thing? Id love the Finnish guys to be in a position, where they can make such a claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzeidzei

And I still cant get it: why is having no1 status such a bad thing? Id love the Finnish guys to be in a position, where they can make such a claim.

---

No one said it's a bad thing, just that he earned it with his driving not on the contract.

I've had enough arguing with people who seem to not read and understand (or do not want to) my posts, but only reply because of their opposite beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

You're farting against thunder ioan. Too many idiots, not enough common sense :down:

---

And we idiots of course dreamt about Austria 2002 :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I bet you have no proof that it was in his team mate's contract!

---

And I bet you have no proof that it wasn't!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Actually MS had better equipment only 2 times, he had the F2003 GA and the F 2005, earlier than RB.

---

Only two times :s How many times is the norm, how many times have ANY other team done this in the past ten years?

It twirls around
It spins around
It whirls around
It never stops!

:rotate: :s pin: :s pinhead:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

It twirls around
It spins around
It whirls around
It never stops!

:rotate: :s pin: :s pinhead:

---

So true :rotflmao:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I've had enough arguing with people who seem to not read and understand (or do not want to) my posts, but only reply because of their opposite beliefs.

---

Would you prefer to argue with people who completely agree with you and post only to strenghten your points? :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janneppi

Would you prefer to argue with people who completely agree with you and post only to strenghten your points? :p :

---

No, no, no! :D

But some people should and could read and try to understand a post before replying to it ( and I'm not talking about you! ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

Only two times :s How many times is the norm, how many times have ANY other team done this in the past ten years?

---

What if 1 out of those 2 times RB didn't want to get the new equipment? I might be wrong but I recall that in Bahrain 2005 he chose to go with the old car.

As for RB's contract he said it last year that it was no no.2 clause in it, happy now? BTW if you want a link you'll have to google it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

What if 1 out of those 2 times RB didn't want to get the new equipment?

---

What! You can't possibly be serious, that's an outrageous statement even comming from you. About what Rubens have said or not, you didn't believe Fontana when he said he was ordered by Todt to hold Villeneuve up, why do you choose to believe Rubens?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

And we idiots of course dreamt about Austria 2002 :rolleyes:

---

That was to secure a WDC. Not contractual #1 driver status, but attempting to secure the WDC as soon as possible. But I dont expect you to be able to differentiate between the two :(

P.S. Mclaren did it in OZ with far less outcry than the Ferrari incident. Coincidence or a fact that there is an anti-Ferrari sentiment out there :?:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

That was to secure a WDC. Not contractual #1 driver status, but attempting to secure the WDC as soon as possible. But I dont expect you to be able to differentiate between the two :(

---

You're damn right I'm not. What's #1 status for if not to secure WDC? Are you for real :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

No one said it's a bad thing, just that he earned it with his driving not on the contract.

I've had enough arguing with people who seem to not read and understand (or do not want to) my posts, but only reply because of their opposite beliefs.

---

Actually your biggest point is that MS never had such a clause in his contract. And this is something you just cannot know. You know this and I know this.

No one has said that he didnt earn his position with his driving. That doesnt mean he didnt have that on his contract. No one is arguing against MS being the most successful driver in F1 history (probably for all times), hes certainly earned his merits.

But you are again confusing beliefs and facts. You dont know MS did not have that kind of clause in his contract. We know for a fact that for years Ferrari acted like he had that clause. And as long you actually see the contract, you have to judge by what you see. If it looks like an apple and tastes like an apple, it has to be an apple, right? Even if Ross says its really not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

You're damn right I'm not. What's #1 status for if not to secure WDC? Are you for real :confused:

---

Like I said, I dont expect you to be able to differentiate between #1 status on contract and a driver trying to securing a WDC when the other is out of the running. Your mind is made up, get on with your life ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

What! You can't possibly be serious, that's an outrageous statement even comming from you. About what Rubens have said or not, you didn't believe Fontana when he said he was ordered by Todt to hold Villeneuve up, why do you choose to believe Rubens?

---

You might want to put things into a context and analyze them before posting.
What had Rubens, a Honda man, to win from stating he had no no.2 clause in his contract? In fact it meant that he acknowledged that he was inferior to MS because he couldn't best him in equal equipment and conditions!

Now think about what Fontana had to gain from contributing to global heating with his comments? Lot's of media coverage and all that comes from that. Plus his claims were rubbished by Peter Sauber (the one who could have ordered him something, unlike Todt).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzeidzei

Actually your biggest point is that MS never had such a clause in his contract. And this is something you just cannot know. You know this and I know this.

---

I gave you a quote from one of the highest placed Ferrari team members, the 2nd after Jean Todt, who said he didn't know about that being written in MS's contract, still you say it's only what I believe. Not that you came with any kind of proof, the smallest possible (beside calling them all liars).

So once again, read what I post before answering my posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

Like I said, I dont expect you to be able to differentiate between #1 status on contract and a driver trying to securing a WDC when the other is out of the running.

---

But Rubens wasn't "out of the running" in Austria 2002 (6th race out of 17). And I say it again; no, I most certainly can not differentiate between #1 status and securing WDC for a specific driver, because there simply is none. Fact, end of story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I gave you a quote from one of the highest placed Ferrari team members, the 2nd after Jean Todt, who said he didn't know about that being written in MS's contract, still you say it's only what I believe. Not that you came with any kind of proof, the smallest possible (beside calling them all liars).

---

You didn't provide any "proof" either, because even if Brawn 'was not aware of' doesn't prove it wasn't so. Ioan, why are you so eager to prove that Shumi was not #1, a futile mission I'd say, haven't we all gone through this a dozen times already?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

But Rubens wasn't "out of the running" in Austria 2002 (6th race out of 17).

---

:laugh: You're right, he was going to destroy Schumi that year with a superb come from behind performance :laugh:

Bye bye Mr VresiBerba :wave:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

:laugh: You're right, he was going to destroy Schumi that year with a superb come from behind performance :laugh:

---

:rolleyes: 2002 was by far Rubens' best season in Formula 1 to date and beyond, but Ferrari's rotten reliabillity... hmpf, let me rephrase that; Rubens' rotten reliabillity is what put Shumi so far ahead at the 6th race. And really, why are you laughing, Ferrari shot themselves in the foot EXACTLY the same way in 1999, by allowing Shumi to score instead of Irvine, and boy, did they not learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

You didn't provide any "proof" either, because even if Brawn 'was not aware of' doesn't prove it wasn't so. Ioan, why are you so eager to prove that Shumi was not #1, a futile mission I'd say, haven't we all gone through this a dozen times already?

---

As I already said I don't try to prove he wasn't no.1 I just brought up a quote that says he wasn't a contractual no.1. But many people around here seem to be very hurt because of this and chose, like you, not to read what I posted and attack with the suppositions they have in the corner of their minds.

For me this thread proved what I thought about certain people in this forum so I'll stop here.
So as 555 said it, :wave: Vresi!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

For me this thread proved what I thought about certain people in this forum so I'll stop here.

---

YOU started this thread and you can't even stand up for your own believes, chicken :laugh:

Do you honestly believe that Ferrari are going to admit to favouring one driver over the other :?:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harsha

Do you honestly believe that Ferrari are going to admit to favouring one driver over the other :?:

---

That wouldn't be surprising given their stance behind Austria 2002, but all we have here is Brawn, a former technical director saying he doean't know (is/was not aware). Had it been Todt though, he would most certainly know and that he would either tell the truth or a lie.

What we have now is not even worth debating since all Brawn said is he wasn't aware, ie. neither true nor false.

Ever since Schumacher joined Ferrari,the one driver policy has been followed,whether it is written in contract or was it a "gentleman's" agreement doesn't make the difference....

the fact remains that Schumacher was favoured over Rubens Barrichello in Ferrari,it doesn't matter whether he gained the number 1 status through his performances or through a contract.That could also be a reason why apart from FM to some extent,Schumacher never had decent team mates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harsha

Ever since Schumacher joined Ferrari,the one driver policy has been followed,whether it is written in contract or was it a "gentleman's" agreement doesn't make the difference....

the fact remains that Schumacher was favoured over Rubens Barrichello in Ferrari,it doesn't matter whether he gained the number 1 status through his performances or through a contract.That could also be a reason why apart from FM to some extent,Schumacher never had decent team mates.

---

Now you're just being anti-Ferrari :D

i've been anti ferrari ever since the chin joined them :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

and boy, did they not learn.

---

They went on to win 5 WDC and 5 CC between 2000 and 2004.

Here's to not learning :beer:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

They went on to win 5 WDC and 5 CC between 2000 and 2004.

Here's to not learning :beer:

---

Big deal! A title in a renault or mclaren means more than these 10. Ferrari is a dirty team and I would never believe what MS, Brawn or JT says. Lying and cheating is what they do best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eu

Big deal! A title in a renault or mclaren means more than these 10. Ferrari is a dirty team and I would never believe what MS, Brawn or JT says. Lying and cheating is what they do best.

---

Reality check for you. FACT: every team in F1 cheats. However, they dont call it cheating, they call it bending the rules. By your sumation then, every team in F1 is a dirty team.

He's not even racing any longer and we still have this?

<pit to Rubens> slow down Rubens, MS is going to pass you

<Rubens to pit> why?

<pit to Rubens> he is faster than you Rubens

<Rubens to pit> then why is he behind me?

:laugh:


Contract or not, Ferrari have in recent history favored and done whatever they can to support the driver they feel has a better chance at the season. If in fact they supported the faster driver on any given day then there would have never been team orders when they were allowed, or pit mishaps and sudden lap time changes when they were not.

Most teams did and still do it, but to claim that Ferrari was the only exception is really a stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

Reality check for you. FACT: every team in F1 cheats.

---

That would by default imply that Ferrari was cheating when they let Shumi by Rubens in Austria 2002. Do you wish to persuit this path?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eu

...I would never believe what MS, Brawn or JT says. Lying and cheating is what they do best.

---

Poor little boy... :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W8&C

Poor little boy... :(

---

Hilarious.... trying to be sarcastic WC?

Is this a discussion thread or a grudge match?

Besides, should be in the H+N forum.

The current and past F1 is a transparent partition, it will unavoidably lead to the past when you are talking about present, history goes continuously.

I think you can go on talking as long as it is legal of age ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malllen

Is this a discussion thread or a grudge match?

---

It started as a discussion thread about a fairly old and hot topic, it even managed to stay a discussion thread till a certain moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VresiBerba

That would by default imply that Ferrari was cheating when they let Shumi by Rubens in Austria 2002. Do you wish to persuit this path?

---

Letting your team mate through was not illegal in F1 in 2002. How was it cheating :?: It was within the rules and out in the open.

The question now is, do you want to pursue this path :?:

is it within the spirit of racing....

or do we follow the rule book with no questions asked