The Ferrari thread !

[Dave B]

Ferrari need to replace Alonso next year, or accept that they not are a top brand in F1 any moore.

Eh? :\

I'm no fan of Alonso, but even I recognise that he's one of the top drivers on the grid, a double world champion, and in some areas a marketing masterstroke. Who would you replace him with - other than drivers already under contract such as Vettel, Hamilton or Kubica?

[Retro Formula 1]

Eh? :\

I'm no fan of Alonso, but even I recognise that he's one of the top drivers on the grid, a double world champion, and in some areas a marketing masterstroke. Who would you replace him with - other than drivers already under contract such as Vettel, Hamilton or Kubica?

I think we all need to learn to ignore her. It is very rare that she offers any constructive contribution to the forum but just posts these pathetic one liners that have as much to do with reality as the Labour Governments economic policy. In fact, there seems to be a lot of similarity

Alonso is one of the 2 best drivers out there today and Ferrari will always be the top Brand in F1 until a time they decide to withdraw.

[Bagwan]

I think we all need to learn to ignore her. It is very rare that she offers any constructive contribution to the forum but just posts these pathetic one liners that have as much to do with reality as the Labour Governments economic policy. In fact, there seems to be a lot of similarity

Alonso is one of the 2 best drivers out there today and Ferrari will always be the top Brand in F1 until a time they decide to withdraw.

She has her opinion .
Ignore her , or debate with her .

Demeaning her in public for a different opinion , or a different way of expressing herself , is petty at best .
PM her if you have an issue , please .


I'd love to see Kimi back , but he seems to be having too much fun rallying .
And Alonso fits Ferrari much better than Kimi ever did .
He displays the temper and passion needed to boil the Latin blood .

[Shifter]

This forced-off debate needs one clarifying point...these controversies always arise due to an off-track pass, and always at chicanes. Chicanes are extremely difficult places to overtake if the overtaking driver is on the outside going into the first turn of a chicane. The driver who is being overtaken, when they have the inside line of a chicane, has the unique opportunity therein as a chicane allows them to be ahead, claiming the line legitimately and has the right to go for the apex on the exit turn of the chicane. We have seen this scenario and controversy play out in Spa, Hungary and Suzuka in the recent past. In every occurance, the overtaking driver attempted the pass on the outside of the first turn of the chicane, went off, took the position and was penalized. This is the precedent, and I agree it is the correct one.

The only way to make a pass work in a chicane is to be on the inside of the first corner. If you are on the outside, you will be forced off every time.

[Bagwan]

This forced-off debate needs one clarifying point...these controversies always arise due to an off-track pass, and always at chicanes. Chicanes are extremely difficult places to overtake if the overtaking driver is on the outside going into the first turn of a chicane. The driver who is being overtaken, when they have the inside line of a chicane, has the unique opportunity therein as a chicane allows them to be ahead, claiming the line legitimately and has the right to go for the apex on the exit turn of the chicane. We have seen this scenario and controversy play out in Spa, Hungary and Suzuka in the recent past. In every occurance, the overtaking driver attempted the pass on the outside of the first turn of the chicane, went off, took the position and was penalized. This is the precedent, and I agree it is the correct one.

The only way to make a pass work in a chicane is to be on the inside of the first corner. If you are on the outside, you will be forced off every time.

I think , to an extent , it depends on how tight the chicane is , but I don't think there are any on the calendar that are so tight that two cars cannot make it through at the same time .

Even though it might be said that you have a distinct advantage going into any given corner , there is still the obligation to allow room for a driver that is beside you on track .

In this particular case , Ferrari were told that they would review it after the race . This points to the fact that there was at least some question about whether he would need to give the place back , and his positoning having been beside Robert was what was in contention .

Though I agree that the place might easily have been given back , and controversy avoided altogether , it seems as though the decision to discuss was rather forthrightly dropped when ugly timing for Ferrari was best .

They said they would discuss after the race .
Since the timing of the SC was in the middle of it all , a delay would be understandable . The situation was already a mess , so to sort it out a good while after the SC would allow for some debate , and also space the cars out to a state a little more like it was before the SC , and seem to make more sense .
Then , the penalty might have been more fitting for the crime .


Kubica slid deep , in order to keep Fernando at bay , but Alonso had committed to going outside .
It simply was two different plans , that couldn't both work .

As they were both legitimate plans , though , I feel there was room for debate about what to do .

As it turned out , it ends up being a penalty far worse than intended , for an infraction that was debatable in the first place .
And , that debate was suggested by the body that issued the penalty only moments later .

Does it sound fair to you ?

[ioan]

I think , to an extent , it depends on how tight the chicane is , but I don't think there are any on the calendar that are so tight that two cars cannot make it through at the same time .

Even though it might be said that you have a distinct advantage going into any given corner , there is still the obligation to allow room for a driver that is beside you on track .

In this particular case , Ferrari were told that they would review it after the race . This points to the fact that there was at least some question about whether he would need to give the place back , and his positoning having been beside Robert was what was in contention .

Though I agree that the place might easily have been given back , and controversy avoided altogether , it seems as though the decision to discuss was rather forthrightly dropped when ugly timing for Ferrari was best .

They said they would discuss after the race .
Since the timing of the SC was in the middle of it all , a delay would be understandable . The situation was already a mess , so to sort it out a good while after the SC would allow for some debate , and also space the cars out to a state a little more like it was before the SC , and seem to make more sense .
Then , the penalty might have been more fitting for the crime .


Kubica slid deep , in order to keep Fernando at bay , but Alonso had committed to going outside .
It simply was two different plans , that couldn't both work .

As they were both legitimate plans , though , I feel there was room for debate about what to do .

As it turned out , it ends up being a penalty far worse than intended , for an infraction that was debatable in the first place .
And , that debate was suggested by the body that issued the penalty only moments later .

Does it sound fair to you ?

You are right, this was another example of the typical nonsense decision process that we have got from Charlie and his stewards for quite some time now.

[airshifter]

I think , to an extent , it depends on how tight the chicane is , but I don't think there are any on the calendar that are so tight that two cars cannot make it through at the same time .

Even though it might be said that you have a distinct advantage going into any given corner , there is still the obligation to allow room for a driver that is beside you on track .

I can agree that any chicane on the calendar can fit two cars, but certainly can't agree that the car leading has an obligation to allow room for a driver trying to overtake.

It is the obligation of the car overtaking to take control of the line by leading into the corner, and until that point the one allowed move to block can be executed by the leading car. I'm not saying that at any time should a driver intentionally take someone else off the track during such a pass, even though the rules allow it. But if the lead driver has already committed to the line, he can't simply adjust in a split second due to the fact that someone charges up on the outside.


One of the best chicane passes in years has been Montoya taking Schumacher at Spa in 2004. A brilliant well timed move, showing just how well it can be done.



But in this case, I think Fernando and everyone in the Ferrari team should have known instantly that the pass was not legit, and instructed Alonso to give back the position. Though I agree 100% that the delay and process was completely flawed in handing out the penalty, it should have been avoided by the team and/or driver before it reached that point.

[rohanweb]

I can agree that any chicane on the calendar can fit two cars, but certainly can't agree that the car leading has an obligation to allow room for a driver trying to overtake.

It is the obligation of the car overtaking to take control of the line by leading into the corner, and until that point the one allowed move to block can be executed by the leading car. I'm not saying that at any time should a driver intentionally take someone else off the track during such a pass, even though the rules allow it. But if the lead driver has already committed to the line, he can't simply adjust in a split second due to the fact that someone charges up on the outside.


One of the best chicane passes in years has been Montoya taking Schumacher at Spa in 2004. A brilliant well timed move, showing just how well it can be done.



But in this case, I think Fernando and everyone in the Ferrari team should have known instantly that the pass was not legit, and instructed Alonso to give back the position. Though I agree 100% that the delay and process was completely flawed in handing out the penalty, it should have been avoided by the team and/or driver before it reached that point.

lots of sensible talk here.
i dont see any way forward winnings for ferrari unless luca de marshmallow get rid of domenicali ( give the job to adrian newey or bring in like Ross braun)

i seriously believe there is a big problem going on at ferrari with alonso on board, the car is capable but not drivers this season.

i would jhave barrichello back in a ferrari, he could drive the williams in to 4th and 5th place and i refuse to rule out what barrichello would have done in a ferrari? think about it !!!

its not bad luck and others screwing ferrari, its bad leadership management, a hot tempered whinging driver whom cannot make the most out of his race day (alonso) and a driver is nowhere near his team mate really making any difference in race conditions.

its a disaster for ferrari right now.

[DexDexter]

So you are saying that if Ferrari got rid of Alonso they would suddenly be back at the top of F1 again?

Are you just making up posts because you are bored or are you on something? If so, please share with the rest of us!

Well, many thought the strategy of giving the boot to a world champion was right last year, why not this year? Nothing has changed for the better, driverwise. On a more serious note...Ferrari need to get Newey or Brawn back.

[Mia 01]

They are not leading the development side anymoore as they did a couple of years back.

Now they risk falling further back.