Malaysian GP *SPOILERS*

..and also because honda didnt have schumacher, ross brawn, norbert haug + mercedes engines.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/2011 05:14PM by mitadumapaga.

They had ross brawn, norbert haug is just there he does nothing to help with the car. The problem was not with the engine it was with the car.

When they build a good car both Button and Sato were up there, but over the years they have only really built 2 good cars.

DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another thing was spoiled an otherwise brilliant
> race for me is the BBC commentary was excellent
> again, but Brundle has said on Twitter that the
> bosses complained it was too confusing and 2
> drivers isn't working. Well, if you're too stupid
> to understand it then press the red button and go
> listen to Ant and Crofty talking about 5 year
> olds. Leave Brundle and DC alone, they were
> awesome.

It's a small point, but worth making all the same: it was the Fleet Street journalists who were complaining, and they were complaining about the race, not the commentary. They were suggesting the action was hard to follow. It wasn't a criticism of the BBC commentary. Brundle was pointing out that he and DC had no problem with it and laughing at the (pre-season) suggestion that having two drivers in the commentary box was a bad move. The BBC seem happy enough with the commentary either, and I have to say, I've barely noticed it, which is just what I want from commentary.

On the race itself, I thought both penalties were silly. Why penalise Alonso for an incident that a) wasn't serious b) didn't have any impact on Hamilton and c) hurt his own race? As for weaving... well, you're going to get a lot of penalties if that was a penalty. Let racers race. It's not like Hamilton was stopping Alonso make a move - the track is 15 metres wide for goodness sake - and not a peep of complaint from Alonso about it, either. And let's be honest, Alonso wouldn't be slow to complain. They made an issue out of something neither driver had a problem with and which had no real impact on the race. Needless.

[Website]

Race stewards shouldn't hand out penalties when they see fit in these kind of instances (pit lane speeding and jump starts are another matter of course). IMO they should only review an incident when a team complains.

Looking again, I'm thinking Hamilton's penalty wasn't just for the weaving, but the where the weaving took place - the final move looked as though it was just entering the braking zone, forcing Alonso to change direction again to avoid a collision, and while it's unclear from the TV view (which was only from a head-on angle), if that is the case, he needs more than a penalty - he needs his head checking.

Looking back, Vettel certainly should have had a penalty for the start too.

Coulthard and Brundle work a hell of a lot better that Legard and Brundle did.

I don't get any of that 'what on earth is he talking about' & 'stop using the same clichés' thoughts with DC and MB.

Alonso's penalty wasn't really a penalty though, he didn't lose any positions (ferrari never do with time penalties).

_______________________________________________________________________

Ferrari_Fuhrer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DaveEllis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Another thing was spoiled an otherwise
> brilliant
> > race for me is the BBC commentary was excellent
> > again, but Brundle has said on Twitter that the
> > bosses complained it was too confusing and 2
> > drivers isn't working. Well, if you're too
> stupid
> > to understand it then press the red button and
> go
> > listen to Ant and Crofty talking about 5 year
> > olds. Leave Brundle and DC alone, they were
> > awesome.
>
> It's a small point, but worth making all the same:
> it was the Fleet Street journalists who were
> complaining, and they were complaining about the
> race, not the commentary. They were suggesting the
> action was hard to follow. It wasn't a criticism
> of the BBC commentary. Brundle was pointing out
> that he and DC had no problem with it and laughing
> at the (pre-season) suggestion that having two
> drivers in the commentary box was a bad move. The
> BBC seem happy enough with the commentary either,
> and I have to say, I've barely noticed it, which
> is just what I want from commentary.
>


Yeah, I got the feeling as well that for the un-hardcore F1 fan, it was a somewhat confusing race, thanks to tyres going over cliffs, DRSesses and KERs and what have you. (The tyres didn't play a big part in Melbourne, we saw it come more into effect in Malaysia) I think Brundle and DC even alluded to this in the forum. Personally, I loved the commentary. Brundle sounded like he's having the time of his life at points during the race, a complete contrast to last season.

Brundle had some good Brundle-isms this race too;

"it's all turned to custard for D'Ambrosio"

Brilliant :p

Gav, good point about Lewis. About Vettel though, im not so sure. Maybe was a tad more excessive than need be, but if you penalize drivers for weaving like that at the start then im sure more than a few drivers will have penalties. From onboard Lewis the weaving from Vettel did not look so bad, from the external camera it looked alot worse. Its a difficult one to call. A penalty would have been harsh, but maybe a reprimand would be OK. If Lewis felt it was bad then im sure he would have radio'd Mclaren.

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

I don't think either deserved a penalty. Vettel hardly moved, and I don't think Lewis did much in the braking zone.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Quote
DaveEllis
I don't think either deserved a penalty. Vettel hardly moved, and I don't think Lewis did much in the braking zone.

Agreed. I was happy to see some wheel to wheel racing. Arnoux and Villeneuve ain't got no punishment either back in the day and still the racing world drools over them banging wheels.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

marcl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not sure why people are so shocked with Merc,
> Honda done no better with that team. They got
> lucky is 2009, and they built 3 cars to get 1 that
> worked and even at the end of the year they were
> about 4th fastest.


It's really weird. I was thinking this same thing. All those years in the wilderness that Button spent with Honda. Then Ross Brawn comes along rebrands, the team and gets lucky with the car: but as you correctly stated that did not even last a season. Most of the top teams had already caught up after a handful of races.
The fact is there was no real turning point in the Mercedes, pre-Brawn, team. A lucky loop hole, in the interpretation of the rules gave birth to a world Championship, no more.
Schumacher and Rosberg, who are both great drivers in my opinion now find themselves in the precarious position of working for a team that has changed it's name to Mercedes but is still fundamentally only capable of Honda abilities which is basically where they came from and mostly where they still are.


" Perfection is not a gift ....... it comes with practice."

Member of R.S.C.T Group

i am sorry ISAint, but what you say makes absolutely no sense.

the whole team is new: drivers, management, even engines are absolutely different (and waaay better, even jenson button said that the mercedes enegine was far better than a honda in the beginning of 2009)

the problem for mercedes gp is one and one only, namely, they want to run a low budget team, without big investments. And the fact is ... IT DOESNT WORK LIKE THAT ANYMORE !!! it is not 1980's it is 2011. That is the fact.

mitadumapaga Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i am sorry ISAint, but what you say makes
> absolutely no sense.
>
> the whole team is new: drivers, management, even
> engines are absolutely different (and waaay
> better, even jenson button said that the mercedes
> enegine was far better than a honda in the
> beginning of 2009)
>
> the problem for mercedes gp is one and one only,
> namely, they want to run a low budget team,
> without big investments. And the fact is ... IT
> DOESNT WORK LIKE THAT ANYMORE !!! it is not 1980's
> it is 2011. That is the fact.


Yes I agree but what you have said has just compounded the point Im trying to make. It's not the new drivers or engine or even the new management that makes a team successful. It's the mentality and as you have just signified by the above statement, Quote: 'they want to run a low budget team' when that clearly is not the way forward. Well, Honda had the fourth biggest budget in 2008? And with the very same success don't you think.
Money, drivers, management are not the pulpit for success it helps but if you dont have the right mentality well, ....... the comparison is easily recognised by looking at a high budget team like Ferrari and lower one like RED BULL, make more sense now? As the saying goes it's not what you have it's how you deploy it.


" Perfection is not a gift ....... it comes with practice."

Member of R.S.C.T Group



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 02:33AM by Isaint.

so, any exit of this nightmare situation ?

You know it's always easy to judge from where we are sitting but I think that the only way out for them is to take chances with radical innovation I really thought that they would do that this year. I still find that the car is wrong in design. There has been some comments posted initially about how the back end does not flow aerodynamically like the 'Bulls' and Ferrari. Ironically enough that's where the biggest problem is lack of down force and limited grip. I think the car has speed in a straight line but they need to look at harnessing that power through the turns most important the car eats tires like 'Billy Bunter' at a Mcdonalds party. So they need to rectify that P.D.Q. because there will be no mercy on these new Perelli tires ...............


" Perfection is not a gift ....... it comes with practice."

Member of R.S.C.T Group



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 02:46AM by Isaint.

I am sure Merc will have the same if not larger budget than RBR

they do. as a company. but they run the part of the company, called MERCEDES F1 GP Petronas, wit a low budget. For example, after the end of 2009 the half of the team were kept, the rest were sacked (or another more appropriate word).

Seems like JB done the right thing getting out that team, I just cannot see them in F1 in 2 years time if they do not start getting it right.

c'mon. ferrrari weren't a lot better in the 94 and 96. Your arguments wer: the mercedes a.k.a HONDA team cannot build fast cars, right ? well, were ferrari able to do so in the late 80's and early 90's... NO. as long as there is schumacher in that team, combined with ross brawn (and nico rosberg actually is a big hope from my point of view), there is still something to come out of that car.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2011 12:58PM by mitadumapaga.

Looking back at the Alonso/Hamilton crash, Hamilton definitely contributes more to it than I first thought.

You can see that he is looking in his mirrors, and appears to slightly steer to the right just as Alonso is approaching, sealing his fate.

---

X (@ed24f1)