2012 Formula One Season

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

He called it as it is and somewaht tongue in cheek but that obviously went over some heads.

"Somewhat tongue in cheek"? Please explain.

<snip>

The eyebrow comment is just childish

[rixalex]

Why did it look bad on paper ?

He called it as it is and somewaht tongue in cheek but that obviously went over some heads.

Domenicali and Forghheiri both said many times over the season they had not provided the car to Alonso to take the fight to the competition

At the start of the season the Ferrari was 1 to 1.5 seconds off the pace. The car was improved over the season but never the best second or third best car. Vettel won four races on the trot in Asia and kudo's to him but to pretend the car had nohing to do with that is simply ignorant.

Certainly at the start of the season, the Ferrari was clearly a complete dog of a car. No doubt or question about that. About a third of the season in, they made some changes that really helped turn things around, and by the middle of the season, they had a seriously competitive car. As fast as the McClarens or the Red Bulls? Probably not quite, but they were pretty darn close. If you look at their laps times during the races, they were right up there - well at least Alonso's lap times were.

One thing they never managed to sort out however was qualifying. Their pace in qualifying combined with Massa's overall uninspiring pace, both in qualifying and in the races, made Alonso look like he was doing something rather superhuman with the car on Sunday. I don't think anyone doubts his skills or questions him as being one the fastest drivers out there, but was he getting more out of the car than say Vettel, Hamilton or Button would have been able to? I suspect probably not.

So i think this whole business of him saying "with a car that is a lot slower than the others we fight until the last race", is over-stating his genius just a little. He drove very well, very consistently and didn't make many mistakes, and nor did the team. Credit for that. But saying he drove a car that is a lot slower than the others... no i don't buy that. But whether or not you happen to buy it, whether or not you happen to agree him, is not for me the issue here. The issue is him saying this himself. Why not let other people speak glowingly about you? There have been enough people doing that this season even for a man with his large-sized ego surely? It's like were he to state "i am one of the fastest drivers on the planet". If he said that most people would cringe. Why? Well not because it is not true, but because it's just not necessary to go around blowing your own trumpet. Alonso fans, who usually are easily identifiable by their keen hatred for Hamilton, are always quick to become outraged the moment Hamilton says anything remotely arrogant - which he has been known to - but the moment their man says something equally self-congratulatory, then suddenly it's all this "what's wrong with stating the facts" or "somewhat tongue in cheek... over your head probably" nonsense. They just can't accept any sort of criticism about him. Label it as "Alonso bashing". It's not "Alonso bashing". The man isn't perfect, that's all. Try not to get so upset when his flaws are pointed out.

The eyebrow comment is just childish

Do you take everything in life so seriously? For goodness sake, lighten up man. He's not a cancer sufferer. He's an extremely well paid sports person, with an extremely cute girlfriend. I think he can take someone having a chuckle about his eyebrows without the Alonso fan club cavalry arriving to defend those bushy beasts.

[rixalex]

Can't imagine that Button or Alonso would have been taken out in this way.

Hamilton is undoubtedly quick but he is not smart. He only knows how to drive flat-out, sometimes as here that is not the best option.

So it's Hamiltons fault that Hulkenberg slid into him ..?

totster

The same sort of comments were made when Grosjean came flying across from one side of the track to the other at the start of the Belgian GP, taking Hamilton crashing out along with a few others. There is no doubt that Hamilton has at times driven with unnecessary urgency and impatience and it has cost him. But when someone makes a clear mistake and veers into his path taking him out of the race, let's not try and shift the blame anywhere else other than where it should be.

If you drive constantly taking evasive action, giving people extra space, just in case they make a mistake and drive into you, you would quickly find yourself somewhere at the back of the pack.

[ignis]

Can't imagine that Button or Alonso would have been taken out in this way.

Hamilton is undoubtedly quick but he is not smart. He only knows how to drive flat-out, sometimes as here that is not the best option.

So it's Hamiltons fault that Hulkenberg slid into him ..?

totster

The same sort of comments were made when Grosjean came flying across from one side of the track to the other at the start of the Belgian GP, taking Hamilton crashing out along with a few others. There is no doubt that Hamilton has at times driven with unnecessary urgency and impatience and it has cost him. But when someone makes a clear mistake and veers into his path taking him out of the race, let's not try and shift the blame anywhere else other than where it should be.

If you drive constantly taking evasive action, giving people extra space, just in case they make a mistake and drive into you, you would quickly find yourself somewhere at the back of the pack.

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

[rixalex]

The same sort of comments were made when Grosjean came flying across from one side of the track to the other at the start of the Belgian GP, taking Hamilton crashing out along with a few others. There is no doubt that Hamilton has at times driven with unnecessary urgency and impatience and it has cost him. But when someone makes a clear mistake and veers into his path taking him out of the race, let's not try and shift the blame anywhere else other than where it should be.

If you drive constantly taking evasive action, giving people extra space, just in case they make a mistake and drive into you, you would quickly find yourself somewhere at the back of the pack.

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

Are you talking about Kamui?

[tinfoilhat]

The same sort of comments were made when Grosjean came flying across from one side of the track to the other at the start of the Belgian GP, taking Hamilton crashing out along with a few others. There is no doubt that Hamilton has at times driven with unnecessary urgency and impatience and it has cost him. But when someone makes a clear mistake and veers into his path taking him out of the race, let's not try and shift the blame anywhere else other than where it should be.

If you drive constantly taking evasive action, giving people extra space, just in case they make a mistake and drive into you, you would quickly find yourself somewhere at the back of the pack.

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

Are you talking about Kamui?

Narain more likely.

I have heard it told his last name is Chicane, but suspect that is untrue

[b19bry]

Can't imagine that Button or Alonso would have been taken out in this way.

Hamilton is undoubtedly quick but he is not smart. He only knows how to drive flat-out, sometimes as here that is not the best option.

So it's Hamiltons fault that Hulkenberg slid into him ..?

totster

Not saying that exactly, but a smarter driver would not have smoked his tyres going into the corner to take the fight on the outside of a damp track against a 'less experienced' driver

[rixalex]

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

Are you talking about Kamui?

Narain more likely.

I have heard it told his last name is Chicane, but suspect that is untrue

Of course! Silly me.

[Totster]

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

Are you talking about Kamui?

Narain more likely.

I have heard it told his last name is Chicane, but suspect that is untrue

Of course! Silly me.

But surely he just makes sure he is out of the way of the rest of the drivers as they lap him ?

totster

[b19bry]

Certainly at the start of the season, the Ferrari was clearly a complete dog of a car. No doubt or question about that. About a third of the season in, they made some changes that really helped turn things around, and by the middle of the season, they had a seriously competitive car. As fast as the McClarens or the Red Bulls? Probably not quite, but they were pretty darn close. If you look at their laps times during the races, they were right up there - well at least Alonso's lap times were.

One thing they never managed to sort out however was qualifying. Their pace in qualifying combined with Massa's overall uninspiring pace, both in qualifying and in the races, made Alonso look like he was doing something rather superhuman with the car on Sunday. I don't think anyone doubts his skills or questions him as being one the fastest drivers out there, but was he getting more out of the car than say Vettel, Hamilton or Button would have been able to? I suspect probably not.

So i think this whole business of him saying "with a car that is a lot slower than the others we fight until the last race", is over-stating his genius just a little. He drove very well, very consistently and didn't make many mistakes, and nor did the team. Credit for that. But saying he drove a car that is a lot slower than the others... no i don't buy that. But whether or not you happen to buy it, whether or not you happen to agree him, is not for me the issue here. The issue is him saying this himself. Why not let other people speak glowingly about you? There have been enough people doing that this season even for a man with his large-sized ego surely? It's like were he to state "i am one of the fastest drivers on the planet". If he said that most people would cringe. Why? Well not because it is not true, but because it's just not necessary to go around blowing your own trumpet. Alonso fans, who usually are easily identifiable by their keen hatred for Hamilton, are always quick to become outraged the moment Hamilton says anything remotely arrogant - which he has been known to - but the moment their man says something equally self-congratulatory, then suddenly it's all this "what's wrong with stating the facts" or "somewhat tongue in cheek... over your head probably" nonsense. They just can't accept any sort of criticism about him. Label it as "Alonso bashing". It's not "Alonso bashing". The man isn't perfect, that's all. Try not to get so upset when his flaws are pointed out.

At no point in the season was the Ferrari a trully as quick as either the Red Bull or the Mclaren and often behind several of the other cars, most informed punters (read the columns in Autosport. Telegraph. Guardian etc.) are in agreement with this so whether you 'buy this' is immaterial. You go on to say blithely that Alonso's times 'at least' were well up there, missing entirely the point that you yourself are making.

One things for sure, put Vettel in the Ferrari and Alonso in the Red Bull and there woud not have been 3 points between them by the end of the season.

Maybe you didn't notice but there have been plenty of people (i.e. not Alonso) saying this all season long

The Alonso bashing comment comes from the fact that a point is being made where there is none in a similar way to the pages & pages that were written about his 'cheating' with the gearbox seal issue in Austin

The eyebrow comment is just childish

Do you take everything in life so seriously? For goodness sake, lighten up man. He's not a cancer sufferer. He's an extremely well paid sports person, with an extremely cute girlfriend. I think he can take someone having a chuckle about his eyebrows without the Alonso fan club cavalry arriving to defend those bushy beasts.

Pot, Kettle, Black, when I dared to write about Hamilton's reaction on the podium in Australia you were hardly a model of restraint

[Totster]

Can't imagine that Button or Alonso would have been taken out in this way.

Hamilton is undoubtedly quick but he is not smart. He only knows how to drive flat-out, sometimes as here that is not the best option.

So it's Hamiltons fault that Hulkenberg slid into him ..?

totster

Not saying that exactly, but a smarter driver would not have smoked his tyres going into the corner to take the fight on the outside of a damp track against a 'less experienced' driver

Um, sorry.. you have it all wrong. Hamilton had the racing line, but then gave Hulkenberg plenty of room on the inside as he came charging into the corner (too fast) sliding into Hamilton. Hamiltons natural racing line would have cut straight across Hulkenbergs front into that corner.

totster

[ignis]

Like that very fast [some say] Asian driver that goes way off line when another car comes into sight ? and finishes mostly in last place.

Are you talking about Kamui?

Did not want to name names as everyone knows who I was referring to

[b19bry]

Can't imagine that Button or Alonso would have been taken out in this way.

Hamilton is undoubtedly quick but he is not smart. He only knows how to drive flat-out, sometimes as here that is not the best option.

So it's Hamiltons fault that Hulkenberg slid into him ..?

totster

Not saying that exactly, but a smarter driver would not have smoked his tyres going into the corner to take the fight on the outside of a damp track against a 'less experienced' driver

Um, sorry.. you have it all wrong. Hamilton had the racing line, but then gave Hulkenberg plenty of room on the inside as he came charging into the corner (too fast) sliding into Hamilton. Hamiltons natural racing line would have cut straight across Hulkenbergs front into that corner.

totster

Not wrong at all, Hamilton tried desperately to defend going round the outside of a damp track with Hulkenburg on the inside, what's your point ?

[rixalex]

At no point in the season was the Ferrari a trully as quick as either the Red Bull or the Mclaren and often behind several of the other cars, most informed punters (read the columns in Autosport. Telegraph. Guardian etc.) are in agreement with this so whether you 'buy this' is immaterial.

What i didn't buy was the claim that his car was a lot slower. It was a lot slower for a few races at the beginning of the season but after that, was pretty close to the top, if not in qualifying, certainly in race trim on Sunday. But as i said, my issue wasn't so much with how much truth there was or wasn't in what he said, it was in the trumpet blowing aspect of it all. It obviously didn't bother you. Not a surprise. The man can clearly do no wrong.

Do you take everything in life so seriously? For goodness sake, lighten up man. He's not a cancer sufferer. He's an extremely well paid sports person, with an extremely cute girlfriend. I think he can take someone having a chuckle about his eyebrows without the Alonso fan club cavalry arriving to defend those bushy beasts.

Pot, Kettle, Black, when I dared to write about Hamilton's reaction on the podium in Australia you were hardly a model of restraint

So you are calling yourself a kettle. Deary me.

All i said about Hamilton's po-face in Australia on the podium was that feeling angry with yourself for not having done better wasn't such a bad thing for a sports person - or something along those lines - what was unrestrained about that? Alonso was looking pretty po-faced himself last weekend.

[b19bry]

At no point in the season was the Ferrari a trully as quick as either the Red Bull or the Mclaren and often behind several of the other cars, most informed punters (read the columns in Autosport. Telegraph. Guardian etc.) are in agreement with this so whether you 'buy this' is immaterial.

What i didn't buy was the claim that his car was a lot slower. It was a lot slower for a few races at the beginning of the season but after that, was pretty close to the top, if not in qualifying, certainly in race trim on Sunday. But as i said, my issue wasn't so much with how much truth there was or wasn't in what he said, it was in the trumpet blowing aspect of it all. It obviously didn't bother you. Not a surprise. The man can clearly do no wrong.

Do you take everything in life so seriously? For goodness sake, lighten up man. He's not a cancer sufferer. He's an extremely well paid sports person, with an extremely cute girlfriend. I think he can take someone having a chuckle about his eyebrows without the Alonso fan club cavalry arriving to defend those bushy beasts.

Pot, Kettle, Black, when I dared to write about Hamilton's reaction on the podium in Australia you were hardly a model of restraint

So you are calling yourself a kettle. Deary me.

All i said about Hamilton's po-face in Australia on the podium was that feeling angry with yourself for not having done better wasn't such a bad thing for a sports person - or something along those lines - what was unrestrained about that? Alonso was looking pretty po-faced himself last weekend.

Actually what you wrote was this :

"Regarding comments about Australia, what i didn't find particularly balanced or honest was those who, having led us to believe their primary interest is in the racing, not in the personalities, to have been almost squealing with pleasure because Hamilton finished third (the disgrace of it!) and was visibly not impressed with his performance. And as if the fact that he showed disappointment in himself, somehow reaffirms their belief in him being an ass-hole. I really don't get it. The chap can do no right.

And these same people, who were so quick to jump on the fact that he didn't look pleased as being some terrible character failing, offered no opinion whatsoever on Alonso's hissy-fit with the marshall. Too busy scrambling for superlatives at what a wonderful job he did in an under performing car on race day. Quite how they know it is under performing i don't really know. Massa is useless these days so we have no idea from him on how the car is, and Alonso's qualifying was so short lived thanks to the mistake he made - something that also, funnily enough, warranted no comment - that makes data on the Ferrari very limited. And I would actually say, judging by how fast the car went on Sunday, and even taking into account Alonso's undoubted skills at ringing the neck out of cars, it is pretty close to the top."

With the clear implication that 'in your balanced view' the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars

[b19bry]

At no point in the season was the Ferrari a trully as quick as either the Red Bull or the Mclaren and often behind several of the other cars, most informed punters (read the columns in Autosport. Telegraph. Guardian etc.) are in agreement with this so whether you 'buy this' is immaterial.

What i didn't buy was the claim that his car was a lot slower. It was a lot slower for a few races at the beginning of the season but after that, was pretty close to the top, if not in qualifying, certainly in race trim on Sunday. But as i said, my issue wasn't so much with how much truth there was or wasn't in what he said, it was in the trumpet blowing aspect of it all. It obviously didn't bother you. Not a surprise. The man can clearly do no wrong.

Well actually in this case he did no wrong except ruffle the feathers of a few enthusiastic Alonso bashers

[Totster]

Um, sorry.. you have it all wrong. Hamilton had the racing line, but then gave Hulkenberg plenty of room on the inside as he came charging into the corner (too fast) sliding into Hamilton. Hamiltons natural racing line would have cut straight across Hulkenbergs front into that corner.

totster

Not wrong at all, Hamilton tried desperately to defend going round the outside of a damp track with Hulkenburg on the inside, what's your point ?

Sorry, I thought my point was clear. However, my point is that Hamilton was on that side of the track due to the fact that he gave Hulkenberg enough room to go through on the inside. But the main point, which seems to elude you, is that it doesn't matter whether Hamilton was on the wet side of the track.. it wasn't his car that slid it was Hulkenbergs.

Are you sure you watched the race ? Maybe you are just being deliberately contentious.

totster

[b19bry]

Um, sorry.. you have it all wrong. Hamilton had the racing line, but then gave Hulkenberg plenty of room on the inside as he came charging into the corner (too fast) sliding into Hamilton. Hamiltons natural racing line would have cut straight across Hulkenbergs front into that corner.

totster

Not wrong at all, Hamilton tried desperately to defend going round the outside of a damp track with Hulkenburg on the inside, what's your point ?

Sorry, I thought my point was clear. However, my point is that Hamilton was on that side of the track due to the fact that he gave Hulkenberg enough room to go through on the inside. But the main point, which seems to elude you, is that it doesn't matter whether Hamilton was on the wet side of the track.. it wasn't his car that slid it was Hulkenbergs.

Are you sure you watched the race ? Maybe you are just being deliberately contentious.

totster

Yes, I watched the race and can remember Hamilton 'smoking' his tyres going into the corner then attempting fend off Hulkenburg going round the turn. The point that eludes you is that that put him a dangerous position where a more thinking driver would have backed away from taking the fight round the outside in those conditions. He could then have come back at Hulkenburg.

[Totster]

Um, sorry.. you have it all wrong. Hamilton had the racing line, but then gave Hulkenberg plenty of room on the inside as he came charging into the corner (too fast) sliding into Hamilton. Hamiltons natural racing line would have cut straight across Hulkenbergs front into that corner.

totster

Not wrong at all, Hamilton tried desperately to defend going round the outside of a damp track with Hulkenburg on the inside, what's your point ?

Sorry, I thought my point was clear. However, my point is that Hamilton was on that side of the track due to the fact that he gave Hulkenberg enough room to go through on the inside. But the main point, which seems to elude you, is that it doesn't matter whether Hamilton was on the wet side of the track.. it wasn't his car that slid it was Hulkenbergs.

Are you sure you watched the race ? Maybe you are just being deliberately contentious.

totster

Yes, I watched the race and can remember Hamilton 'smoking' his tyres going into the corner then attempting fend off Hulkenburg going round the turn. The point that eludes you is that that put him a dangerous position where a more thinking driver would have backed away from taking the fight round the outside in those conditions. He could then have come back at Hulkenburg.

555555

Ok, we'll have to agree to disagree.

totster

[b19bry]

Sorry, I thought my point was clear. However, my point is that Hamilton was on that side of the track due to the fact that he gave Hulkenberg enough room to go through on the inside. But the main point, which seems to elude you, is that it doesn't matter whether Hamilton was on the wet side of the track.. it wasn't his car that slid it was Hulkenbergs.

Are you sure you watched the race ? Maybe you are just being deliberately contentious.

totster

Yes, I watched the race and can remember Hamilton 'smoking' his tyres going into the corner then attempting fend off Hulkenburg going round the turn. The point that eludes you is that that put him a dangerous position where a more thinking driver would have backed away from taking the fight round the outside in those conditions. He could then have come back at Hulkenburg.

555555

Ok, we'll have to agree to disagree.

totster

5555555

OK

[rixalex]

Actually what you wrote was this :

"Regarding comments about Australia, what i didn't find particularly balanced or honest was those who, having led us to believe their primary interest is in the racing, not in the personalities, to have been almost squealing with pleasure because Hamilton finished third (the disgrace of it!) and was visibly not impressed with his performance. And as if the fact that he showed disappointment in himself, somehow reaffirms their belief in him being an ass-hole. I really don't get it. The chap can do no right.

And these same people, who were so quick to jump on the fact that he didn't look pleased as being some terrible character failing, offered no opinion whatsoever on Alonso's hissy-fit with the marshall. Too busy scrambling for superlatives at what a wonderful job he did in an under performing car on race day. Quite how they know it is under performing i don't really know. Massa is useless these days so we have no idea from him on how the car is, and Alonso's qualifying was so short lived thanks to the mistake he made - something that also, funnily enough, warranted no comment - that makes data on the Ferrari very limited. And I would actually say, judging by how fast the car went on Sunday, and even taking into account Alonso's undoubted skills at ringing the neck out of cars, it is pretty close to the top."

With the clear implication that 'in your balanced view' the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars

What do you mean actually what you wrote? You made a comment about my reaction to your comments at Hamilton's po-face in Australia being without restraint, and i responded to that with a pharaphrase of what i had said back then, and asking you what was unrestrained about those comments.

You ignore that, and now switch the discussion to what i said all those months ago about the pace of the Ferrari back in Australia.

Anyway, that aside, i did not say that the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars (why misrepresent my view when it is clear for all to see?), i said the performance of their car was somewhat hard to judge owing to the fact that Massa was crap and Alonso didn't finish qualifying, but that they had good pace on Sunday and looked pretty close to the top.

I stand by that, as i stand by my disagreement with Alonso's claim (and yours unless i have missed you stating disagreement?) on having had a car this season that was "a lot slower", and his claim that "had i had a car that was a little slower, i probably would have won".

I also stand by my feelings that those claims, accurate or not, were a touch pompous with a pinch of arrogance.

[b19bry]

Actually what you wrote was this :

"Regarding comments about Australia, what i didn't find particularly balanced or honest was those who, having led us to believe their primary interest is in the racing, not in the personalities, to have been almost squealing with pleasure because Hamilton finished third (the disgrace of it!) and was visibly not impressed with his performance. And as if the fact that he showed disappointment in himself, somehow reaffirms their belief in him being an ass-hole. I really don't get it. The chap can do no right.

And these same people, who were so quick to jump on the fact that he didn't look pleased as being some terrible character failing, offered no opinion whatsoever on Alonso's hissy-fit with the marshall. Too busy scrambling for superlatives at what a wonderful job he did in an under performing car on race day. Quite how they know it is under performing i don't really know. Massa is useless these days so we have no idea from him on how the car is, and Alonso's qualifying was so short lived thanks to the mistake he made - something that also, funnily enough, warranted no comment - that makes data on the Ferrari very limited. And I would actually say, judging by how fast the car went on Sunday, and even taking into account Alonso's undoubted skills at ringing the neck out of cars, it is pretty close to the top."

With the clear implication that 'in your balanced view' the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars

What do you mean actually what you wrote? You made a comment about my reaction to your comments at Hamilton's po-face in Australia being without restraint, and i responded to that with a pharaphrase of what i had said back then, and asking you what was unrestrained about those comments.

You ignore that, and now switch the discussion to what i said all those months ago about the pace of the Ferrari back in Australia.

Not ignoring at all, read the first paragraph above before you ramble on to tell us how good the Ferrari is at that point in the season or at least 'it's pretty close to the top'

You later added the following :

I think reading of behaviour and judging of character can depend a lot on our own personal biases.

Yesterday during practice session Vettel came on the radio and said the car was "undriveable". I imagine had Hamilton been the one saying it, we'd be hearing what an arrogant so and so he was.

And imagine the reaction had Hamilton been the one having the hissy fit with the marshal in Australia. Some people have completely ignored this behaviour of Alonso's and instead been rushing to tell us not only how happy it made them to see Hamilton displeased with third, but also how it demonstrates his bad character.

The fact is Hamilton was in the best car on that day - Button proved that - and the fact is that Hamilton was on pole. Being on pole and being in the best car, is it not surprising that a driver in those circumstances would be disappointed with third? Have to consider also that it being the first race of the season, it is quite symbolic and it is a race that serves to lay down a marker for the races to come. I think it would be more worrying, and more of a question mark on his character - his character as a racer anyway - were he happy with how he performed in that race.

Again according to your 'balanced' view

Edited November 30, 2012 by b19bry

[rixalex]

What do you mean actually what you wrote? You made a comment about my reaction to your comments at Hamilton's po-face in Australia being without restraint, and i responded to that with a pharaphrase of what i had said back then, and asking you what was unrestrained about those comments.

You ignore that, and now switch the discussion to what i said all those months ago about the pace of the Ferrari back in Australia.

Not ignoring at all, read the first paragraph above before you ramble on to tell us how good the Ferrari is at that point in the season or at least 'it's pretty close to the top'

Yes what you quoted included my comments about Hamilton's po-face, but nothing i could see that was without the restraint you claimed.

And then, after my quote, at the bottom, you said "With the clear implication that 'in your balanced view' the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars", which was neither what i said, nor what we were discussing. You were trying to explain why i was a pot and you were a kettle.

Anyway, this is all rather tiresome. I suspect, as someone else has suggested, you are just being deliberately contentious / argumentative. Well that's my "balanced" view.

[b19bry]

What do you mean actually what you wrote? You made a comment about my reaction to your comments at Hamilton's po-face in Australia being without restraint, and i responded to that with a pharaphrase of what i had said back then, and asking you what was unrestrained about those comments.

You ignore that, and now switch the discussion to what i said all those months ago about the pace of the Ferrari back in Australia.

Not ignoring at all, read the first paragraph above before you ramble on to tell us how good the Ferrari is at that point in the season or at least 'it's pretty close to the top'

Yes what you quoted included my comments about Hamilton's po-face, but nothing i could see that was without the restraint you claimed.

And then, after my quote, at the bottom, you said "With the clear implication that 'in your balanced view' the Ferrari was at that point as quick as any of the other cars", which was neither what i said, nor what we were discussing. You were trying to explain why i was a pot and you were a kettle.

Anyway, this is all rather tiresome. I suspect, as someone else has suggested, you are just being deliberately contentious / argumentative. Well that's my "balanced" view.

Actually what's rather tiresome is the way you construe every opportunity to endlessly bash on and on and make personal jibes at Alonso and present that as a 'balanced' view.

Having said that I do think it's wrong for Ferrari to pursue the flag issue in Brazil if they are still intent on this.

Vettel won fair and square, roll on 2013

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

Having said that I do think it's wrong for Ferrari to pursue the flag issue in Brazil if they are still intent on this.

Vettel won fair and square, roll on 2013

Formula 1: Ferrari say Sebastian Vettel complaint is 'closed'

By Andrew Benson Chief F1 writer

Ferrari says the controversy over world champion Sebastian Vettel's driving in the Brazilian Grand Prix is "closed".

Ferrari have now received an official response from governing body the FIA after requesting clarification on whether Vettel overtook illegally during the race.

The team says it "takes notice" and "considers the matter closed".

It says it raised the issue because the incident "could have left a shadow in the eyes of all the fans of Formula 1".

The only thing that is left is a nasty taste in the mouth about just how far Ferrari will go to get a win.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/20552525

[Mosha]

<snip>

Having said that I do think it's wrong for Ferrari to pursue the flag issue in Brazil if they are still intent on this.

Vettel won fair and square, roll on 2013

Formula 1: Ferrari say Sebastian Vettel complaint is 'closed'

By Andrew Benson Chief F1 writer

Ferrari says the controversy over world champion Sebastian Vettel's driving in the Brazilian Grand Prix is "closed".

Ferrari have now received an official response from governing body the FIA after requesting clarification on whether Vettel overtook illegally during the race.

The team says it "takes notice" and "considers the matter closed".

It says it raised the issue because the incident "could have left a shadow in the eyes of all the fans of Formula 1".

The only thing that is left is a nasty taste in the mouth about just how far Ferrari will go to get a win.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/20552525

We saw that in the penultimate race..

[Mosha]

Just watched a repeat of Top Gear with Rubens on. He was adamant when he signed on with Ferrari, there was nothing in his contract that stated MSC was the lead driver. He only found out when he was told to let him pass in the race Rubens was leading. He refused for 8 laps. On the last lap, he was told there would be consequences if he did not comply.

[tinfoilhat]

Anyway, the championship is done and dusted.

I for one am pleased with the result, and found the season hugely entertaining.

water always seems to find its own level, so to, with a points system geared to rewarding race wins, the 2012 standings should offer up no real surprises.

[Mosha]

No HRT next season, they are up for sale, and the deadline has passed for entries.

[ignis]

No HRT next season, they are up for sale, and the deadline has passed for entries.

Feel sure I read somewhere Honda were looking to come in ??