FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[spankyham]

Webber's not the one under scrutiny - and, as you so eloquently pointed out in an earlier post, if Webber was a thief would that make Seb stealing stuff be ok?

Would it be ok to steal from a thief?
Well, it would be a whole lot less bad then to steal from someone innocent.
If I knew my neighbor was a (albeit bad) burglar, who tried to steal my stuff several times, I would be less inclined to call the police when I hear noises in the night.

Even if your supposition is 100% accurate, Seb gave his word knowing that (as all those things had happened beforehand). So are you saying its "ok" to give your word with no intention of keeping it because the person your giving your word to has done something wrong in the past? Seb entered into an agreement with Mark and he broke his word without any genuine remorse for the sake of 7 points. As far as character goes, that's a pretty big negative.

that 'something wrong in the past' is kind of important though.
would it be acceptable if Webber hadn't invited Vettel for his birthday parties? no.
would it be acceptable to break your promise to someone who has broken their promise to you several times, with much more severe potential consequences? well, I would wonder why I would make a promise to that person in the first place. and if it comes to a point where I feel the need to break that promise, I would certainly not feel as bad. "if he's not willing to keep his promise to me, why should I suffer to keep my promise to him"

You can say things about character, but the context is very important.
If as a teacher you see some kid beat up another kid, would you (be inclined to) punish him? Most likely.
If as a teacher you see a kid beat up the bully that has beaten him up three times before, would you (be inclined to) punish him as badly (if at all), when you haven't punished the bully when he beat that kid up? I wouldn't.

They are interesting examples, but, they don't address the point I made. However bad Webber was, however bad the things he did, how ever many times he did those things, Seb gave his word, in full knowledge of all of those events. So, Seb either gave his word with absolutely no intention of keeping it or he gave his word then decided that 7 points were more important to him than keeping his word. Either way big negatives in terms of personal character IMO.

[1Lemon]

He still has a point though, whilst Alonso is at Ferrari, Massa will always be #2, just how it is, doesn't mean they both can't be competitive though.

The point IMO is - and history clearly backs it up, Ferrari have a #1 and #2 driver. The #2 driver can bank on one thing, if by driving (Felipe 08) or luck (Irvine 99) the #2 can become #1 (no matter who the #1 was) and the team will continue to back the #1. Those are the facts as Schumi and Kimi can attest.

What that means for Felipe is, if he can put himself into the dominant position by the business time of this year, he will be the #1 and Nando will be told to pull over for him.

What's clear in those cases though, is that the #2 only became #1 for a short time and because of unique circumstances. Also in the X many years that Ferrari have been going, only 2 that are 9 years apart can be chosen, that doesn't bode well.

[mnmracer]

They are interesting examples, but, they don't address the point I made. However bad Webber was, however bad the things he did, how ever many times he did those things, Seb gave his word, in full knowledge of all of those events. So, Seb either gave his word with absolutely no intention of keeping it or he gave his word then decided that 7 points were more important to him than keeping his word. Either way big negatives in terms of personal character IMO.

So just that I understand you, you feel that not keeping your word to a 'not word keeper', is just as bad as not keeping your word to an honest man?

[spankyham]

He still has a point though, whilst Alonso is at Ferrari, Massa will always be #2, just how it is, doesn't mean they both can't be competitive though.

The point IMO is - and history clearly backs it up, Ferrari have a #1 and #2 driver. The #2 driver can bank on one thing, if by driving (Felipe 08) or luck (Irvine 99) the #2 can become #1 (no matter who the #1 was) and the team will continue to back the #1. Those are the facts as Schumi and Kimi can attest.

What that means for Felipe is, if he can put himself into the dominant position by the business time of this year, he will be the #1 and Nando will be told to pull over for him.

What's clear in those cases though, is that the #2 only became #1 for a short time and because of unique circumstances. Also in the X many years that Ferrari have been going, only 2 that are 9 years apart can be chosen, that doesn't bode well.

When you have a Schumi in his prime, its a fair bet that any driver would find it hard to establish a clear superiority over him. Ditto for Fernando, so its not really surprising that it hasn't happened very often. Still, the fact is it can and has been done. Felipe is ahead now and driving very well - much better than the start of last year. He is confident - that is important. A bit of luck here and there, a couple of great races and he may well surprise a lot of people. And let me again reiterate, if he was ahead at the business end and the driver with the chance to win a title, the team would absolutely treat him as #1

[Hammer278]

This thread has become so hardcorreee.

[spankyham]

This thread has become so hardcorreee.

Meh .... 3 weeks break, what else is there to do

[1Lemon]

He still has a point though, whilst Alonso is at Ferrari, Massa will always be #2, just how it is, doesn't mean they both can't be competitive though.

The point IMO is - and history clearly backs it up, Ferrari have a #1 and #2 driver. The #2 driver can bank on one thing, if by driving (Felipe 08) or luck (Irvine 99) the #2 can become #1 (no matter who the #1 was) and the team will continue to back the #1. Those are the facts as Schumi and Kimi can attest.

What that means for Felipe is, if he can put himself into the dominant position by the business time of this year, he will be the #1 and Nando will be told to pull over for him.

What's clear in those cases though, is that the #2 only became #1 for a short time and because of unique circumstances. Also in the X many years that Ferrari have been going, only 2 that are 9 years apart can be chosen, that doesn't bode well.

When you have a Schumi in his prime, its a fair bet that any driver would find it hard to establish a clear superiority over him. Ditto for Fernando, so its not really surprising that it hasn't happened very often. Still, the fact is it can and has been done. Felipe is ahead now and driving very well - much better than the start of last year. He is confident - that is important. A bit of luck here and there, a couple of great races and he may well surprise a lot of people. And let me again reiterate, if he was ahead at the business end and the driver with the chance to win a title, the team would absolutely treat him as #1

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

[spankyham]

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

Which really proves my point - it doesn't matter who the #1 is, and it doesn't matter how he lost the lead, the team will back the driver with the chance to win the title (that driver will become the Ferrari #1) - that's the way it has always been and that's the way it will be this year - end of story.

[What's Burning?]

Which, is why I made my original comment to our forum queen about this behavior for Vettel is not what SF expect, and would not go unpunished there like it does at RBR. I'm thinking Sunday's direct challenge of the team will be remembered by those that make decisions in a team, far longer than it will by those that sit in the stands or watch on the tube.

[hirstes]

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

Which really proves my point - it doesn't matter who the #1 is, and it doesn't matter how he lost the lead, the team will back the driver with the chance to win the title (that driver will become the Ferrari #1) - that's the way it has always been and that's the way it will be this year - end of story.

i agree the team will back whoever has the lead in the championship at that tipping point but the real question is will alonso follow suit? will he graciously give way for felipe and be a team player or will he bitch and moan? cause isnt it in his contract that he is regarded as the number one and must be treated as so?

[Hammer278]

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

Which really proves my point - it doesn't matter who the #1 is, and it doesn't matter how he lost the lead, the team will back the driver with the chance to win the title (that driver will become the Ferrari #1) - that's the way it has always been and that's the way it will be this year - end of story.

i agree the team will back whoever has the lead in the championship at that tipping point but the real question is will alonso follow suit? will he graciously give way for felipe and be a team player or will he bitch and moan? cause isnt it in his contract that he is regarded as the number one and must be treated as so?

Please, we all saw what kind of trouble McLaren had to deal with even though there wasn't a No.1 clause in the contract....imagine if he had to do it having signed asking for preferential treatment. Probably burn Maranello down one night with the other 6 dwarfs.

[hirstes]

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

Which really proves my point - it doesn't matter who the #1 is, and it doesn't matter how he lost the lead, the team will back the driver with the chance to win the title (that driver will become the Ferrari #1) - that's the way it has always been and that's the way it will be this year - end of story.

i agree the team will back whoever has the lead in the championship at that tipping point but the real question is will alonso follow suit? will he graciously give way for felipe and be a team player or will he bitch and moan? cause isnt it in his contract that he is regarded as the number one and must be treated as so?

Please, we all saw what kind of trouble McLaren had to deal with even though there wasn't a No.1 clause in the contract....imagine if he had to do it having signed asking for preferential treatment. Probably burn Maranello down one night with the other 6 dwarfs.

i agree, he would start thinking that he was hamilton in 2011 "theres massa, GO GO GO" crash

[LRW]

They are interesting examples, but, they don't address the point I made. However bad Webber was, however bad the things he did, how ever many times he did those things, Seb gave his word, in full knowledge of all of those events. So, Seb either gave his word with absolutely no intention of keeping it or he gave his word then decided that 7 points were more important to him than keeping his word. Either way big negatives in terms of personal character IMO.

So just that I understand you, you feel that not keeping your word to a 'not word keeper', is just as bad as not keeping your word to an honest man?

The importance of keeping your word should not be affected by whom you are giving it to. Either your word is important or not. If you value your own principles you should only give your word if you intend to keep it. Regardless of what the person has or hasn't done in the past.

That's my opinion. But it depends on ones own values I suppose, and the level of integrity that you hold yourself to.

[darwin dali]

Maybe it's time for SV to move on and join Ferrari...

Absolutely not, at Ferrari they would never stand to have a driver overrule the team. He may have actually sealed his fate with the scuderia.

Uh, wrong - he would never be in a similar position as he'd have no. 1 status, absolute no. 1 status in a Schumacheresque way, so he'd never have to fight his teammate.

Your Schumi analogy simply proves how utterly wrong you are. Malaysia '99 Shumi was given a clear team order to move over and let Irvine pass him. Schumi did exactly as he was told. Ferrari have a team #1 and that's clear. But every #2 at Ferrari understands the path to becoming #1 - its clear and achievable if they are good enough.

Bro..the #1 driver had BROKEN his leg for half the season. If Ferrari did not give that order to Schumacher, they don't even deserve to be in F1.

[darwin dali]

Schumi in his prime is a bit subjective considering he missed 7 races because of a broken leg! He had to become number 2 when he returned, he mist most of the season!

Which really proves my point - it doesn't matter who the #1 is, and it doesn't matter how he lost the lead, the team will back the driver with the chance to win the title (that driver will become the Ferrari #1) - that's the way it has always been and that's the way it will be this year - end of story.

No, I posit that there is a default no. 1 driver at Ferrari (MS, FA, whatever) and gets supported as no. 1 contractually. If for whatever reason the no. 2 driver happens to do better, then, only then, the Scuderia supports him as the defacto no. 1 (only to be reversed at the start of the following season).
Back to SV: he's the clear no. 1 driver (and leading the no. 2 driver in the points). He would NOT be in a similar situation at Ferrari. The number 2 driver would have swapped position right away around lap 19 or maybe at the following pit stop. End of story.