FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[bud]

Repost but, the truth about Fernando Alonso? Well a picture tells a thousand words

[smokin]

If Massa is no good why did FA need teams orders to pass him, can't be that slow if mr 2 times has to resort to asking team for help to pass...........

1. Because Vettel was very close behind Alonso and was setting and resetting fastest lap on virtually every circuit.
1.A. Because lap times slow when cars fight for position. They must drive anywhere to protect their position or to execute the pass, paying little heed to the proper racing line.
1.B. Because if Massa and Alonso were tussling for P1, it significantly would have increased the chances that Vettel could have taken advantage of their condition and passed the both of them.

2. Because an F1 car is a fragile instrument. If the pass were contested, that would manifestly increase the probability of contact between them and the possibility of damage to one car or both. With Vettel in such close trail, even minor damage to either Ferrari undoubtedly would have moved him up the podium (potentially along with Hamilton, Button and Webber) and cost Ferrari significant points in both the WDC and the WCC. Alonso was loyal enough to his team that he would not risk the sort of self-inflicted injury RBR has suffered twice already this season -- the sole reason RBR do not dominate both the WDC and WCC at this point -- just to get to the top step of the podium.

Ross Brawn:

"Our drivers are asked to avoid clashing against each other, and if one has the chance to take the title while the other one doesn't, we want both of them to act in the interest of the team without throwing away that opportunity."

1. If Vettel was so fast then why was he never in a position to overtake Alonso?
1.A. So Alonso stays behind Massa. Problem solved.
1.B. See 1.A.
2. See 1.A.

The interests of the team would have been best served by Alonso keeping Vettel away from 'slower' Massa and preventing Vettel from overtaking or damaging Massa's car, preserving a Ferrari 1-2

Your arguments are based upon the premise that Alonso had to try to overtake Massa. Why didn't Ferrari just tell him to hold station? Which brings us back to the OP. Alonso would have thrown a hissy fit, spat out his dummy and driven Massa off the track. That's who he is and that's the truth about Fernando Alonso.

[Hammer278]

I always knew he was a jerk. And I always had a feeling that Ferrari was/is dirty.
That is all.

Exact timeframe of this suitcase? I knew about Alonso from 2005 and Ferrari since I started watching F1 (1998)

I'm sorry but I don't quite understand your wording so I apologize if I am misinterpreting it. I have actually known that Alonso was a jerk before I liked F1. When I was a young girl (didn't care about F1, but happened to be watching), I was watching a race with my dad and we discussed Alonso's character. So yeah. I don't even know why I remember this conversation so vividly, but ever since then I haven't been a fan. I wasn't trying to sound pretentious or something.

My fault. I meant timeframe since you knew of his wretched personality. You interpreted correctly.

[f1ea]

1. If Vettel was so fast then why was he never in a position to overtake Alonso?
1.A. So Alonso stays behind Massa. Problem solved.
1.B. See 1.A.
2. See 1.A.

The interests of the team would have been best served by Alonso keeping Vettel away from 'slower' Massa and preventing Vettel from overtaking or damaging Massa's car, preserving a Ferrari 1-2

Your arguments are based upon the premise that Alonso had to try to overtake Massa. Why didn't Ferrari just tell him to hold station? Which brings us back to the OP. Alonso would have thrown a hissy fit, spat out his dummy and driven Massa off the track. That's who he is and that's the truth about Fernando Alonso.

it will be endless... just like still the Austria episode gets brought up like 10 yrs later......

1.A. Alonso stays behind Massa:
No. Alonso was not going to stay behind Massa. His choices were: attempt a pass with the risks involved or lose time.
When Massa came out, Alonso decided to back off to give some room and avoid some clash and to avoid both losing more time to Vettel. BUT when he neded to close the gap, he pretty much closed it on demand. Just like he extended the lead once he was past. He was faster and he was going for the move because he needed the 1st place for the championship. Period.

Vettel settled for 3rd because he chose to go riskfree... a decision he was wise to make given he's not far behind in the championship and was already getting higher score than his competitors. Also, he was not in the car to finish 1st. He knew that, so did everyone.

I can't believe the posts suggesting Ferrari telling Alonso to hold position. You have got to be kidding: The faster man, in the faster car, in the hunt for the championship... holding position. Simply clueless. There was only 1 choice: overtake.

[What's Burning?]

On that we agree, the best outcome for Ferrari and Alonso was that. And they got it and there is no argument from me on that. It was the best choice.

But Alonso didn't overtake, he was ham handedly allowed to pass. I say hamhandedly because I've convinced myself that Massa and Smedley did it the way they did it as a show of civil disobedience to the orders they were given.

So you argument of once choice being to overtake is hollow since he didn't.

That's what my argument is, I didn't get to SEE it from Ferrari the way I've seen it from Red Bull and McLaren, all out racing.

[bud]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

[f1ea]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

[billindenver]

Why didn't Ferrari just tell him to hold station? Which brings us back to the OP. Alonso would have thrown a hissy fit, spat out his dummy and driven Massa off the track. That's who he is and that's the truth about Fernando Alonso.

Let me get this straight. You are saying that Alonso and Ferrari are evil bar stewards for team orders that you believe told Massa to move out of the way...but you are saying it would have been better to have team orders telling Alonso to hold station?

Your true colors have just shown. You couldn't care less whether team orders exist or do not exist. You simply hate Alonso and don't like that he won the race. Hypocritical garbage.

[f1ea]

Why didn't Ferrari just tell him to hold station? Which brings us back to the OP. Alonso would have thrown a hissy fit, spat out his dummy and driven Massa off the track. That's who he is and that's the truth about Fernando Alonso.

Let me get this straight. You are saying that Alonso and Ferrari are evil bar stewards for team orders that you believe told Massa to move out of the way...but you are saying it would have been better to have team orders telling Alonso to hold station?

Your true colors have just shown. You couldn't care less whether team orders exist or do not exist. You simply hate Alonso and don't like that he won the race. Hypocritical garbage.

I missed that!
telling them to hold statin IS a team order

[bud]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

thats what im saying Massa was faster!

[What's Burning?]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

EVERY overtake in F1 has risks ask Webber and HK. You just have to trust that your drivers are capable of managing that, which Ferrari apparently isn't.

[f1ea]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

thats what im saying Massa was faster!

Not necessarily.
Alonso was MUCH faster than Kubica, look at what happened.
Webber was MUCH faster than Kovalainen... look at what happened.
Care to go on?

[vaptin]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

EVERY overtake in F1 has risks ask Webber and HK. You just have to trust that your drivers are capable of managing that, which Ferrari apparently isn't.

Or they just diddn't want to. Why take the risk when there's no need to?

[bud]

Massa was ahead and lapping on equal terms. Saying Alonso was faster is ridiculous.

And mate if you're afraid of banging wheels then sorry go watch Rally. The risk of coming together is what makes a pass exciting.

[What's Burning?]

There was only 1 choice: overtake.

which the supposed faster man, couldn't do.

WITHOUT risk for the team: No.
Was the team willing to accept the risk: No.

EVERY overtake in F1 has risks ask Webber and HK. You just have to trust that your drivers are capable of managing that, which Ferrari apparently isn't.

Or they just diddn't want to. Why take the risk when there's no need to?

When they can simply just break the rules.