Ferrari: are they coming back?

On Sun, 29 May 2005 12:28:37 -0700, Nino Barlini <net>
wrote: 

The T-Ball inspired points structure all but prevents a comeback from
this point.
 

"Kimi" should learn how to drive a car.

Alternatively, it could have been a much, much better result for
Ferrari if Mark Webber were at the Coca-Cola 600, where he belongs,
yesterday.
 

If you thought they had you were not paying attention.

F2005... wrote: 

Hell, no. I just like hearing it from the drivers ... from the podium.

M


--
"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

Pete Clemenza

"F2005..." <com> wrote in message
news:com... 

What goes around comes around......
 

I think he can probably do it better than you or I.....they gambled & lost
is all.
 

Webber is definitly not the "real deal"
 

They'll be back - but not till Bridgestone wake up or they do a deal with
Michelin.

I.

On Mon, 30 May 2005 19:50:08 GMT, "Iain Miller" <me> wrote: 

....Working as designed, it is.
 

First, he flat-spotted his tires bad enough to shake his suspension to
pieces, despite absolutely no pressure from behind; then he simply
couldn't calculate the long term reward of net -2 vs 0 points towards
the championship: NOT a wunderkind. McLaren's disregard for the
safety of their and the others drivers homes in on criminal
negligence.

The FIA, although primarily concerned with spectator safety, will have
to react.
 

....Embarrassing.
 

It's closer than it looks, if not for Webber's bone-headed start it
might have been *Cavallini* on the podium.

"F2005..." <com> wrote in message
news:com... 

Its the same system for everyone
 

You may have a minor point - what was interesting & reassuring is that the
wheel tether worked perfectly. The other point is of course that this was
more than likely a Mclaren decision, not just a Kimi decision. 

Indeed - AFAIK he is on a multi year deal whereas Heidfeld is on a a 1 year
deal - and I know which one I'd rather keep when Button exercises his
contract to drive the other car next year.
 

I think JPM would have been up there - had he got through at the start I I
think the result would have looked very different indeed. MS would have got
stuck behind Webber for a start.

I.

Iain Miller wrote:
<<Webber is definitly not the "real deal">>

How so?

C.

Tiger Racing wrote: 
I might be able to answer that. IMO, though he apparently has no
trouble getting contracts, he is an underachiever - fast enough to
warrant attention but not fast enough to win consistently, or win at
all, pretty much.

He's made some blunders that have cost other drivers the race or their
car, and he seems to have a lot of trouble with touching other cars in
the corners. "Rubbin' is racin'" does not hold in F1.

M

--
"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli."

Pete Clemenza

"Tiger Racing" <com> wrote in message
news:googlegroups.com... 

He's been quick over the odd single lap - but only in qualifying & more
often than not with light fuel. He makes too many mistakes in the races.

Read some stuff about him a week or three ago - he came up through the ranks
in Australia with some success - but not as much as some of his
contemporaries - but he did have the right contacts & particularly some
girlfriend or other who was involved in sports management. One contact led
to another & a seat in Stoddart the fellow Aussies Minardi. Up until a
couple of races ago I think his best result was still the 5th place in
Melbourne in his first race.

Right now he's behind his team mate in the championship & his team mate beat
him fair & square in Monaco (and showed him how to execute a pass properly &
cleanly). Then he screws up in Germany while his team mate grabs aother 8
points.

He's under pressure now & we'll see if he can hack that or whether he'll
fade away - just as Zanardi and Frentzen did at Williams. WHo knows, maybe
he's trying to hard & over-driving the car but I don't think he can afford
to continue that - a season full of screw ups at Williams will probably see
him out the door & I could name quite a few other drivers that Williams have
to choose from to replace him.

I.