Montezemolo speaks

Russfeld · 10 Jan 2003, 04:57 (Ref:469158)

From January 13th issue of Autoweek, to F1 journo Alan Henry.

At Ferrari, the status of the No. 1 driver is determined by the time sheets. It is not decided by God or what the journalists or what the team might think, but by his sheer speed. And Michael has been consistently the fastest Ferrari driver since 1996.

z2252314 · 10 Jan 2003, 07:12 (Ref:469206)

It's no suprise that all the anti-schu's have suddenly become quiet.

Valve Bounce · 10 Jan 2003, 07:23 (Ref:469209)

I think it is about time we laid this chestnut to rest. How many more pro-anti SchM bashes do you want to endure?

Russfeld · 10 Jan 2003, 07:25 (Ref:469210)

Well this is one of the few actual quotes from someone IN THE KNOW. Not wild and mindless press speculation

Valve Bounce · 10 Jan 2003, 07:33 (Ref:469215)

I think John Toad, SchM, Brawn, also are in the know, and quite honestly I wouldn't believe any of them regarding this contentious subject either. But if you want to provoke another SchM bash, go right ahead.

f1manoz · 10 Jan 2003, 07:39 (Ref:469219)

Yep, we've already seen this before. We don't need to keep on seeing it. Nothing more than flaming...

Jukebox · 10 Jan 2003, 07:49 (Ref:469226)

The man is an ****** but he's right about Michael

Russfeld · 10 Jan 2003, 08:24 (Ref:469242)

Im not provoking a bash. The bashes are based on incorrect facts. Im just pointing out one of the few instances where someone lays the situation out as it is.

How is Montezemolo an ass? he seems like one of the better guys in F1

Jukebox · 10 Jan 2003, 08:27 (Ref:469244)

He's responsible for the 2002 Austrian GP incident and the wrong person gets the blame

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 08:57 (Ref:469266)

Quote:

Originally posted by Russfeld
And Michael has been consistently the fastest Ferrari driver since 1996.

He will be, he gets all the new bits, including entire cars before his team mate

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 09:00 (Ref:469269)

BTW, during the ITV f1 christmas special Max Mosley was talking about tyres and he said about the bridgestones being deisgned for Ferrari then corrected himself and said that they were designed for one man, Michael Schumacher.

However, yes, Michael Schumacher is a brilliant driver, and yes, he is better than Rubens.

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 09:02 (Ref:469271)

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
He will be, he gets all the new bits, including entire cars before his team mate

'before his teammate'... I take it that, at some point (that is from the next race on), his teammate was given those parts and cars too, yet he still was quicker. That should further explain the 'consistently'.

Also, since he was 'consistently' faster, it is a logical (as opposed to stupid) managerial decission to give him the new car 'before' his teammate, if two cars are not available. No big mystery here Mr V.

Jukebox · 10 Jan 2003, 09:04 (Ref:469274)

It's best not to take a risk by debuting both contenders while reliability is still a concern.

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 09:06 (Ref:469275)

Red, note the little "smilie" it was meant in good humour, did you read my post under it where i said that i thought that Michael is a brilliant driver and better that Rubens? why didn't you reply to that?

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 09:19 (Ref:469287)

Well, Mr V, I did notice the smilie, as well as the second post. (actually I saw it after I hit reply for your first).

The fact that you consider him a brilliant driver is not news to me, but actually that's not the subject of this thread; this one is about the rationale behind team politics at Ferrari. And the other 2 comments fits better in this context. Even though they were made in good humour, I suspect that they are not actually too far from your opinion. (And I do not agree with them)...

Cheers,
Red

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 09:36 (Ref:469301)

Quote:

Originally posted by Red
Even though they were made in good humour, I suspect that they are not actually too far from your opinion.

You are right, yes, it was said in good humour, and yes, it is my opinion that he gets the bits first.

However, i'll still have that

with you if thats ok.

Jukebox · 10 Jan 2003, 09:44 (Ref:469305)

It's great to see both of you guys can get back to positive terms in a short while

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 09:47 (Ref:469307)

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
However, i'll still have that with you if thats ok.

If that's OK? :confused: When was that we did not agree on this point?

PS:

Juke, it's kinda boring to drink beers with someone and the discussion goes like: "Yes, you're right", "How true", "Couldn't say it better myself" ...

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 09:59 (Ref:469317)

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
You are right,

Quote:

Originally posted by Red

PS: Juke, it's kinda boring to drink beers with someone and the discussion goes like: "Yes, you're right",

So, your not up for that

then?

Oh well, back to full arguement mode

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 10:02 (Ref:469322)

Ok, never agreeing is boring too....

Russfeld · 10 Jan 2003, 10:52 (Ref:469336)

Quote:

Originally posted by Jukebox
He's responsible for the 2002 Austrian GP incident and the wrong person gets the blame

I doubt he was the on who made the decision at the track. I dont have a problem with Austria because Ferrari were being consistent. They've allways said they would support the #1 driver. The #1 being the lead driver in points. And once MIchael's points situation was locked down, Rubens became the team #1.

but of course no one has a problem with that, only with Michael

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 11:17 (Ref:469352)

Quote:

Originally posted by Russfeld

but of course no one has a problem with that, only with Michael

I see where your coming from Russ, Michael is either loved or loathed, however, from my own point of view, if it was (for example) Rafe, DC or Jacques, all drivers i have no particular time for moving over for JPM, Kimi or Jenson, 3 drivers that i like after dominating the race that early in the season then i would not like it, as much as i didn't like what happened at Austria.

I personally don't have a problem with it towards the end of the season when the other/second driver has no mathmatical chance left himself.

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 11:35 (Ref:469361)

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
that early in the season

I see where your coming from Mr V. Replace 'that early in the season' with '38 points gap' and see if the matter shows a different perspective....

Mr V · 10 Jan 2003, 11:43 (Ref:469463)

Quote:

Originally posted by Red
Replace 'that early in the season' with '38 points gap' and see if the matter shows a different perspective....

maybe, maybe not, but i still think.......

Quote:

Originally posted by mr v
I personally don't have a problem with it towards the end of the season when the other/second driver has no mathmatical chance left himself.

Red · 10 Jan 2003, 11:47 (Ref:469467)

Yeah, 6th race was not towards the end of the season, I kinda agree. 38 points behind Michael Schumacher was not 'towards'. That was the end for Rubens' season.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Montezemolo: Rossi first, no talks with Kimi (THREAD REOPENED)	DeoValente	Formula One	39	29 Sep 2006 16:08
'Fiat don't fund Ferrari' - Montezemolo	chunterer	Formula One	18	27 Jan 2006 12:56
Montezemolo to run Italian industry federation	ASCII Man	Formula One	1	28 Feb 2004 01:51
Montezemolo throws a tantrum again (about points system)	jonathanc	Formula One	28	20 Dec 2003 20:38