right of course. Even if theyare equal Nando simply has a more competitive spirit

+1

What is definitly wrong in the replacement:

1> Ferrari decided to renew Kimi's contract for 2010 without a break clause [$].

2> Ferrari decided to trade his driver for another one to please the sponsor. Wrong in the view of part of F1 audience, but its Ferrari's commencial right to do it. However it does leave a cheap impression on Ferrari that doesn't match its heritage/brand.

3> Ferrari decided to raise a $6M barrier to Kimi contractors in 2010, in the form of imdemnity. Since McLaren doesn't have the 50% on drivers salary assistance, he got too expensive and F1 fans will miss him, a valuable and attractive element, in 2010. Bernie never said a word to condemn it, bcs he despises drivers that doesn't make PR work for the good sake of F1.

Kimi coming back to Merc and will beat Alonso to make it 4-1 in WDCs.

TC those aren't facts, Alonso and raikonen are about on the same level - the level after Lewis

I've always wanted to see Alonso in a Ferrari, ever since his Minardi days. I think he's the right fit for the team and a better driver overall than Kimi.

Go Alonso!

I'll reserve judgement until the races.

I think both Kimi and Alonso are able to deliver WDC with a fast car. In the end its a decision that can't go wrong for Ferrari, probably will be perceived as right if Alonso gets the WDC but tbh, Kimi can do it too and already did it. The decision impacts drivers more than Ferrari's performance, maybe Alonso will fit better inside the team, so in that sense it can be right

Alexis*27 hysterical!

adam,i remember you from the kimi forum.none of us know how much alonso/kimi were getting paid so this statement is only an opinion,not fact

Ehm, Alonso already has 2 WDC...

Ferrari gave Kimi what McLaren was unable to do.

A WDC. Then happened exactly what I thought will happen years ago, after I read about some of Kimi;s childhood stories. I've seen it over and over with other people. Kimi's ambition was to become a WDC. Mission accomplished. Kimi is capable for multiple WDC's, no doubt, but he needs to work on his goals. No matter how talented a driver is, stagging a championship challenge has never been easy, requires commitment and the will to steer the team in the right direction. If he'd done so, Kimi would still drive next year for Ferrari.

As it is, I rather have Kimi at Ferrari, but Alonso ATM seems the better choice. And I think the team was right to hold on to Massa. He showed the kind of commitment, that brought him near to win the WDC in 2008.

Well I do hope Kimi ends up at RBR in 2011. At least PR events wouldn't be an issue anymore.



If you followed his post in this thread, then you know there's someone that seems to live in another universe than us.

Time will tell.
Kimi had 1 WDC and 2 WCC´s with Ferrari in three years.
If Alonso can do the same or better,then it was right, IF not then we know that Ferrari ****ed up.

"Overhyped" is kinda strong word; especially coming from avid Montoya fan.

Alonso has never impressed me with speed. He impressed me with being tactically smart in the races.

Kimi has impressed me with speed. He's probably not as tactically-minded as Alonso is, but faster, he is.

Which one you prefer is, I think, a matter of preference. Both are excellent. I still voted Ferrari are wrong and they should have shown Kimi more respect. Especially Luca Cordero di Montezemolo has come out as a big jerk with many of his statements regarding Kimi and I would expect more class from a person in his position.

I don't think they understood Kimi's personality - had they understood it we would not have this discussion now. I think it is better for Kimi to not be in that team - so actually I am at peace with their decision. They were wrong about him, but for Kimi it is better he is not working with people like Montezemolo and Domenicali. It's better even to take a sabbatical, or to retire for good, than to spend another year with those people.

I heard from Robetsons that one of the reasons that the marriage between Kimi and McLaren could not be possible was about money. They clarified there were also other reasons, but the money was one of them. Fact.

Alonso never requested 45 millons at McLaren even if he could have done so because of being world champion.

Kimi worked towards the goal in 2008, in fact he had a good start and was in the lead after a few races but then he hit a really bad patch and it all went down in flames.
As for steering the team in the right direction, just what did Alonso do in the last two seasons at Renault? I thought he was capable of steering yet the team was nowhere.

I voted right. Ferrari didn´t deserved him.

Ferrari are not to blame they gave him chances but Kimi didnt deliver. They carried him for almost 2 years, and in that time Kimi was never particularly impressive. Evem when he did beat massa it was never by much, not the way real great drivers beat their team mates with massive gaps, certainly no display of amazing speed witch ferrari were paying big money for. Its his fault so its unfair to blame ferrari. And Ferrari would never fire their driver and replace him with a slower one. They chose the faster driver, and it was a smart decision.

Ferrari never gave him the support that was given to MS. In fact, Ferrari went out of their way to babysit Massa. Case in point - they sent Rob Smedley to collect the team trophy at Barcelona in 2008, a race which Kimi won. I guess comforting Massa was more important to them than letting Kimi's team celebrate their victory. It's their choice of course, now they can enjoy the Latin drivers duo and the many successes that this partnership will bring. Todt was less emotional than that and some would say he delivered better results than Stefano.

Say again?

Nail on the head

todt had "i want to be involved" schumacher, stefano had "i don't care" kimi

If I recall correctly, Todt also won a WDC with "i don't care" kimi ... That's because he is real top manager, and is therefore able to use the strenghts of the people that are available to him. Stefano on the other hand is a failure, as he needed to hire someone else (alonso) to do his job (direct and motivate the team)

todt :
Stefano :

yeap, going into the last 2 rounds with kimi and winning the championship was todt's great merit
doesn't matter than hamilton and mac threw it away, todt won it with kimi by 1 huge point
stefano failed greatly massa losing the title by another huge point after being wdc for a few turns

and i really don't like stefan, mind you. but i am sick of excuses for kimi. now it's stefano's fault

grow up, it's his only fault. that's why he will be taking a year off. if he really wanted he would be in f1, but he has a prima dona attitude.
too bad because he's one heck of a quick driver.

I am just thinking of good old Coulthards sour face in that silly superman cape.

Todt admires those qualities in Schumacher too. If Todt were still TP at Ferrari, he would have been looking to replace Raikkenon too.

100% right, ask me Kimi is a man with "that type" of psychology...The Fire has stopped burning.

Alonso is still hungry.

Pointing the fingers wildly in the wrong direction if you ask me. Kimi's successes/failures can hardly be attributed solely to a manager. There's only so much you can do with a driver with Kimi's sort of approach. All they could really do was build a top car and the rest was up to Kimi to do with it what he could. But as we saw, when there's an equally good car for competition with equally good(or slightly better) drivers, then a top car and his talent just isn't enough.

Alonso might be the difference Ferrari needs.

At the time I wasn't sure. But the way Kimi has reacted since I think Alonso has to be a step forward, if nothing else his driven attitude will be in stark contrast. Kimi seems to go through periods of just not caring.

Very wrong.

They should have replaced Massa with Alonso.

They should have had 2 world champions in their team.

Arguably 2 of the top 3 F1 drivers, other being Hamilton.

It would have been a fairytale dreamteam.

But they got sentimental because of Massa's crash. I actually believe if Massa didn't crash they would've got rid of him in 2010.

Ferrari sacking a world champion is a big mistake. But they are lucky because they replaced with another World Champion.

Massa will be faster than Alonso - you'll see.

I was not discussing Kimi but ferrari as a whole. Under stefano this big winning machine is turning into a circus. Kimi was certainly guilty of not commiting himself enough in the eyes of his employer, but there are far bigger problem with ferrari at the moment in my opinion. They will discover next year that there's not so much alonso can do (or facts will prove me wrong, but I doubt it).



Again I was not trying to find excuses to Kimi, but since you start... The opposition was way tougher in 2007 (Hamilton and Alonso) than in 2008 (only Hamilton, and way more erratic than in his rookie year). In 2008, going into Monaco, Kimi had a nice point lead and it looked like he was going to walk away with it. It still amases me that they came up with developments favoring Felipe's style (like the front suspension). My opinion is that under Jean Todt things would have been different, and we might not be discussing now if it was wize or not to have sacked Kimi

I just could not grasp the logic here. From your POV Kimi, Alonso and Hamilton are currently the top 3 F1 drivers. But at end you have conceded Massa would be faster than Alonso. Therefore, the whinny Massa must be one of the top drivers too. Then where do you put Vettel (team bosses' choice) and Jenson (current WDC?).

On the topic, I guess, just like Kimi, Alonso could be another Ferrari's scapegoat in the future especially IF they could not win the championship.

Edit: Vettel (Team bosses' choice - see Autosport's report)

Like i have said before, i think that only time will tell.

Kimi had 1 WDC and 2 WCC´s with Ferrari in three years.
If Alonso can do the same or better,then it was right, IF not then we know that Ferrari ****ed up.

Hehehe.... then where is the thrill of guess-and-check?



Alonso could do no wrong then? I guess for Ferrari, Alonso's yardstick is Massa.

Ferrari is right: Alonso is hungry, Kimi is not.

We can have a round up after next season finishes. I expect nothing less from Teflonso than:

- winning his first race
- getting the WDC/WCC
- beating Massa by at least 15 points
- winning at least 6 races
- getting involved in NO scandals whatsoever (yeah, right...)

That's assuming things will be similar to 2007:
1. The car is as good as 2007
2. Hamilton and Jenson cause a internal meltdown at McLaren
3. Hamilton saves all his most spectacular brainfade for the last few races
4. Alonso will be gifted a few points by Massa

Yeap. Alonso is going to make the car faster... for Massa.

I'd be seriously worried if Teflonso can't produce a better car than our poor Kimi.

Lewis seems to have a knack for it. I'm sure he'll deliver

?
For the millionth time, the 2 points in Brazil wouldn't have mattered if Kimi didn't perform as brilliantly in the second half of the season. Again, I expect Teflonso to at least match said results.

1. Kimi didn't produce that car.
2. Hopes so, but it isn't entirely impossible that Alonso will not be as lucky as Kimi in terms of benefiting from Lewis brainfade
3. It MATTERS, because he only won by one point.

Aren't you finished rewriting history yet ?

1. You're right. I'm sorry. He 'developed' it.

2. Aren't you a Lewis fan; and hope to see him fail!?!
Anyway, what you fail to realise is that Kimi did not simply benefit from his brainfades. He was part of the reasons which caused them.
Eg. Do you think Lewis would have made his mistake in China without any pressure from the Ferrari?

3. Of course it mattered in that sense. But it wouldn't matter at all had Kimi crashed out in Japan like his future successor did..

1. The comparison is flawed any way, with no in season testing
2. He brainfades doesn't mean he fails. It's just part of him as a driver. Yeah I think he would have made those mistakes not under pressure because he's a rookie.
3. It's actually a response to your point about the 15 points difference. What I mean is it's actually closer between Raikkenon and Massa if you take into account the points Massa gave Raikkenon. About his "briliant" second half season, it's only in comparison to his first half season. As "brilliant" as you may want to make it out to be it's not good enough to win it on his own.

A rookie that was good enough to get 9 consecutive podiums. Right...

What I mean is it's actually closer between Raikkenon and Massa if you take into account the points Massa gave Raikkenon.
Actually, checking the tables again, Kimi beat Massa by 16 points. Let's agree he was 'gifted' 2 in Brazil, and the difference is still 14 points. Hardly that much closer, is it?

The second half of the season....

A while ago, someone posted stats about the best combination of results in the 2nd half of the season for the past decade. Kimi's 2007 effort was only bettered by Schumi with the 2004/2002 supercars IIRC. Do I need to say more?

Even this season, Hamilton did a Hamilton@130% and went into the wall. He's not under pressure, he's not in a championship fight. It's just the sort of things he does once in a while.

it's actually 4 points, 2 points added to Massa, 2 points taken from Raikkenon.

I think those 2nd half season results comparison are meaningless, different cars, different development rate, and your competitors relative competitiveness.

I honestly dont do "What If" scenarios, but China was a cock up primarily from his team/Pit-wall paralysis. Than mistakes from Lewis. How many laps was Lewis driving around on the carcass of the tyre? 3 laps? 4 laps? He was out for 7 laps on shredded tyres, with Alonso catching him hand over fist and Raikkonen before that. The guy was a first year rookie looking at his pit-wall for leadership. But they froze and left a kid out on track, to drive on a part slick, part nylon, part steel mesh tyre. The what if scenario is, "What if Hamilton made that corner?" Would Raikkonen have been sacked at the end of the 2008 season? The line between success and failure at time are incredibly thin. Just ask Massa. World champion for 15 seconds, then Hamilton passes Glock, on the last corner, of the last lap, of the last race of the season. People talk of Hamilton as a potential great and one of the current top 2 drivers with Alonso. The what if scenario is, "What if hamilton never passed Glock and Massa was crowned WDC?" I dont think Hamilton would be seen and viewed as he is now. As I said, success and failure, such a thin line.

I hate when people argue that Kimi beat Alonso in 2005, he was "clearly better", "the car let him down", etc.

In the early races of the season, Renault was better, they won the first 4 races (Alonso won 3 times, and in Australia he finished 3rd starting from 13th). After these first races, Alonso had quite a big advantage in the WDC and Renault decided not to take any risks; they didn't use their engines at maximum power, they developed new engines but they didn't put in the newest one because they wanted to be safe (Symonds said this in a 2006 interview ).
McLaren did the opposite - in order to catch up, they had to build stronger engines, they had a faster car but it was also more risk. The car was fast but unreliable due to the engine, but they had to risk it because they had no other chance. Renault was playing safe, and McLaren's car was much faster, this was obvious for everyone, so no surprise that in most races, Kimi seemed faster than Alonso. His WDC was never really in danger though, because Renault had those stronger engines "in stock" , if Kimi had come too close in the points, they would have used them.
They put the strongest engine into the car at the last race of the season in China, and Alonso won the race quite easily, an indicator that they could have won more races if they hadn't been cautious... What I want to say is that the 2005 season was a bit misleading, you can't compare the two drivers and say "poor Kimi was better all year but his car always let him down", I think their performances were more or less equal with their given machinery...

Also, if a car often breaks down, retires due to mechanical problems, blown engines, etc, I don't think it is it "bad luck" for the driver - or of it is, than a slow car is just as much bad luck. Unreliable car, slow car: both are the teams fault, it's the team who can't make the car more reliable, it's the team who can't make them faster. And it's a team sport, the team's performance counts more than the drivers. So I don't think Kimi had bad luck that year, his team just couldn't provide a better car. We don't hear people say how "unlucky" Alonso was in 2008 or 2009, but the basic problem was the same, the team couldn't provide a better car. If we can say (and a lot of people say) that "Kimi would have won the WDC in 2005 if he hadn't had so much bad luck", why can't we say "Alonso would have won the WDC in 2008, if..." As I said, unreliable car = the team hasn't worked well enough, slow car = the team hasn't worked well enough, I don't see either of them as "bad luck".

Bad luck, to me, is when you get hit on the helmet by a bouncing spring, when someone crashes into your car and it's not your fault at all , when you hit an animal etc.

Sorry for the rant but I'm tired of all these talk about Kimi being clearly faster in '05 and his bad luck.

Räikkönen fans are mostly made up of frustrations and nonsense.

GC

They were very wrong and they'll see it next year.