a) why does Rosberg deliver and MSC not?
2010 - no argument, MSC was genuinely horrible and Rosberg at his strongest.
2011 - MSC was the stronger of the two, but a near-Vettel2010-esque season caused him to miss out on big points. Canada and Spa come to mind, where he had some stupendously good performances yet was beaten by things that were out of his control (starting from the back of the grid in Spa (but nevertheless beating Rosberg
) and being DRS'd by Button and Webber in Canada because DRS became available).
2012 - MSC has been the strongest of the two so far.
Qualifying - Rosberg may be a good qualifier, but 3 times out of 4 he has shown severe weakness and a lack of concentration in Q3. Schuey takes this one.
Race - In Australia Schuey was running third and easily matching Vettel's pace when his gearbox gave out.
In Malaysia he annihilated Rosberg despite his incident with Grosjean early on.
China is an exception, but then that was an exception in every right as not only did Schumacher get screwed over by his pit crew, but so did Button, leaving Rosberg (who had reached the cliff at the end of the race) to trundle his way to a win. Also, Massa.
In Bahrain Schuey had equal pace despite having to make his way through the back of the grid.
That's 2-1 to Schuey at the very least. There's no denying Rosberg's prowess in China, but that was probably the luckiest a driver will get this year as the conditions allowed Mercedes to sidestep the tyre shenanigans and Button was screwed out of a win. (Yes, win. He had the pace and Rosberg hit the cliff.)
Regardless, I highly doubt that Mercedes will return to the form they showed in China, and my hunch is that Schuey himself knows that. Barring the W-Duct, they have nothing. Worse yet, they still have the same tyre issues from last year. Of course he's going to be pissed off at missing out on an easy 2nd or 3rd place, and especially seeing his teammate get far, far luckier and even win.
1 unlucky weekend is fine. Two or three, maybe. 1.25 seasons? Not a chance.
Yes, Michael has been unlucky, yes, Michael has been better at times. Yet over the whole period Nico has dominated Michael. And we still don't know how good Nico really is.
Again, Vettel vs Webber 2010. Luck can easily manipulate the "apparent" skill difference between two drivers.
b) is there a hidden agenda behind Michael's attacks on Pirelli? Does he really think he can get preferential treatment by attacking them publicly? Does it really have to do with Merc not yet signing the Concorde agreement (if so, then what do the tires have to do with it?)?? Did Paul Hembery not please MSC as he should have pleased him in Michael's eyes, and so he will continue to receive retaliation from the Schu?
Whatever the case being, if Michael were to perform better his fans would not have to excuse him consistently with all kinds of arguments but they would simply enjoy Michael's driving and celebrate his triumphs. Because that is what MSC came back for from retirement.
It's funny that you mention the fans when you yourself have absolutely no arguments, barring 2010, to show that Rosberg has been better in any way of the word. As for the tyres, we still
know from Brundle that he's not alone on this one. And it's not even his OR Pirelli's fault either - the fans were stupid enough to ask for more entertainment in the fan forum. Pirelli did their job. There's a reason why Vettel and Webber are sidestepping the matter and mentioning the fans' enjoyment - the viewers genuinely like the racing in 2012 compared to the racing in the previous years. Doesn't mean the drivers do.
Edited by Pamphlet, 09 May 2012 - 10:15.