Jump to content


Photo

Fernando Alonso thread [merged]


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14493 replies to this topic

#1751 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 15:40

So you watched the footage and assumed the reason for the stewards' decision with no other information? Yet you criticise Autocourse and Eason for apparently making things up!

I will go with Autocourse's report on the reason for the stewards' decision rather than your assumption based on youtube.

who cares what you favor? and for what reason you do that?
the bottom line is, in 2005 alonso cutted the chicane and overtook klien, let klien reovertook him again and immediately after that overtook him again, some laps later the stewards asked alonso to let klien repass again!

whether ou see it as a precendence for lewis penalty in 2008 in spa or not, it doesnt matter!
the truth is the penalyt in spa 2008 for lewis was fair, because he profited from cutting a chicane, as alonso did in suzuka 2005!

it is nothing personal, it is about having an advantage due to leaving the track, and in both cases alonso and hamilton profited on that, and a penalty is fair!

Edited by YellowHelmet, 05 July 2010 - 15:41.


Advertisement

#1752 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 05 July 2010 - 15:50

Please bring the discussion away from the matter of the 'precedent' and back to what this means for Alonso. If it goes further off topic posts will be deleted.

A reminder for all posters that the ignore function is available from your control panel.

#1753 billkaos

billkaos
  • Member

  • 160 posts
  • Joined: June 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 16:14

Interesting list of Alonso mistakes/problems from Spanish press:

Alonso crosses his fingers: http://www.elmundo.e...1278327215.html

It turns out that in eight out of nine races he has had some problem, I'll summarize [all blames IMHO]:

  • Bahrein: Engine change. May affect his chances later on. Ferrari to blame.
  • Australia: Bad start. It likely costed him a podium. Blame 50/50 him and bad luck.
  • Malaysia: Mistake with meteo prediction. DNF. Blame 90 percent Ferrari, 10 percent drivers?
  • China: Jump start. Another podium lost. Blame: 100% FA.
  • Monaco: Crash in FP3. Blame: 100% FA, with a little bit of bad luck.
  • Turkey: Failure to qualify in Q3. Blame: Unable to say, 50/50 Ferrari/FA?
  • Canada: Trouble with traffic. At least one position lost. Blame: 40% FA, 60% backmarkers.
  • Valencia: Bad timing with SC. Another podium lost. Blame 100% bad luck.

So far we have a blame distribution of 30% to Ferrari, 43,75% to Alonso, and 26.250% to Bad Luck/backmarkers.

IMHO the bad luck component is well within the limits, so both FA an Ferrari must improve a lot.

Edited by billkaos, 05 July 2010 - 18:42.


#1754 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 16:28

Pretty fair. I would give the team some blame in Australia for not moving Felipe out of the way when Fernando was obviously faster and could have challenged for the win possibly.

And at Valencia I think Fernando could have followed Lewis past the SC, if he'd been right there and feeling a bit friskier. And kept Koba behind. 10-20%, say.

#1755 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 16:51

Pretty fair. I would give the team some blame in Australia for not moving Felipe out of the way when Fernando was obviously faster and could have challenged for the win possibly.

At that early point in the season you can't show driver favoritism. They were both racing, whether one was faster than the other is irrelevant.

#1756 Frostbomb

Frostbomb
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:07

  • Australia: Bad start. It likely costed him a podium. Blame 50/50 him and bad luck.
  • Malasia: Mistake with meteo prediction. DNF. Blame 90 percent Ferrari, 10 percent drivers?
  • Turkey: Failure to qualify in Q3. Blame: Unable to say, 50/50 Ferrari/FA?
  • Canada: Trouble with traffic. At least one position lost. Blame: 40% FA, 60% backmarkers.


Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

#1757 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:15

At that early point in the season you can't show driver favoritism. They were both racing, whether one was faster than the other is irrelevant.


Well it would've been realism more tham favouritism, I'd say, just about pace in that one race. Sure you're right that that was the thinking in the team. But not aggressive enough I think. If they want to beat McLaren and Red Bull, they have to maximise the benefit of having Fernando Alonso, otherwise what are they doing? Even in Oz they should have been planning for not having a car advantage this year.

#1758 billkaos

billkaos
  • Member

  • 160 posts
  • Joined: June 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:21

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

What do you mean? I'd guess you mean that Alonso shouldn't be blamed on those races.

Guess what? A driver is expected to performs various tasks, including placing the car rightly in the grid, helping in strategy/meteo calls, pushing the car higher than his teammate and dealing with other drivers in the best possible way.

#1759 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:31

Interesting list of Alonso mistakes/problems from Spanish press:

Alonso crosses his fingers: http://www.elmundo.e...1278327215.html

It turns out that in eight out of nine races he has had some problem, I'll summarize [all blames IMHO]:

  • Bahrein: Engine change. May affect his chances later on. Ferrari to blame.
  • Australia: Bad start. It likely costed him a podium. Blame 50/50 him and bad luck.
  • Malasia: Mistake with meteo prediction. DNF. Blame 90 percent Ferrari, 10 percent drivers?
  • China: Jump start. Another podium lost. Blame: 100% FA.
  • Monaco: Crash in FP3. Blame: 100% FA, with a little bit of bad luck.
  • Turkey: Failure to qualify in Q3. Blame: Unable to say, 50/50 Ferrari/FA?
  • Canada: Trouble with traffic. At least one position lost. Blame: 40% FA, 60% backmarkers.
  • Valencia: Bad timing with SC. Another podium lost. Blame 100% bad luck.

So far we have a blame distribution of 30% to Ferrari, 43,75% to Alonso, and 26.250% to Bad Luck/backmarkers.

IMHO the bad luck component is well within the limits, so both FA an Ferrari must improve a lot.

australia 50/50 is a joke! a bad start costs you mabe 1 or 2 position but not as the hit by button about 18 positions! so in australia it was not about bad luck it was about being hitted by button! blame on alonso 2% (which was finally more than compensated by the great race he drove!)
moncao: i would say 70% alonso for causing accident 30% bad luck for this happening in fp and still it affected the qualy and race!
canada again 70% (backmarkers) to 30%(alonso)

nevertheless it was a try to be objective :up:

Edited by YellowHelmet, 05 July 2010 - 17:44.


Advertisement

#1760 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:48

Well it would've been realism more tham favouritism, I'd say, just about pace in that one race. Sure you're right that that was the thinking in the team. But not aggressive enough I think. If they want to beat McLaren and Red Bull, they have to maximise the benefit of having Fernando Alonso, otherwise what are they doing? Even in Oz they should have been planning for not having a car advantage this year.

I agree that by doing this it would be more effective (points wise) but equally doing so would give them such negative PR it probably wouldn't be worth it.

#1761 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,655 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:53

australia 50/50 is a joke!


Agree! 100% Alonso blame!

He should have got penalty because his error destroyed some people races! FIA is so lenient towards Alonso its a wonder he is doing so badly this season. But they always massively favored him so its not wonder.

:p

Edited by velgajski1, 05 July 2010 - 17:55.


#1762 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:58

Agree! 100% Alonso blame!

He should have got penalty because his error destroyed some people races! FIA is so lenient towards Alonso its a wonder he is doing so badly this season. But they always massively favored him so its not wonder.

:p

:rotfl:

#1763 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 17:59

Agree! 100% Alonso blame!

He should have got penalty because his error destroyed some people races! FIA is so lenient towards Alonso its a wonder he is doing so badly this season. But they always massively favored him so its not wonder.

:p

your sarcasm shows the truth! :up:

#1764 tifosiMac

tifosiMac
  • Member

  • 6,855 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:01

australia 50/50 is a joke! a bad start costs you mabe 1 or 2 position but not as the hit by button about 18 positions! so in australia it was not about bad luck it was about being hitted by button! blame on alonso 2% (which was finally more than compensated by the great race he drove!)

Yeah 50/50 is a complete joke I'll agree with you there. I will agree with what Alonso said at the time and his opinion that the first corner accident was caused by himself not being able to see Button on the inside due to the ridiculous location of the MIRRORS. He didn't blame Button and the mirrors have since been banned. Button had the line, Alonso couldn't see him and they collided. Simple as that.

Alonso drove a great recovery drive however.

#1765 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,655 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:01

your sarcasm shows the truth! :up:


What sarcasm? :confused:

#1766 Frostbomb

Frostbomb
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:18

What do you mean? I'd guess you mean that Alonso shouldn't be blamed on those races.

Guess what? A driver is expected to performs various tasks, including placing the car rightly in the grid, helping in strategy/meteo calls, pushing the car higher than his teammate and dealing with other drivers in the best possible way.


Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Guees what? You're wrong, dh.

I highlighted those 4 instances because I feel that they've gone too easy on him. He was at fault for them, imho. Posted Image

Apologise for your tone, yeah, we're only having a debate on teh internet. Posted Image


#1767 AlanWake

AlanWake
  • Member

  • 1,610 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:20

Alonso's Blog:

We Spanish are going through a hot time at the moment. Last Saturday, in beating Paraguay, the country’s football team made it to the last four of the World Cup for the first time in sixty years and on Wednesday, we play Germany for a place in the final. I can’t wait to watch this match, in which there is no clear favourite, but that’s as it should be in a semi-final. Anyone who has made it to this stage of the tournament is definitely strong and deserves its place, so it is impossible to say who will have the edge. I think the key player for us will be Iniesta. Whichever way it goes, this has already been a great contest for us. The Tour of France has also got underway, the most intriguing stage race of the year. I will try and watch as much of it as possible, cheering on my friend Alberto Contador. I think he is favourite for outright victory and I’m not just saying that because of our relationship, but because I think everything is in place for him to get a hat-trick in the ‘Grande Boucle.’

It really is a great time for Spanish sport. In June, Pau Gasol picked up his second NBA title, yesterday, Rafa Nadal won Wimbledon for the second time, having already come out on top at Roland Garros, while Jorge Lorenzo looks to be flying towards the MotoGP crown. It is no coincidence that a generation of amazing athletes has grown up in a country that has changed so much over the past twenty years: starting at the end of the Eighties and then into the next decade, the number of sports facilities has increased by an incredible amount – you only need to look round even the smallest town to find football pitches, tennis and basketball courts everywhere and all open to the public – and the approach to sport has changed completely. What we are seeing now is the result of that investment and I think it is a strong enough basis for this success to keep on coming for a long time.

So now let’s turn to my job, which is also my passion: Formula 1. Currently, I am in Maranello to spend time with the team prior to the British Grand Prix. It is a crucial moment in the season, with three races coming up in the space of four weeks. We are ready, both on the technical front and physically. In Valencia, we introduced significant updates on the F10 and there will be more in Silverstone and the races after that. The development programme is intensive and I think we will see it produce results. We have also prepared very carefully from the physical point of view, given that the next events are all very close and one needs to be at a hundred percent all the time.

At Silverstone, we will discover a circuit whose final section has been modified. Along with the engineers, we have spent these few days studying all the characteristics of the new track layout, analysing the available information, including watching the motorcycle races held there a few weeks ago. On Thursday morning, again with my engineers, we will inspect the track to see everything in detail, looking especially for bumps on the racing line. The track seems reasonably similar to the way it was, with a lot of very fast corners, which will not suit us that much. However, it’s a fact that the configuration of the F10 seen in Valencia should give us a boost in these quick corners, so it is best to wait and see where we will be: I remain optimistic. Then, there is always a chance of rain playing its part at Silverstone. I would be very surprised to have a completely dry weekend and we will be ready to tackle any situation that comes our way.

Edited by AlanWake, 05 July 2010 - 18:20.


#1768 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:24

thanks for that link :up:


The track seems reasonably similar to the way it was, with a lot of very fast corners, which will not suit us that much. However, it’s a fact that the configuration of the F10 seen in Valencia should give us a boost in these quick corners, so it is best to wait and see where we will be: I remain optimistic. Then, there is always a chance of rain playing its part at Silverstone. I would be very surprised to have a completely dry weekend and we will be ready to tackle any situation that comes our way.

it looks as ferrari will fight for 5th position

Edited by YellowHelmet, 05 July 2010 - 18:25.


#1769 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:29

I agree that by doing this it would be more effective (points wise) but equally doing so would give them such negative PR it probably wouldn't be worth it.


Yep, that's their mindset I agree, great for us Mac fans :lol: .

Though in Ferrari's place I'd be worrying about the PR fallout from coming 3rd in the championships.

#1770 Saturnus

Saturnus
  • Member

  • 282 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:32

It turns out that in eight out of nine races he has had some problem, I'll summarize [all blames IMHO]:

  • Australia: Bad start. It likely costed him a podium. Blame 50/50 him and bad luck.
  • China: Jump start. Another podium lost. Blame: 100% FA.
  • Monaco: Crash in FP3. Blame: 100% FA, with a little bit of bad luck.
  • Turkey: Failure to qualify in Q3. Blame: Unable to say, 50/50 Ferrari/FA?

Bad start, jumpstart, chrash and unable get into Q3 with 3rd best car on the grid have to be 100% drivers fault.
But since everyone is beating everyone at the top he is still in the hunt if he starts driving better.
He don't have the best car at the moment and needs to avoid these mistakes to stay in the hunt.


#1771 billkaos

billkaos
  • Member

  • 160 posts
  • Joined: June 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:35

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

Guees what? You're wrong, dh.

I highlighted those 4 instances because I feel that they've gone too easy on him. He was at fault for them, imho. Posted Image

Apologise for your tone, yeah, we're only having a debate on teh internet. Posted Image

100% blame to Alonso in Malasia? I see, you must be joking.

#1772 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:36

AlanWake - thanks for the link. Nice read.

Bad start, jumpstart, chrash and unable get into Q3 with 3rd best car on the grid have to be 100% drivers fault.
But since everyone is beating everyone at the top he is still in the hunt if he starts driving better.
He don't have the best car at the moment and needs to avoid these mistakes to stay in the hunt.

Agree with you on the latter 3. On the first one, the wheelspin from the line was 100% Alonso's but that was only part of his bad start. The contact at T1 wasn't his fault at all (IMO) - just one of those unfortunate incidents where no one of the 3 drivers at fault was to blame.

#1773 Jack Burton

Jack Burton
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 July 2010 - 18:50

Agree! 100% Alonso blame!

He should have got penalty because his error destroyed some people races! FIA is so lenient towards Alonso its a wonder he is doing so badly this season. But they always massively favored him so its not wonder.

:p



Guess you weren't watching F1 in 2006.

#1774 sleenster

sleenster
  • Member

  • 308 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 July 2010 - 19:27

Interesting list of Alonso mistakes/problems from Spanish press:

Alonso crosses his fingers: http://www.elmundo.e...1278327215.html

It turns out that in eight out of nine races he has had some problem, I'll summarize [all blames IMHO]:

  • Bahrein: Engine change. May affect his chances later on. Ferrari to blame.
  • Australia: Bad start. It likely costed him a podium. Blame 50/50 him and bad luck.
  • Malaysia: Mistake with meteo prediction. DNF. Blame 90 percent Ferrari, 10 percent drivers?
  • China: Jump start. Another podium lost. Blame: 100% FA.
  • Monaco: Crash in FP3. Blame: 100% FA, with a little bit of bad luck.
  • Turkey: Failure to qualify in Q3. Blame: Unable to say, 50/50 Ferrari/FA?
  • Canada: Trouble with traffic. At least one position lost. Blame: 40% FA, 60% backmarkers.
  • Valencia: Bad timing with SC. Another podium lost. Blame 100% bad luck.

So far we have a blame distribution of 30% to Ferrari, 43,75% to Alonso, and 26.250% to Bad Luck/backmarkers.

IMHO the bad luck component is well within the limits, so both FA an Ferrari must improve a lot.


Hmm. It's interesting that the Spanish press have started keeping score.


#1775 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 July 2010 - 20:33

At that early point in the season you can't show driver favoritism. They were both racing, whether one was faster than the other is irrelevant.


It's not irrelevant if your looking at the WCC and the faster driver could possibly get extra points.

#1776 robefc

robefc
  • Member

  • 8,100 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 05 July 2010 - 20:35

It's not irrelevant if your looking at the WCC and the faster driver could possibly get extra points.


The extra points probably worth less than completing pissing off one half of your driving team right at the start of the season...

#1777 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,686 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 05 July 2010 - 20:39

The extra points probably worth less than completing pissing off one half of your driving team right at the start of the season...


I agree, and I don't want to see drivers having to move out of the way of their teammates, but I just wanted to point out there isn't just the WDC going on and teams might have different priorities.

#1778 syph0nJZ05

syph0nJZ05
  • Member

  • 2,602 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 20:50

It's not irrelevant if your looking at the WCC and the faster driver could possibly get extra points.

It's irrelevant as the only way Ferrari would have made Massa let Alonso pass was if he had a problem. Because imagine if they had ordered Massa to stand down; there would have been an uproar in the pit-lane and likely some reprimands for Ferrari.

#1779 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 July 2010 - 21:23

It's irrelevant as the only way Ferrari would have made Massa let Alonso pass was if he had a problem. Because imagine if they had ordered Massa to stand down; there would have been an uproar in the pit-lane and likely some reprimands for Ferrari.


Yeah it would have had to be agreed beforehand, with a code, that either driver will move over if the other is clearly faster at the time and there are places at stake from other teams.

I tend to think Ferrari is too PC to do that now, and it's a weakness. As a team, the cars should be run to maxmise things for the team, and to have their long-awaited hyper-expensive superstar foiled by their own other driver is a bit of a cockup, from many points of view.

Anyway, it was no surprise Alonso couldn't overtake a guy in the same car in Oz, and I think the team could have done something about that and let him have a go at Kubi and Jense. So from my pov, some blame to the team for his tame 4th place. Could have been 6th quite easily, too.

Advertisement

#1780 VoRteX

VoRteX
  • Member

  • 166 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 05 July 2010 - 21:39

Interesting list of Alonso mistakes/problems from Spanish press:

Alonso crosses his fingers: http://www.elmundo.e...1278327215.html

It turns out that in eight out of nine races he has had some problem, I'll summarize [all blames IMHO]:

it is a great article that collects the problems Alonso had so far.
some problems were driving errors, others not.
however the article is not about blames(less about taking blames off his errors) and it also avoids ALL polemics.
good info to make memory so everyone can build his own opinion.
the journalist only focuses on the bad thing, and atributes good BCN performance to luck, he's not Alonso fan(the contrary actually), but the info is good.


#1781 mkay

mkay
  • Member

  • 2,506 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 06 July 2010 - 05:53

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/22102.html

Interesting article. It seems like it was rather Alonso who decided to leave McLaren rather than a "mutual breakup" or that McLaren "fired" him.

In hindsight, I think it's safe to say he made a mistake, WDCs or not.

#1782 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 06 July 2010 - 07:34

it is a great article that collects the problems Alonso had so far.
some problems were driving errors, others not.
however the article is not about blames(less about taking blames off his errors) and it also avoids ALL polemics.
good info to make memory so everyone can build his own opinion.
the journalist only focuses on the bad thing, and atributes good BCN performance to luck, he's not Alonso fan(the contrary actually), but the info is good.

Decent summary, although I think if it only attributes Bahrain win to "good luck" then it's a bit scant on the detail for that side. Alonso's benefited from the same type of thing that is described in the article as bad luck a number of times.

Off the top of my head: Bahrain (Vettel retirement; Massa cooling/engine problems), Australia (Vettel problem; Rosberg, Hamilton, Webber decision to change tyres late in race), China (SC), Spain (Hamilton retirement; Vettel problem), Monaco (perfectly timed SC), Turkey (Vettel retirement), Canada (Webber grid demotion).

I'd still say he's lost more points than he's gained from this kind of thing, but you've got to consider things like the above to have a more balanced picture/info.

#1783 YellowHelmet

YellowHelmet
  • Member

  • 3,800 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:32

http://en.espnf1.com...tory/22102.html

Interesting article. It seems like it was rather Alonso who decided to leave McLaren rather than a "mutual breakup" or that McLaren "fired" him.

In hindsight, I think it's safe to say he made a mistake, WDCs or not.

why do you come with that again?
we had nielsen, who is saying that 3 years after it happened and no one knows why?
is he applying for a mclaren job, is he just mad about alonso, etc:?
the think about this is that he doesnt know what really happened, he only got his informations from thrid parties and still he does so as if he was directly involved in that!
so he takes position for some people! why?

such interviews are just reflections of a bad sportsmanship by a person who was not involved 3 years after it happened :down:
nothing to do with objectivity :down:
especially because he suggests it was all about alonso whether he is staying or leaving :down:

who knows maybe he will be announced soon as a mclaren employee

#1784 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,202 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:44

Alonso's Blog:
.....


Great read, thanks Alan.
Fernando forgot to mention that there is three Spaniards currently driving in F1, something that also has never been achieved before.
So, all in all, 2010 is doing a proud nation proud, and I can imagine how much Fernando would want to contribute to this tally.


#1785 velgajski1

velgajski1
  • Member

  • 3,655 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:47

why do you come with that again?
we had nielsen, who is saying that 3 years after it happened and no one knows why?
is he applying for a mclaren job, is he just mad about alonso, etc:?
the think about this is that he doesnt know what really happened, he only got his informations from thrid parties and still he does so as if he was directly involved in that!
so he takes position for some people! why?

such interviews are just reflections of a bad sportsmanship by a person who was not involved 3 years after it happened :down:
nothing to do with objectivity :down:
especially because he suggests it was all about alonso whether he is staying or leaving :down:

who knows maybe he will be announced soon as a mclaren employee


Difference between Nielsen and Alonso was that Alonso knew he couldn't beat Hamilton even in his rookie season, let alone in following years. Therefore, I disagree with Nielsen, and I think Alonso return to Renault was a sensible move.

Summary - Nielsen is overestimating Alonso because he likes him :)

#1786 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,218 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:47

It seems like it was rather Alonso who decided to leave McLaren rather than a "mutual breakup" or that McLaren "fired" him.


Why is it surprising? Him being fired, or even mutual breakup was only a wet dream of some Hamilton fanboys.

#1787 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:52

why do you come with that again?
we had nielsen, who is saying that 3 years after it happened and no one knows why?
is he applying for a mclaren job, is he just mad about alonso, etc:?
the think about this is that he doesnt know what really happened, he only got his informations from thrid parties and still he does so as if he was directly involved in that!
so he takes position for some people! why?

such interviews are just reflections of a bad sportsmanship by a person who was not involved 3 years after it happened :down:
nothing to do with objectivity :down:
especially because he suggests it was all about alonso whether he is staying or leaving :down:

who knows maybe he will be announced soon as a mclaren employee


Have to agree. But he says he loves Fernando, I guess that love has gone unrequited, hence the bitter attack with the insinuations. So I think you should be a little bit tolerant, poor guy, he's obviously devastated.


#1788 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 7,202 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:53

Why is it surprising? Him being fired, or even mutual breakup was only a wet dream of some Hamilton fanboys.


Had it been already the McLaren of Martin Whitmarsh, and not Ron Dennis, Fernando would have stayed.
Nielsen is right, sad that it turned out that way, would most probably have meant another WDC for Fernando.

And maybe the Singapore thing would have never happened.

Who was Fernando's manager again, insisting that Fernando comes "back home" to Renault?


#1789 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 08:59

Why is it surprising? Him being fired, or even mutual breakup was only a wet dream of some Hamilton fanboys.


Obviously Alonso was kicked out. Would he have waited for 2 weeks after the end of the season and then resigned?

The only surprise was that he was kept on for the full season after siding openly with the team's enemies, and given a car to race Hamilton with.

#1790 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,218 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 06 July 2010 - 09:49

Obviously Alonso was kicked out. Would he have waited for 2 weeks after the end of the season and then resigned?

The only surprise was that he was kept on for the full season after siding openly with the team's enemies, and given a car to race Hamilton with.


Obviously :drunk:

It's not as he had to negotiate a contract break in those two weeks or anything.

#1791 Gareth

Gareth
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,026 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 06 July 2010 - 09:57

The existence of obviously agreed press releases at the time the announcement was made makes it clear to me that this was a negotiated exit.

So how much that exit was down to McLaren's desires and how much Alonso's is not something that you can ever get a definitive answer on. To me, I suspect the desire was mutual. Had Alonso made a strong move to stay, would McLaren have been willing to keep him? Had McLaren made a strong move to keep him, would Alonso have been willing to stay? I don't think we'll ever know but, as neither side wanted to do this, I think it's fair to call it a mutual parting of the ways.

#1792 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 10:16

The existence of obviously agreed press releases at the time the announcement was made makes it clear to me that this was a negotiated exit.

So how much that exit was down to McLaren's desires and how much Alonso's is not something that you can ever get a definitive answer on. To me, I suspect the desire was mutual. Had Alonso made a strong move to stay, would McLaren have been willing to keep him? Had McLaren made a strong move to keep him, would Alonso have been willing to stay? I don't think we'll ever know but, as neither side wanted to do this, I think it's fair to call it a mutual parting of the ways.


As you say we lack evidence, though the Times said he went to the meeting expecting a continuation and Ron tore up his contract. For me if Fernando was going to resign he'd have done that immediately after Brazil.

The fact that he didn't suggests to me he looked into the abyss of Renault and pulled back.

Anyway it's moot. Depending on your polarisation you can say he chickened out or gave them the finger, or conversely that he was bravely up for taking on Hamilton in 2008 or was rejected.

On top of that the negotiation was a separate thing IMO. Both sides had their interests to protect, whoever had wanted the split.

#1793 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 06 July 2010 - 10:20

Considering the part he played (whether willingly or not) in spygate it was always going to be more than just about his driving. Even if we all accept that he is the absolute best on the grid, I don't think Ron would have been happy having him around for another year.

Terribly unfortunate for both parties, IMO, whatever the true reason.

#1794 toxicfusion

toxicfusion
  • Member

  • 523 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 06 July 2010 - 10:33

Considering the part he played (whether willingly or not) in spygate it was always going to be more than just about his driving. Even if we all accept that he is the absolute best on the grid, I don't think Ron would have been happy having him around for another year.

Terribly unfortunate for both parties, IMO, whatever the true reason.


De La Rosa played a part in spy gate, and he managed to stay at McLaren.

#1795 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 10:49

De La Rosa played a part in spy gate, and he managed to stay at McLaren.


Pedro didn't have lunch with Max.

#1796 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 06 July 2010 - 10:51

De La Rosa played a part in spy gate, and he managed to stay at McLaren.

True, but there was more to it wasn't there? I think had they occurred in separate years (spygate and the Lewis-clash) Alonso would have weathered the storm and still be at McLaren, probably with an additional WDC to his name. The two happened at the same time and it just created an issue too big for either party to get out of unscathed. Sad really, because I thought they were a match made in heaven as far as us fans were concerned.

#1797 prty

prty
  • Member

  • 5,218 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 06 July 2010 - 11:25

Had McLaren made a strong move to keep him, would Alonso have been willing to stay? I don't think we'll ever know but, as neither side wanted to do this, I think it's fair to call it a mutual parting of the ways.


Actually McLaren made him a new offer after the contract was broken.

*opens umbrella*

#1798 seahawk

seahawk
  • Member

  • 3,132 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 06 July 2010 - 11:54

True, but there was more to it wasn't there? I think had they occurred in separate years (spygate and the Lewis-clash) Alonso would have weathered the storm and still be at McLaren, probably with an additional WDC to his name. The two happened at the same time and it just created an issue too big for either party to get out of unscathed. Sad really, because I thought they were a match made in heaven as far as us fans were concerned.


After the first 4 races it was onvious that McLaren did not need Alonso as they had Hamilton. The rest of the season just suhowed how Alonso was using politcs and dirty tricks to force the McLaren team to favour him. But as Ron is a fair sportsman and McLaren would never favour a driver ,they declined and Alonso betrayed them.

In that year Alonso lost all respect from the Forumla 1 fans and destroyed his carreer.

#1799 MichaelPM

MichaelPM
  • Member

  • 2,594 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 11:59

After the first 4 races it was onvious that McLaren did not need Alonso as they had Hamilton. The rest of the season just suhowed how Alonso was using politcs and dirty tricks to force the McLaren team to favour him. But as Ron is a fair sportsman and McLaren would never favour a driver ,they declined and Alonso betrayed them.

In that year Alonso lost all respect from the Forumla 1 fans and destroyed his carreer.

:rotfl:
And the award for best fiction goes to.....seahawk!
:lol:


Advertisement

#1800 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 06 July 2010 - 12:02

Actually McLaren made him a new offer after the contract was broken.

*opens umbrella*


Source?

Or should I say 'fuente'? :lol: