We really should be sticking to the topic about Marko's interview, but let's get a few things straight here first:
1. It's generally accepted Massa underperformed in the first few races, he's since said so himself. This overemphasized Alonso's driving feats in the first few races. Without a reliable benchmark, we don't know how bad the car truly was.
2. Pat Fry has said after Barcelona the car wasn't that bad. Not amazing, but not bad.
3. No one said Newey was an engineering genius when his cars were blowing up for Raikkonen and Rory Byrne was running the show. Not to mention that after 1999, the only championship McLaren won was in 2008, AFTER Newey left.
4. Why does everyone act like Alonso doesn't have a well-paid team, with stable finances, designing his cars and giving it their all? Pat Fry is a competent engineer, and if Alonso's in a team that can't deliver car-wise, he should sort that out and move, not criticise other drivers who have chosen their teams well.
5. Over the course of the season the Ferrari wasn't anywhere near as bad as Alonso makes out, Pat Fry said so himself. RBR had a lot of problems early on and McLaren were dominating the show (see: three wins in a row).
6. No one in 2005 and 2006 came out saying Briatore's team was amazing and Alonso was only winning because of Renault - ESPECIALLY not Schumacher, who was driving for Ferrari at the time. If Alonso can't win championships with Ferrari he needs to sort this out, not criticise the competition for building a better car than his team. I don't remember Raikkonen complaining he was fighting against Paddy Lowe this year.
1. There can be absolutely no doubt that the car was really bad until Barcelona. If you needed it, Pat Fry confirmed as much - but everyone knew that even before. You might want to remember that rival fans liked to make fun of "Clifford the dog" and wanted the sacking of Fry, Domenicali and LdM, leading to this thread full of troll attempts
2. But it was bad until Barcelona, and after that ... well, it was not bad, but their rivals had amazing cars. I know that in the attempt of diminishing Alonso, certain posters (demised ones like cilurnum as well as "new" ones like you) keep trying to erect this particular straw man: they insist that there are significant amounts of pro-Alonso posters who claim that the car was the 6th fastest (or something like that) even after Barcelona, in order to be able to argue against that notion, and in the process to try and undervalue Alonso's contribution without looking too stupid. The fallacy here is that if you discount the rabid imbeciles which exist on any side, nobody is claiming this or has been claiming this since Barcelona. In fact the only people I recollect ever to have argued that Ferrari was the 4th to 7th fastest team were a few of the anti-Ferrari/Alonso posters who relished in making fun of the Scuderia.
3. I don't know where you hung out, but everyone always agreed that he was an engineering genius, how sometimes built fragile cars in the pursuit of performance. How could you fail to see his genius after the success he already had had by this time? And wasn't it mostly the Merc engine that kept blowing up?
4. Another straw man. "Everyone" does
act like Alonso has a well-paid team, with stable finances, designing his cars and giving it their all. It would be foolish to say otherwise. On the other hand when I argued that "Fry is a competent engineer" up until Barcelona, I was often the sole voice in the wind, and more often than not was laughed at not so much by Ferrari fans, but, again, by the anti-Ferrari/Alonso brigade having their fun. For what that's worth, it at least shows once more that the car was
considered really bad for a while. As for what Alonso needs to do or not, I leave that up to him, and IMHO he can criticize whoever he wants (he, and any other driver. Vettel certainly has "criticized" other drivers, and that's fine with me), and people will form their opinions anyway. But I'm not sure what this has to do anything, because in the context we are talking about he never "criticized" Vettel, did he. And finally, as for "chosen their teams well", it's a bit unfair to compare Alonso and Vettel simply because of their different tenure. Vettel is approximately at the same stage of his career as Alonso was after his 2nd Renault WDC, and I bet Alonso was happy then and it could be said he had chosen his teams well. And Vettel hasn't chosen much so far, at all. We'll see where Vettel is in 5 years' time.
5. As I said in (2), it's mostly you who incorrectly claims that there are people who say the car was still super bad after Barcelona. All Alonso, correctly, said it that it was not fast enough. As far as the races before Barcelona are concerned, it's laughable that you single out RBR as having a lot of problems, because whatever you think about the Ferrari after Barcelona, disputing that they had big, big problems in the first races just makes you look like an idiot. So let's say both had problems, ok? And since what Fry said in the recent interview carries so much weight for you, please do note that he said that Alonso carried the car through that time.
6. There is no point in even answering this, it's just your fantasies of what you imagine someone said mixed with your fantasies of what someone should say or not.
Edited by KnucklesAgain, 22 January 2013 - 19:56.