Die Ferrari. I Hate You Red b#####ds

[uglyferrari 0]

Blaming Ferrari?!? What the...?

When bridgestone had problems in the begining of the season the teams that used bridgestone just had to deal with the problems and suffer the consequences. When their labs couldnt create fast rubber they used harder and slower tyres...simple.

And now Michelin messed up and the bridgestone teams have to make it their own problem?? No they dont. The 7 teams + michelin are the responsibles and no one else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Again, sport is about fairness, mutual agreement and sportmanship.

Bridgestone/firestone has plenty of data and race experience in the resurfaced Indianapolis from Indy500...... What about Michelin? [Where is the fairness?]

When all the 9 teams agreed not to race without a chicane, why wouldn't you? [Where is the mutual agreement and sportmanship?]

If you are not fair and not willing to tolerate, who wants to play with you? It is better to change it to 'Ferrari International Association'. That sounds better.

[Kaciaj 0]

Again, sport is about fairness, mutual agreement and sportmanship.

Bridgestone/firestone has plenty of data and race experience in the resurfaced Indianapolis from Indy500...... What about Michelin? [Where is the fairness?]

When all the 9 teams agreed not to race without a chicane, why wouldn't you? [Where is the mutual agreement and sportmanship?]

If you are not fair and not willing to tolerate, who wants to play with you? It is better to change it to 'Ferrari International Association'. That sounds better.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The FIA has said.."you teams you will decide what to do..if all of you agree we will put in a chicane,we don't know what to do"

It is shameful.they already knew Ferrari wouldn't have agreed...btw Schumacher tried to put Rubens out to stay on top.

[Fed up 0]

The FIA has said.."you teams you will decide what to do..if all of you agree we will put in a chicane,we don't know what to do"

It is shameful.they already knew Ferrari wouldn't have agreed...btw Schumacher tried to put Rubens out to stay on top.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The FIA did not say that...Their response is posted on their website

[Kaciaj 0]

The FIA did not say that...Their response is posted on their website

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was obviously a sarcastic post....In facts they said that.Would ALL the teams have agreed they would have put in a chicane...9 agreed,1 no...the FIA rejected the chance of putting in a chicane.it's simple

[Fed up 0]

It was obviously a sarcastic post....In facts they said that.Would ALL the teams have agreed they would have put in a chicane...9 agreed,1 no...the FIA rejected the chance of putting in a chicane.it's simple

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

FIA/

Finally, it has been suggested that a chicane should be laid out in Turn 13. I am sure you will appreciate that this is out of the question. To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres.

[uglyferrari 0]

Ferrari were made to race at Brazil 2003 in a monsoon in intermediate tyres because the FIA and the Michelin runners refused Ferrari special dispensation, where were all the cries about safety then ???

A car aquaplaning on intermediates in a monsoon is much more dangerous than turn 13 yet Ferrari were told to shut up and get on with it and Michelin should have been told to do the same

Schumacher got 0 points and was nearly decapitated by a crane when he aquaplaned so why should the Michelin runners get special treatment and have everyone licking their bums in the name of safety when Michelin stabbed Bridgestone in the back in Brazil 2003 ??

What goes around comes around, Ferrari didn't act like cry babies and take their ball home and stamp their feet they got on with the ****ing job and Michelin should have done the same !!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you had watched the race, may I know who won the race? If I'm not mistaken, is bridgestone. In that race, other bridgestone runners were running quite well. Why no other teams complaining so much except ferrari? Looking into your complaint is about ferrari against the michelin. Is one against many. Shall I follow one adivce, or majority? USGP case is 9 teams aganist ferrari, is totally opposite. I hope you are clear at this point. Thanks!

[ACE 0]

So it was Ferrari and FIA that made the CRAP MICHELINS and its their fault that they blow up and it is their fault that Kimi's Tyre blew up at the Nurburgring, But where was the safety concern then.

[Kaciaj 0]

Schumacher's tyre blew up in Spain.

[Fed up 0]

If you had watched the race, may I know who won the race? If I'm not mistaken, is bridgestone. In that race, other bridgestone runners were running quite well. Why no other teams complaining so much except ferrari? Looking into your complaint is about ferrari against the michelin. Is one against many. Shall I follow one adivce, or majority? USGP case in 9 teams aganist ferrari, is totally opposite.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You miss the point...

Ferrari competed despite their fears and performance disadvantage.

[ACE 0]

USGP, the best race I have ever seen. Ultra exciting!

FIA? Is it 'Ferrari International Association'? 

Sport is about fairness, mutual agreement and sportmanship.

Everyone is agreed to limit testing, ferrari say NO.

Everyone is agreed to race with a chicane, ferrari say NO.

When I complaint your tires are wider after the race, FIA will play the game for me.

When I complaint someone used illegal lauch control, FIA introduced traction control at start the next season. Eventually, all teams suffered the new regulation except ferrari. They never fail at start for the entire season. So, who was actually using the illegal launch control and who was actually benefited it?

Even Ruben is feeling to leave the team just for the sake of sportmanship and fairness.

Too bad to F1. Ferrari and FIA are getting closer and closer. I think it is better to fill the track with 20 ferraris. So we don't need to waste our time to know who will be winning.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you remember then that after 2002 domination by Ferrari the rules were changed for 2003 , who struggled at the beginning of the season, Ferrari, then after 2004 rules changed again, who struggled again Ferrari, so evry time Ferrari have dominated the rules have been change to stop them so where is the FIA/Ferrari theory then.

[uglyferrari 0]

Why must you turn our forum into a den of lies?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry if I made a mistake. Please go to the following link to analyse what is Paul Stoddart is trying to hint.

http://www.gp2004.com/news/news.php?lang=u...nth=6&year=2005

Pay attention to the following sentences:

"Earlier on today, nine of the 10 competing teams had agreed that, in the interests of safety, a temporary chicane needed to be placed before the final turn, and that unless that took place, the nine teams would not compete."

"For the avoidance of doubt, Minardi only participated when it became clear that Jordan had changed its decision to compete from this morning."

To my interpretation, Minardi and Jordan were agreed not to race. However, when they saw Jordan was racing, they just joint in.

Which team do you think is missing in that letter? Minardi and Jordan changed their plan. Whoelse need not change their plan? That's ferrari. Why? Because they never agree. That's it. I hope I didn't make a mistake on Stoddart statement. Thanks!

[uglyferrari 0]

You miss the point...

Ferrari competed despite their fears and performance disadvantage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oops, that's my mistake, sorry!

[Fed up 0]

Sorry if I made a mistake. Please go to the following link to analyse what is Paul Stoddart is trying to hint.

http://www.gp2004.com/news/news.php?lang=u...nth=6&year=2005

Pay attention to the following sentences:

"Earlier on today, nine of the 10 competing teams had agreed that, in the interests of safety, a temporary chicane needed to be placed before the final turn, and that unless that took place, the nine teams would not compete."

"For the avoidance of doubt, Minardi only participated when it became clear that Jordan had changed its decision to compete from this morning."

To my interpretation, Minardi and Jordan were agreed not to race. However, when they saw Jordan was racing, they just joint in.

Which team do you think is missing in that letter? Minardi and Jordan changed their plan. Whoelse need not change their plan? That's ferrari. Why? Because they never agree. That's it. I hope I didn't make a mistake on Stoddart statement. Thanks!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How dare they dictate to the FIA

[uglyferrari 0]

So you remember then that after 2002 domination by Ferrari the rules were changed for 2003 , who struggled at the beginning of the season, Ferrari, then after 2004 rules changed again, who struggled again Ferrari, so evry time Ferrari have dominated the rules have been change to stop them so where is the FIA/Ferrari theory then.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you understand about political science, you will know why ferrari struggle first, then win at last.

Also think of the odds in F1 gambling. If ferrari don't struggle, who will bet on other teams to win? If everyone is betting on ferrari, the big bosses are making zero profit.

Take some times to understand politcal science will give you a clearer picture.

[AutoRacer5 0]

Ferrari is s##t.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your Mother.

[pumpdoc 2]

Your Mother.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ignore him ar5 his hatred for Ferrari is so out of touch with reality

[fu-f1 0]

This whole sham had nothing to do with Ferarri. They showed up ready to race and they did. The rest of the teams did not - sorry jordan & minardi...you don't really count.

Hell, please, I'd like MORE f1 races in the US. It would kill the series off quicker.

[AutoRacer5 0]

ignore him ar5 his hatred for Ferrari is so out of touch with reality

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true dude. He doesn't know how to consider ALL point of views on the arguement here.

[Buttonfan 0]

The only thing to blame Ferrari on is with the agreement on the chicane, everything else is mostly Michelin, and some on the FIA

[AutoRacer5 0]

It wasnt Ferrari's problem about the chicane. They were not to blame. Michelin and FIA are to blame.

[Unholybuttlord 0]

It wasnt Ferrari's problem about the chicane. They were not to blame. Michelin and FIA are to blame.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yes, and at the end of the day, ferrari did their job.

[uglyferrari 0]

Ferrari were made to race at Brazil 2003 in a monsoon in intermediate tyres because the FIA and the Michelin runners refused Ferrari special dispensation, where were all the cries about safety then ???

A car aquaplaning on intermediates in a monsoon is much more dangerous than turn 13 yet Ferrari were told to shut up and get on with it and Michelin should have been told to do the same

Schumacher got 0 points and was nearly decapitated by a crane when he aquaplaned so why should the Michelin runners get special treatment and have everyone licking their bums in the name of safety when Michelin stabbed Bridgestone in the back in Brazil 2003 ??

What goes around comes around, Ferrari didn't act like cry babies and take their ball home and stamp their feet they got on with the ****ing job and Michelin should have done the same !!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

answer from pitpass forum

Brazil 2003

Brigdestone turn up with a wet tyre that is in fact the famous Bridgestone intermediate. It is woefully inadequate for the torrential conditions in place at the start of the race - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Michelin however are sitting pretty with their full wets and have no such problem.

After some discussion with Charlie Whiting the race start is delayed, and then they drive around the circuit behind the safety car, until enough water has been cleared to allow the Bridgestone runners to be able to race safely. The track is now a classic Bridgestone inter track and a Jordan, of all cars, wins the race on Bridgestones.

USA 2005

Michelin turn up with a tyre that is woefully inadequate for the newly changed surface of the track - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Bridgestone however are sitting pretty with their tyres, having had a huge amount of data fed to them by the Firestone shod Indy 500 runners that have recently run on the newly ground track surface.

Well we all know what happened, and its interesting to ponder why Mr Whiting and the FIA were prepared to change the rules at the last minute at Brazil, but weren't prepared to sort out a compromise, with 2 days to think about it, in a similar situation this time around.

[uglyferrari 0]

Oops, that's my mistake, sorry!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

from pitpass forum

Brazil 2003

Brigdestone turn up with a wet tyre that is in fact the famous Bridgestone intermediate. It is woefully inadequate for the torrential conditions in place at the start of the race - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Michelin however are sitting pretty with their full wets and have no such problem.

After some discussion with Charlie Whiting the race start is delayed, and then they drive around the circuit behind the safety car, until enough water has been cleared to allow the Bridgestone runners to be able to race safely. The track is now a classic Bridgestone inter track and a Jordan, of all cars, wins the race on Bridgestones.

USA 2005

Michelin turn up with a tyre that is woefully inadequate for the newly changed surface of the track - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Bridgestone however are sitting pretty with their tyres, having had a huge amount of data fed to them by the Firestone shod Indy 500 runners that have recently run on the newly ground track surface.

Well we all know what happened, and its interesting to ponder why Mr Whiting and the FIA were prepared to change the rules at the last minute at Brazil, but weren't prepared to sort out a compromise, with 2 days to think about it, in a similar situation this time around.

[Fed up 0]

from pitpass forum

Brazil 2003

Brigdestone turn up with a wet tyre that is in fact the famous Bridgestone intermediate. It is woefully inadequate for the torrential conditions in place at the start of the race - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Michelin however are sitting pretty with their full wets and have no such problem.

After some discussion with Charlie Whiting the race start is delayed, and then they drive around the circuit behind the safety car, until enough water has been cleared to allow the Bridgestone runners to be able to race safely. The track is now a classic Bridgestone inter track and a Jordan, of all cars, wins the race on Bridgestones.

USA 2005

Michelin turn up with a tyre that is woefully inadequate for the newly changed surface of the track - they have c##ked up big time and are in no position to start the race. Bridgestone however are sitting pretty with their tyres, having had a huge amount of data fed to them by the Firestone shod Indy 500 runners that have recently run on the newly ground track surface.

Well we all know what happened, and its interesting to ponder why Mr Whiting and the FIA were prepared to change the rules at the last minute at Brazil, but weren't prepared to sort out a compromise, with 2 days to think about it, in a similar situation this time around.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you actually read the facts of the race rather than quoting other forums, you will arrive at a different conclusion

[Kaciaj 0]

Your Mother.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Calm down little ignorant...We are talking about sport I din't offend your family.