To be perfectly honest...

[slicktoast]

Anybody else notice that RB said he had a suspension problem so he drove close by the pit wall for the crew to have a look before the SC came in. Then when he did make his pit stop later, it was routine and no crew member bothered to even look at at the rear suspension. Nice try RB, but your post race demeaner said more. The driver/car combo just didn't have it at Monaco. Third was inherited because of the antics in the tunnel of love. Maybe this weekend...

[Homer Simpson]

That's just, sad, very sad...

[Hugewally]

Originally posted by slicktoast
Monaco... the tunnel of love...

Simply the best thing I've heard from the race!!!

[Hugewally]

Double post... Now how did that happen???

[Liz]

That was a lame attempt to cover his Leader's bum, anticipating that "suspension failure" might be the excuse for his Close Encounter of the Tunnel Kind.

But all in all it was pretty sad. RB has finally figured out that he sold his soul for nothing of lasting value.

[freud]

Yeah.. what more can I say except that I am not surprised at all. Every sane individual who follows formula-one is well aware of Rubenho's agenda.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by Liz
That was a lame attempt to cover his Leader's bum, anticipating that "suspension failure" might be the excuse for his Close Encounter of the Tunnel Kind.

I don't think so, surely he knew little of the details of TGF's accident, which has pretty much been put down to 'one of those things' by Ferrari/Michael.

I think RB under performed at Monaco and he was embarassed by it. It is always difficult to say thee things, but I suspect RB's problem wasn't as bad as he made out. On the rare days that Michael goes out then Rubens is favourite and he only grabbed a lucky third.

[Wrex]

Lets face it (ignoring the BS from the Anti-Ferrari brigade), Rubins has been average at best this season. Last season some were suggesting the tide had turned, and RB was as good or better on most days.

This season, he has'nt been anywhere near Michael. Car not to his liking, or a broken spirit?

[climb]

Agree with Adam; he just tried to find some excuse for his underperforming attitude, period

[Korr]

Second in points and the guy is underperforming?
I suppose in order for him to perform he would have to beat Schumacher, which the rest of the field has done a sterling job of doing this year.

Unreal.

[climb]

Korr, I just hope he'll repeat the second part of season he had in 2003.
But for now, his performances are well under the expectations, cos, as last year he outrun MS many a time, everybody (Rubens included) expected theis trend could somewhat continue.
On the contrary, up to now, he's been beat by lightyears, without discussion.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Wrex


This season, he has'nt been anywhere near Michael. Car not to his liking, or a broken spirit?

Both maybe?

Ferrari have gone back to a shorter wheel base this season which is more to Michaels liking than Rubens. Rubens looked very good last year with a longer wheelbase car, but can't seem to get his head around a shorter wheelbase car.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Korr
Second in points and the guy is underperforming?

Unreal.

Korr, i think the point is, nobody realisticly expects him to beat Michael, but he should be a clear second in the races (Monaco excepted) behind Michael and in front of the rest, he has the car to do it.

That is why he's underperforming, he's spent too much time battling with BAR's Renaults and JPM.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by Korr
Second in points and the guy is underperforming?

I'm afraid to a certain extent yes.

At points last year he was closer and sometimes ahead of Schumacher. If he is not recreating that form now he is underperforming. It is a hard act to beat, but we have seen him do better.

mr v, I'd heard that reasoning. There has been an increase Ferrari's relative pace, but it is harder to drive.

[neil_davidson2]

Originally posted by Mr V
Both maybe?

Ferrari have gone back to a shorter wheel base this season which is more to Michaels liking than Rubens. Rubens looked very good last year with a longer wheelbase car, but can't seem to get his head around a shorter wheelbase car.

I tend to agree. Whilst I'm no fan of MS I do acknowledge that his ability to get the best out of an ill-performing or "twitchy" car is second to none. I think last year's Ferrari was so near to perfection that MS's talents didn't produce the same differential in terms of performance so Rubens was able to challenge.

This year the car is less stable again and so MS's ability to wring the best out of it shows up in an increase in performance over his team-mate.

[RWC]

Absolutally! Well spotted
Irwhine did exactly the same.As they made the car more manageable,eddie got closer to shu

[Knowlesy]

Originally posted by Liz
That was a lame attempt to cover his Leader's bum, anticipating that "suspension failure" might be the excuse for his Close Encounter of the Tunnel Kind.

Well that would be odd considering it was a collision. Hmmm.......interesting. *scratches chin*

[Super Tourer]

I think the 2004 car is a bit 'edgy', which suits Michael but not Rubens.

On the subject of Moanco, as we said in the preview (!), he does have patchy record there of late, with 2004 adding to it!

[Knowlesy]

Originally posted by Super Tourer
I think the 2004 car is a bit 'edgy', which suits Michael but not Rubens.

I said this the other week and got lambasted for apparently suggesting that Ferrari favour TGF! :confused:

[GP Racer]

Hey Slicktoast, excuse me for not buying the BS your selling, and I'm quite surprised so many other's are!

Just because you think you "noticed" something doesn't make it true. If the car was still drivable, why would the team take precious time to fix it during a pit-stop, and maybe lose a guaranteed third place finish? They probably told him to limp it home, and grab some badly needed points. Unless his car was badly damaged and far off the pace, who was going to pass him on that track?

He may have actually made an heroic effort at driving that car, instead of the weak effort so many of you are convinced he gave it.

[shiny side up!]

Brawn said today in the FIA press conference that Rubens' car was behaving unpredictably, and although they did not pinpoint a specific cause, they attribute the car's behavior to the setup. He also pointed out that Monaco of all places is not where you want a driver to be unsure what the car is going to do when you enter a corner...

[Tye]

Originally posted by freud
Yeah.. what more can I say except that I am not surprised at all. Every sane individual who follows formula-one is well aware of Rubenho's agenda.

It's quite obvious isn't it? How many years has this been going on now?

I was reading an interview with Frank Willaims this past week and he put it like it is. I'm not sure if the words are to the letter, but I'm sure we'll get the picture as clear as day.

"It would sure be good for the sport if Micheal's teammates were actually allowed to race against him. In 1988 when Senna and Prost were teammates at McLaren, they raced each other all the time."

I completely agree with Frank on the matter and this is why I'll never rate Micheal. What I also find amusing is the fact that the Ferrari team always say that they have this arragement because it maximises their chances at winning. What a load of **** that explanation is. It sure didn't hurt McLaren's chances in 1988 now did it? Pathetic really. It is good to see that some of us get the message

Call it like it is Frank!!

Tye

[Yoong Montoya]

Originally posted by Tye
"It would sure be good for the sport if Micheal's teammates were actually allowed to race against him. In 1988 when Senna and Prost were teammates at McLaren, they raced each other all the time."

I completely agree with Frank on the matter and this is why I'll never rate Micheal. What I also find amusing is the fact that the Ferrari team always say that they have this arragement because it maximises their chances at winning. What a load of **** that explanation is. It sure didn't hurt McLaren's chances in 1988 now did it? Pathetic really. It is good to see that some of us get the message

Call it like it is Frank!!

Tye

Even if MS and RB raced each other all the time, no one would believe them.

[1 Lotus]

Seems like a lot of you are down on Rubens. I have to say that while he doesn't seem to be as much one with the car as Michael this season, to be second in the points for the WDC speaks volumes.

I also remember that last year, Rubens beat Michael in poles and almost half of the races in the second half of the season. I don't think Ferrari would prevent him from beating Michael and the only time specific orders would come to play would be if the championship were at stake for Michael.

[freud]

Originally posted by Tye

I completely agree with Frank on the matter and this is why I'll never rate Micheal. What I also find amusing is the fact that the Ferrari team always say that they have this arragement because it maximises their chances at winning. What a load of **** that explanation is. It sure didn't hurt McLaren's chances in 1988 now did it? Pathetic really. It is good to see that some of us get the message

I cant agree more. And you know what irks me... some Ferrari and MS fans in 'denial' of this arrangement. I tremendously respect those ferrari fans who are willing to critically analyze the situation and express their dismay with the tactics of the Ferrari team. I know a few who think that Ferrari has robbed its fans of genuine excitement. Imagine a Ferrari team with MS and (e.g.) Jacques Villeneuve as teammates. Can you just feel the excitement.. how beautiful it would've been for the fans??
*sigh*.. I bet in such an arrangement Ferrari would've still gotten the constructors title for past 4 years. Though MS definitely wouldn't have broken all the records that he was able to break in the presence of the lapdog.