Ferrari Rules

[DriverT]

Darn right. Unlucky for Eddie. If he had won, then we'd have all gone to the loo and felt even worse

[MrBluesman1]

Originally posted by Red
Hmm, he was gifted 2 wins and in the other races he performed lamentably. While I would agree that the team might "demoralize him privately" I'm quite sure that those 2 wins were extremely public.

<curiously trying to find a connection to the thread's title>

had I put it anywhere else I probably would have got a *******ing so I thought here was good as it was to do with Ferrari

[Red]

You could start you're own thread.

Anyway...You're wrong. Ferrari really needed and wanted that title. They gave Eddie all the support he's asked for. Bad luck for Eddie (while doing a mediocre job by the way)

[MrBluesman1]

yes I am wrong because Red says I am wrong, ok mate whatever hey, I know myself what I have just read and I know from memory how that season went. Ferrari wanted M Schumacher to win their first WDC since 79 and no-one else, especially an out going driver.
Eddie should have won that title that year, I will grant him that but Ferrari imo and many other peoples let him down that year.
How you have the audacity to sit there and tell me what I have read is wrong and again unless you and I worked for Ferrari at that time how the heck would we know what was really going on there except through reading articles and watching what is happening on the tele!

[Wrex]

Cool it kiddies.

[Red]

Originally posted by MrBluesman1
yes I am wrong because Red says I am wrong

Huh? Obviously we two disagree on this one (among many other things ). What did you expect me to say? Yes, you're absolutely right but I disagree? Comeon!

PS: I know myself what I have just read You just read, here, a different opinion. By the way, I remember that season too.

[BertMk2]

Hey Red - I knew it wouldn't last long, I've got to disagree with you on this one (surprise surprise )

After the amount of money they'd paid Michael and all the times they'd told Irvine to get out of his way it would have pretty embarrassing for them had Irvine won. What would they do? Admit they'd made a mistake backing just one driver? No chance. Add to that the fact that Irvine was on his way out of the door at Ferrari - they'd waited years for a title and the number 1 still wouldn't have been on one of their cars!

Obviously winning the title would have been good from a team point of view but if Irvine had won it would have taken some of the shine off it from a Ferrari point of view.

I would have loved Irvine to have won that title, how funny would that have been? Ferrari spend years and millions of $ grooming Michael to take their first title for god knows how long, then along comes some gobby Irish fella to steal the glory. It would have been classic.

[Red]

Hehe

Hmm, some here would argue that Marlboro paid big bucks to Schumacher.

Ferrari indeed put big cash in the team, I guess that a no title at all was lot more better than a title for Eddie? Tsk....

[climb]

Everybody should recall that the main contribution to Eddie's WDC chances came from the Macs, who accumulated an incredible numbers of horrendous mistakes in that season.
They simply were not enough for Eddie...

[MrBluesman1]

well Ferrari did win for them the WCC which from a team point of view is the top one to win amd that year Ferrari were slightly better than McLaren
as for disagreeing Red it is fine to disagree however IMO it is not fine to tell someone they are wrong with nothing other than your point of view backing you up. If you would like to read what I was reading read the autosport magazine and F1Racing magazine that covers that period, if you don't have them I have them all here. Just let me know and I'll keep them safe and in good condition for you

[Red]

Ferrari won WCC's before too. The Drivers title is that they wanted better.

PS: Ok, I'll rephrase that: I am extremely sure that you're absolutely wrong.

[BertMk2]

Originally posted by Red
Ferrari won WCC's before too. The Drivers title is that they wanted better.

True, but if Irvine had won it they wouldn't have been impressed, that wouldn't have fitted in with their plan at all would it? They'd have ended up looking pretty stupid if Irvine had won (but then again they've managed that a couple of times since Irvine's left anyway).

[ljakse]

Originally posted by Red

Hmm, some here would argue that Marlboro paid big bucks to Schumacher.

Ferrari signed two-year contract in 1996 with Michael Schumacher payin him $24mil per year, with both possibillities - if they do good, they can extend it, if they fail to perform Michael Schumacher was free to leave.
From my point of view it was 'Tic-Tac' who payed Michael Schumacher, but it says Ferrari, right?

Originally posted by Red
PS: Ok, I'll rephrase that: I am extremely sure that you're absolutely wrong.

Atack the post???? As opposed to atack the poster???
:confused:

[Red]

I said it before. I am not arguing for the sake of argument. If I argue with someone it is because I am confident that I am right and the other one is wrong. It is normal. I already admited that the first one was a bit inapropriately put, and I added "I am sure" (like in my opinion, etc). That is to let you know that it doesn't mean that I amd absolutely right. Of course I might be wrong, it is just that I don't think so. I did not attack the poster in anyway. I will repeat what I previously said: what did you expect me to say? Yes you're right?

[Adam43]

FWIW (i.e nothing, but a high level of tedium) I think Ferrari (and Micheal) tried to win Eddie the title that year. Ferrari's spirits might have been down a little due to the absence of Micheal previously, but that is it. The reason they didn't succeed wasn that Irvine wasn't up to the job.

[ljakse]

Sorry for going totally of topic, but hey, mods, feel free to delete it.

Originally posted by Red
I will repeat what I previously said: what did you expect me to say? Yes you're right?

I expected you to say "I disagree" and to back it up, or not, 'coz it might be based on your opinion only.
But saying "You're wrong" is saying "You know nothing, I know it all", and MrBluesman sad it well:

How you have the audacity to sit there and tell me what I have read is wrong and again unless you and I worked for Ferrari at that time how the heck would we know what was really going on there except through reading articles and watching what is happening on the tele!

[BertMk2]

Originally posted by Red
I said it before. I am not arguing for the sake of argument. If I argue with someone it is because I am confident that I am right and the other one is wrong. It is normal. I already admited that the first one was a bit inapropriately put, and I added "I am sure" (like in my opinion, etc). That is to let you know that it doesn't mean that I amd absolutely right. Of course I might be wrong, it is just that I don't think so. I did not attack the poster in anyway. I will repeat what I previously said: what did you expect me to say? Yes you're right?

The thing you have to remember Red - is that you're always wrong. (how predictable was that? )

[Red]

How you have the audacity to sit there and tell me what I have read is wrong and again unless you and I worked for Ferrari at that time how the heck would we know what was really going on there except through reading articles and watching what is happening on the tele!

Precisely. That goes both ways.

Wrong (adj) - Not in conformity with fact or truth; incorrect or erroneous.

PS: Bert! Don't push it!

[BertMk2]

Ljakse - I'm sure Red doesn't mean any offence, I've got a feeling this is a language barrier/use of English type of thing (I could be completely wrong on this but there you go).

I've disagreed with Red over just about every conceivable F1 topic and initially I was quite taken aback by the strength of Red's responses. But if you look at Red's other posts they're all in the same vein - whether agreeing or disagreeing with someone (I've even known Red to admit to making mistakes).

There is of course a chance that I'm talking complete cr*p and Red hates everybody that doesn't have a Ferrari tatoo on their forehead but there you go!

[Adam43]

Thread closed. If dictionary definitions are being posted it is an indication that the thread has gone too far.

Also Wrex's little, but plain and simple, warning was completely ignored.

There seems to be a general inability to accept that others have a different point of view and that they aren't going to change. Also the thread is not arguing points anymore, but arguing with others. If you see what I mean.

Finally lots of complaining came from purposefully ignoring the actual sentiment and taking literal meanings to try and discredit the others posts.