Can anyone help me with Vettel?

First topic message reminder :

John just wrote a perfectly accurate post on the "Singapore" thread and it prompted me to reply, but rather than derail a thread I thought it better to separate. He wrote:

Who cares, reality is Vettel will ease to this years title. You can say Newey this, Newey that but the record books will just say a 4 time world champion. The competition haven't been good enough......again. Another Vettel podium this weekend & we can pretty much close the book on this season. I'm already just looking forward to next year, think the regulations will inevitably mix it up & probably the only way of halting Newey/Vettel is an inferior & uncompetitive Renault engine.

He's right. Everyone knows that the RB is an incredible car, but when that uncontentious observation becomes a stick with which to beat what I believe to be incredible driver it gets silly. You'd think the greats won titles in poor cars, or that they didn't chase the best car from team to team.

Personally I'm still a bit oblivious about why people don't like or rate Vettel. I find patriotism irrational, so I don't have that problem, and he seems a nice lad with a funny sense of humour. He seems to have provided great evidence of what he adds to the car; he attacks well yet makes very few serious errors since his stock car approach to the 2010 season (a bit of a campaign began to make out he cracks under pressure, but it's based on the thinnest of evidence when everyone makes an error or two. He seems to make fewer every year, even under a lot of heat in 2012).

I like his attitude to competition; his comments after Webber disobeyed orders at Silverstone in 2011  to back off him were unique. He said he didn't mind, he welcomed competition and understood Mark wanted to race, and he liked that too. Y'know, he was how old at the time? That's pretty grown up stuff from what was still in these terms a kid.

He won legitimate spurs in a poor car early on, something Hamilton didn't (but doesn't diminish his status in my eyes). Still, it's a good counter to the idea he can only pilot a superior car.

Is it really the finger? Seriously? Like no great sportsmen do this?


Anyone help?

bogbrush wrote:The funny thing is that ifAlonso was gifted a pass, or slip stream qualifying (ha!) over Massa everyone says obviously smart tactics. When it's Vettel they get sanctimonious,

It's just stupid really. That's why I love reading it so much.

Not at all.

While I don't like any driver being "gifted" a place, by any means, or for any reason, team orders are now an accepted part of F1 and teams will use them to their benefit.

In Alonso's case, he has been struggling with an inferior car, but has consistently been Vettel's closest challenger over the last few seasons. In that sense, its obviously a smart move for Massa to make way for him, when circumstances dictate its necessary (again, not that I like it), in order to keep up any sort of challenge on Vettel.

Vettel, on the other hand, has had the car and the ability to win without any help from Webber. If he happens to find himself behind his team mate for the odd race over a season, its hardly going to damage his title chances.


For the record, I wasn't overly impressed when Rosberg was told to hold station behind Hamilton either. In that instance I think Mercedes are just far enough off realistically challenging for the title that they should just let their drivers race.

Oh so team orders are ok so long as there's a moral case for the underdog, but not if the guy is better.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Take it from me and other F1 fans - what we want is exciting racing wheel-to-wheel for race wins and nail-biting title finishes. Red Bull's vast superiority coupled with Vettel totally negates that. I tell you what? Why do you think Steve Davis was labelled 'boring' when he was a multiple world champion and one of the very best snooker players of all-time? Because he dominated and won with great ease and was very rarely threatened. Sound familiar?

Good example, because now people realise what prats they were for failing to recognise what a great player, and decent guy, he always was.

That just emphasises what people want. Do people refer to his 18-2 world title win or his nail-biting black ball final V Taylor. Point proven that people crave competitiveness in viewing sport and F1 just now isn't it.

Back to Davis and I'd say they warmed to him when they got to know the real him when he became a pundit on the BBC. I'd say that was more the case.

That just emphasises my point that this is just irrelevant moaning that has nothing to do with his racing ability or personal qualities.

Like I keep saying, who in their right mind gives a toss what people who are swayed by irrelevance think?

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Take it from me and other F1 fans - what we want is exciting racing wheel-to-wheel for race wins and nail-biting title finishes. Red Bull's vast superiority coupled with Vettel totally negates that. I tell you what? Why do you think Steve Davis was labelled 'boring' when he was a multiple world champion and one of the very best snooker players of all-time? Because he dominated and won with great ease and was very rarely threatened. Sound familiar?

Good example, because now people realise what prats they were for failing to recognise what a great player, and decent guy, he always was.

That just emphasises what people want. Do people refer to his 18-2 world title win or his nail-biting black ball final V Taylor. Point proven that people crave competitiveness in viewing sport and F1 just now isn't it.

Back to Davis and I'd say they warmed to him when they got to know the real him when he became a pundit on the BBC. I'd say that was more the case.

That just emphasises my point that this is just irrelevant moaning that has nothing to do with his racing ability or personal qualities.

Like I keep saying, who in their right mind gives a toss what people who are swayed by irrelevance think?

Well actually no. You will hear lots of people nowadays bemoan Davis achievements due to a much poorer standard of competition and there's a good chance the same will be said of Vette's achievements I feel - it is inescapable no matter how s**t hot you may feel he is. Hendry gets the same feedback from many in snooker as well.

Oh ok, so now he's rubbish because Hamilton & Alonso are useless!

What next? He's too young to have shot Kennedy.

No not because Hamilton and Alonso are useless but because they are made to look useless by inferior equipment they have at their disposal.

Was that the problem with Steve Davis' rivals too? Or was that why everyone misjudged his personality? So Vettels personality perception is determined by his opponents cars.

Yes, it's all logically coherent.

No I am merely pointing out how easy wins don't equate to greatness in people's eyes as is the example with the likes of Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry in snooker - they were both dominant in the sport with back-to-back titles. Vettel has great driver's opposing him but Davis and Hendry had great player's opposing them but that cut no ice.

bogbrush wrote:Oh so team orders are ok so long as there's a moral case for the underdog, but not if the guy is better.

I didn't say team orders are okay. If you read my post you'd see I said I dont like them under any circumstances.

What I said was, Vettel has the car and the ability, such that, he doesn't need team orders...and that tossing Webber the odd bone when he happened to be leading a race wouldn't significantly dent his title chances (then again, we've seen what Seb does when he is given team orders).

In Alonso's case, its the smart thing for Ferrari to do as he's been Vettel's closest rival over the last few seasons. I still don't like that Massa has had to play second fiddle to him, but you have to concede his race peformances have generally been poorer than Alonso's.

Also, where's the "moral case for the underdog" in the Mercedes example I mentioned?