I’ve been slightly dumbfounded in the last few days with the discussion, well not exactly discussion, rather accusations of biased site on a neighbouring thread. Because opinated articles are by definition opinions, and same goes to forums who supposedly exist so that a community can express their opinions.
But after reading this thread, maybe I’m getting what some people were trying to say: no, the forum is not biased, for sure. Maybe unbalanced is the right word: 6 out of 8 of the opinions expressed here are against Ferrari, some rather extremists. Nothing wrong with that, though.
Hopefully, the Ferrari fans have just been sleeping, or for some unimportant reason not wanting to express their love here (is there really a point?), because as the OP emphazises it’s a rather polarized subject with “a distinct split between those of us who like Ferrari, and those who don’t”.
Why hopefully? Because it’s always better that such divisive subjects are balanced, with both sides evenly represented on a place of discussion like this one. For the image of the forum. For that the newcomers from the unrepresented side don’t be afraid of being too alone, unsupported and decide not to stick around, contribuiting this way for an hard to break cycle (unbalance -> Newcomers from the misrepresented side don’t stay -> more unbalance). For other good reasons also.
So, I’ll try to play the devil’s advocate and cover for the Ferrari fans that for some reason skipped this thread. not sure how effective I will be, but at least the thread will look, let’s use the same word again as it’ss perfect, I think, will look more balanced.
I’ll address @Hairs, who seems to have the more extremist position:
the truth is that “per year” they’re behind McLaren, Lotus
So what? Like you pointed out Brawn would be “per year” the most sucessful team of them all. Would that be fair? Of course not, because they only entered the game for one year; sweep clean that year and never played again, nor had played before. The point is that the argument is biased
(this is bias, not what was told around the last few days). Hairs here tries to use a biased statistical history to suit his position, biased because biased towards the teams he wants, McLaren and Lotus – he only wants to count the years they participated)
Point is during all the championships, Ferrari is the most sucessful team of them all, and if McLaren or Lotus or Williams didn’t participate in some years of the Championship, well, maybe they should have. Then, if they were more sucessful you could say that they were.
Continuing on the same paragraph curiously entitled “All mouth, no trousers.”, Hairs goes on in describing his view of the history of the Ferrari team, either with contempt (“garagiste team, robbed mechanics”), with cryptical expressions (“bought their way into wins”) which he doesn’t bother to explain the meaning let alone justify them.
He then mentions the sucessful “Schumacher age”, allowing the team “to change to something more like their successful rivals”, but doesn’t bother to mention which rivals and what ages is he comparing the Schumacher years sucess of Ferrari to. For people like me that don’t know F1 past history more than by seeing the ocasional movie and looking at record tables, it would be good that Hairs specified what is he talking about, at least so we could check it out and confirm if he’s not playing with statistics again (how do they say it? “The thief always returns to the crime scene”?)
The second paragraph is even harsher in empty accusations. Entitled “Cheating” he starts with
No team embodies brazen institutionalised cheating like Ferrari do.
and then it’s not clear what is he accusing Ferrari of doing. Again explaining what “this is a team that actually requested a veto on the sport’s rules – and got it!” means (examples, what, when, who, where) would definitely help your cause, especially if you know what you’re talking about. But I’m not sure you do.
Never mind teams robbing designs, or ideas, or paying photographers to get pictures, or buying technical staff.
Again, I have a limited knowledge as to F1 history goes, so I only can remember the team McLaren (I believe you mentioned it in the beginning of your post) robbing designs, ideas to Ferrari. In 2007 and they were convicted by it, huge fine, disqualification from the constructors championship and stripped from its points.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Formula_One_espionage_controversy
so, if you could present also some source it would be helpful.
Finally he just says they are smug. Hmmmmm.
