F1 Fanatic

Hate is a strong word, but I really really really dont like him. He is a really nice guy, and if he was not in F1 it would be all fine & dandy, but he is an F1 driver, and that comes with some responsibilities too. I was a fan of Button since he started his F1 career, but I did not like his way of handling things off the track. With Vettel it is the other way around. I do think he is fast, and he is a match for everyone, but I dont like his personality on the track. It all started in 2009 when he joined RB, in 2008 I was happy that he won in Monza, but what he did throught 2009 & 2010 have made me turn away. Crashing into other cars all the time, not just bumping, but seriously crashing, then taking no responsibility at all. Yes he said he made a mistake, but thats not taking responsibility, its admitting his fault, he did not learn from those mistakes and contuined to do them, and that is what annoys me the most. In 2011 he did less stupid things because he was not in a position to do them, but when he was, he was lucky to get away with them, his ‘superb’ pass on Alonso in Monza, was just plain stupid, he could have overtake him elsewhere, but was very opportunistic, and he made the pass, but had he slipped, it would have been the same thing as 2010 Spa. In Suzuka, he cut through the track & pushed Button off, but if it wasnt Button, he would have a nice DNF there.

So all in all, I think he is a fast driver, and I was happy that he won in 2010 because that meant Alonsos did not win (in my view he wouldnt deserve it because the Hockenheim incident), but his sheer stupidity makes me dislike him, just as Maldonado or Grosjean.

@bag0

his ‘superb’ pass on Alonso in Monza, was just plain stupid

I think that’s unreasonably harsh on Vettel. He was perfectly entitled to make a pass on Alonso there. Alonso pushing him off the track was questionable, and Vettel showed bravery and skill by not being intimidated and keeping the car under control.

@keithcollantine
Sorry my memory played tricks with me, he had all four wheels on track when he made the pass, his off track moment was behind Alonso, but I still think he did not need that pass at that corner, and he should not have risked it, as he could have passed him throught Ascari. He took an uncalculated risk which payed off that time.

Its to do with RBR itself.

As is seen in this thread, Red Bull is seen as the ‘bad guys’ of F1. This comes from their smugness particularly team bosses like Christian Horner and Helmut Marko. They are the most unlikable faces of Formula 1.

Coming from all of this, Vettel is Red Bull’s chosen one. They will defend him and cheat for him. He is not a particularly likeable character in that he sulks when he loses and he gives everyone the big one finger salute.

Alot of the other hatred stems from the teams treatment of Webber, they clearly favoritize Vettel and many feel this isn’t fair. Webber is extremely well liked and the teams subordination of him and refusal to support him has made them be seen in even lesser light. Add into the fact that when Webber was misfairly treated Vettel was far from polite about this and often had that smug grin and he is lopped in with the ‘bad’ guys at Red Bull, and Webber is seen as the outsider.

Vettel can be pleasant and funny, but he is a not a likeable character. I’m sure if he went to Ferrari and got beaten by Alonso for a season people would celebrate when he won, but currently he is just the poster child for the most unlikable team in F1.

@mazdachris

I’m not sure there are any examples of Red Bull cheating, in fairness.

Take a look at their flexible splitter last year. They created a splitter that flexed under certain circumstances, but passed all of the FIA load tests – even when the FIA doubled the weight applied to the splitter. So while the part was deemed to be technically legal, the rules also state that flexible aerodynamic parts are banned. The part was visibly flexing, so a lot of people felt it was illegal. And yet, Red Bull still ran it. If that’s not cheating, it’s incredibly questionable.

No other team has flaunted the rule book so much as Red Bull has. They’ve been involved in three technical disputes this season, and gotten away with all of them because they were down to clever interpretations of the rules, finding loopholes that were not intended to be there. By all means, you can applaud them for innovation, but my mind always goes back to the Cold War, and the “Moscow Rules” that were spelled out by foreign intelligence agents working in Russia. One of them – often quoted as the first rule – was that once is an accident, and twice is simply coincidence, but three times is enemy action. Three times forms a pattern, so I think one of the main reasons why people dislike Red Bull is that they’re clearly pouring everything they can into finding whatever advantage is available, and not caring whether or not it’s within the spirit of competition – and then, when the FIA or other teams propose cost-cutting regulations, they vehemently oppose it, claiming that it is for the good of the sport.

I’m convinced that Red Bull are spending massive and unreasonable amounts of money on development in ways that the FIA will not approve of, and then trying to kill any regulations that might show exactly what they’re up to because they know that if they get found out, at the very least they’ll slide back down the grid (and at worst, get heavy penalties for what they are doing). To then claim that their opposition to such rules is for the good of the sport – and not for self-preservation – is a slap in the face, and one that they seem to expect up to be thankful for.

I’m convinced that Red Bull are spending massive and unreasonable amounts of money on development in ways that the FIA will not approve of, and then trying to kill any regulations that might show exactly what they’re up to because they know that if they get found out, at the very least they’ll slide back down the grid (and at worst, get heavy penalties for what they are doing). To then claim that their opposition to such rules is for the good of the sport – and not for self-preservation – is a slap in the face, and one that they seem to expect up to be thankful for.

And when they got called out on the budget they simply left the teams association. In many ways its a joke how poorly Red Bull is performing this year, they have the biggest budget in the sport and the best personal for all position.

I also feel Red Bull is a fly by wire drink brand, they don’t care about F1 heritage it is just a big marketing operation. They will do anything for marketing promotion and when they stop winning they will be gone. I really think the odds are against them this year and with the type of form Vettel has shown so far this weekend at Spa he very well could lose even more ground in the championship.

Coming back from 30 points behind with the fastest car in 2010 is one thing, coming from 50 points behind in a car that isn’t dominant is another, particularly when your team mate appears to have the upper hand.

@prisoner-monkeys

I can’t see anything you’ve mentioned which you couldn’t equally level at any other front running team. The flexible front wing is a great example – the part was technically legal. The fact it used clever engineering to get around the tests was precisely the sort of gemesmanship which defines F1. Technically legal are the two most important words when it comes to building an F1 car. You have to look at the technical regs as a set of rules designed to limit the performance of the car. In order to build a fast car, you need to find a way of making the car faster than the rules were meant to make it, while still satisfying the letter of the law. This is certainly nothing new, and designers were doing this while Adrian Newey was still sucking his thumb.

Red Bull are successful because over the past few years, they’re the ones who have been most effective at doing the above. Every other team were trying to do the same thing, and all were doing it to some extent. A much more blatant example would be Brawn’s introduction of the double diffusor which was a fine example of exploiting technical loopholes. It’s natural that in situations where a team is doing well, that the other teams will try to work out how they’re doing it. In some instances once they work out how it’s being done, they’ll seek a technical clarification. Sometimes it’s upheld and the FIA will clarify the rules which will close a small wording loophole. In other cases, they simply pass it as it’s outside of the scope of the rules. Double diffusors, off throttle exhaust blowing, f-ducts, all recent examples of things which have been technically challenged when the other teams have worked them out, but all were legal within the rules.

What you won’t find, as far as I know, are any examples of Red Bull actually being found to have directly broken a rule. That is to say, something they’ve done which is illegal and banned under the rules. In that respect, they’ve not cheated. They’ve done the best job of maximising the performance of the car while satisfying the technical requirements of the formula. That’s not cheating, that’s just how you win at F1. They should be congratulated for it, not scorned!