Justify why you like or dislike Ferrari

This topic contains 147 replies, has 57 voices, and was last updated by  Magnificent Geoffrey 6 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 148 total)
  • Author
  • #129735

    Ned Flanders

    Well, this thread should be fairly self explanatory…

    Ferrari is a team with an ability like no other to polarise fans. There seems to be a distinct split between those of us who like Ferrari, and those who don’t. (Obviously there will be an ambivalent middle ground too, but presumably they’re in the minority). Yet sometimes it’s easy to forget why it is that we choose to love or hate them- I personally have never liked Ferrari for as long as I can remember, and occasionally I have to remind myself why that is.

    So, here is an opportunity for people to dispell the suspicion that their love or hate for the Scuderia is irrational, by justifing their opinions. I can come up with plenty of reasons why I don’t like the team, and I’m sure the F1 Fanatic Tifosi can come up with an equally valid defence.

    You never know, maybe some of us could be persuaded to switch allegiances!…



    I dislike them because of their overly blatant use of team orders and because of their overly close relationship with the FiA.

    They are a one driver team. Until that attitude changes, I won’t like them. Same reason I don’t like Red Bull.


    sbl on tour

    ferrari are like man utd, you either luv em or hate em



    What sw6569 said. Team orders, their haughtiness and their shady relationship with the FIA.

    I doubley don’t like them now that Alonso is in the team, someone I just cannot bear to like after his actions in 2007 in McLaren no matter how good he is behind the wheel. I also don’t particularly like his personality.

    That’s not to say It dislike everything about Ferrari. I’ve liked many of their drivers such as Barrichello, Mansell, Raikkonen, Massa and Fisichella.



    Two reasons that immediately come to mind:

    1. LDM – I cant stand his arrogance and the way he belittles other teams

    2. The Schumacher years – I think most brits who had to suffer through this feel the same way, especially given the relationship Schumi had with Hill prior to his joining the scuderia.

    There are some things I like about Ferrari though. The drivers for one, I have a soft spot for Domenicali too, and I like the way they celebrate their history (when they’re not shoving it down our throats).

    I’d say I slightly lean towards dislike, when they mess up I do tend to chuckle, but I can appreciate it when they do something well.



    Why I don’t like Ferrari:

    “All mouth, no trousers.”

    For all that they harp on their unrivalled history, success, and results, the truth is that “per year” they’re behind McLaren, Lotus (and Brawn, but that’s a statistical anomaly). They started off as a garagiste team, robbed mechanics, designers, drivers success and livery from Alfa Romeo, and bought their way into wins. They’ve had long spells of drought, followed by short periods of success. Most of the time, their cars have been at best second fastest, but always horribly unreliable. For most of the 80’s they were a laughing stock of a team. Their most successful period was the Schumacher age – when they threw off their arrogance, brought in a bunch of foreigners, and allowed the ethos of the team to change to something more like their successful rivals. Yet there’s never a sense that Ferrari even acknowledge anything other than their own mythology. Horse Whisperer and Di Montizemalo typify all that is worst about the team.


    No team embodies brazen institutionalised cheating like Ferrari do. Never mind teams robbing designs, or ideas, or paying photographers to get pictures, or buying technical staff. We’re not talking about seeking an advantage by unscrupulous means, this is a team that actually requested a veto on the sport’s rules – and got it! Other teams, you sense, will bend the rules or cheat if they think they have to. Ferrari always seem like a team that will resort to cheating because they’ve got nothing else to offer.


    Nobody likes a smug git. And nothing’s more smug than this lot.

    Good things:

    Their cars are red. But that wasn’t their idea anyway.

    Domenicali. A good man in the wrong team, unfortunately.



    I never liked them in the era of His Schumacerness because it was so boring but since then i have grown to love them, mainly because of all the history and passion and the unexplainable fact that at the end of the day, Ferraris (on the road and the racetrack) just have something more emotionally than any other team or car manufacturer. They all seem boring and empty when compared with Ferrari, apart from Williams. Plus I have always been an Alonso fan (because of his talent – the best all round driver on the grid) and a Massa fan (Cheered him on in 08 and felt sorry for him ever since – no luck at all), and dislike Hamilton (spoilt and thinks nothing is ever his fault)



    Basically what sw6569 and Hairs said. And what Ned (sort of) said – if I think about it, I dislike them more!

    I actually used to be a Ferrari fan! In a sense, I felt betrayed since I defended them when I was younger but all they did was carry on with the same antics.

    It doesn’t help that I have little respect for their drivers either. One asks his team-mate to move over for him and the other obliges gladly. Not to mention the evidence that Alonso used Spygate knowledge to his advantage and then tried to blackmail his boss with it when he wouldn’t make him #1. As good as you are Fernando, that’s unacceptable. Even Schumacher admitted what he did, even if he only apologised once, for the Jerez incident.


    Ned Flanders

    Indeed. One of the biggest mysteries in modern F1 is how Alonso’s reputation survived what was a pretty horrific blackmail attempt on Ron Dennis in 2007. What’s almost as surprising is that he has shown absolutely no remorse for what he did.

    Obviously, Ferrari weren’t to blame for Alonso’s treachery. But as long as Alonso drives for them- or at least until he apologises for what he did- then I will be unable to support them



    I have liked Ferrari ever since I started wathcing in 1998. A lot of that has to do with Michael Schumacher, who I saw very much as the underdog, the red hero fighting Hakkinen and Coulthard in the Mclarens which back then were very dull and grey in appearance. Also, I feel Ferrari’s history and passion is unparalleled- especially since they only initially produced road cars to fund the racing operation. That shows the level of dedication Enzo had to motorsport, which I fell in love with.



    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.


    so, if you could present also some source it would be helpful.

    Finally he just says they are smug. Hmmmmm.



    I’m ambivalent towards Ferrari. Does that count?

    Sure, they’ve had their indiscretions, but how many long running top teams have no stain on their character. I do admire some of their cars for being either incredibly competitive, or just simply being awesome (like their later V12 models). As for drivers, it depends. I never particularly liked Schumacher, but Jean Alesi is one of my favourite drivers ever.


    Dan Thorn

    I find it really hard to explain why I like them – especially as the arguments for not liking Ferrari are many and understandable.

    I guess for me it’s the passion, the history and the emotion that gets generated whenever they’re on track. For me there is no more emotional moment in F1 than Monza 1988 and whenever a Ferrari wins at Monza, it just feels different from when any other team score a home success. Enzo was an intriguing and complex character which adds a touch of mystique to it as well.

    Of course, there are bad things about Ferrari, but it’s like putting up with a beautiful woman who picks her nose and liberally farts – you gloss over them because when things get good, they get REALLY good.



    @LL Jehto

    I’ll admit I have only skim read your post, but its huge and I have a few things to do. However, i thought i’d pick you up on a point you mention at the beginning.

    Stating that I dislike Ferrari in no way suggests that I am biased against them, or indeed their drivers. I’m happy to praise the team and Alonso when the time is right. However, their past antics mean that I won’t go out of my way to buy their merchandise.

    Additionally I think that who you support largely stems from two factors: when you started watching F1 and if you support the underdog or not.

    For example:

    If you started watching in the late 90’s then its likely you’ll be a McLaren or Ferrari fan. If you started watching in the early 90’s then it’s likely you’ll be a Williams fan (like me) or a Mclaren fan.

    There is therefore no need for a thread like this to be balanced. It might simply be an age thing.



    I dislike Ferrari because what they did with Kimi. Alonso was supposed to be the new god, but guess what – championships in a Ferrari still 1-0 for Kimi. Also, how they just forget Kimi in some of their press releases and events – and misspelled his name in the Ferrari World at Abu Dhabi.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 148 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.