Cosicave 'Mangey Course' is as dull as a day in Dover.' Oh dear! you have spent a whole day in Dover? Our sympathies are with you old chum.
You were addressing Grosjean's future, but how can you make definitive judgements about his future without taking his past into account? We can only speculate as to how good he might become, but to say "he's never going to be good enough" without proper justification is very harsh, to say the least.
I agree it sounds harsh but I repeat: it is less a reflection of merit than an unfortunate reality of F1. Of course, Grosjean may prove to be one of the few exceptions but the simple reality is that most only get one chance; and he's had one already. This means that the chances are that he will not be considered good enough to be considered in the future.
except De La Rosa who should be nick-named 'the cat' he's had so many lives in F1 despite always being crap.
Haha. Yeah, there are a few stray cats but unfortunately most are neutered. Another was Alex Wurz. Just for fun: what do these guys have in common? (apart from being cats)
I think you are missing the point here cosicave. This isn't about Grosjean getting another chance in F1 but about Grosjean's talent. You said he was "never" going to be good enough. I responded to that point. On the topic of whether he's going to get another chance in F1, I think it's entirely possible - because he has proved himself before and after his brief F1 stint and currently has the role as reserve driver at Lotus Renault and Pirelli tyre tester. F1 history does show that many driver's don't receive a second chance, but the individual achievements of that driver does play a big part in whether they get another chance.
McLaren test drivers between driving for other teams? Both stood in for a main driver (Montoya and Berger, not to mention Perez)?
Aah Genji, such deep and thorough research! I'm no quiz master and although I'm sure you're correct, it extends the relatively simple point I was trying to make: PdlR and Alex Wurz are two of the best, most thorough test drivers F1 has ever seen, which is the reason they were such perennial 'comeback kings'. Grosjean, by comparison, isn't; which brings me back to address Forza's point: With the greatest respect Forza, it appears that we are at cross-purposes, since I believe you are overlooking my point in my choice of the word 'never'. The word 'never' simply refers to the future doesn't it? As I have already explained, it takes no account of the past whatsoever - which definitely includes past performance; and I chose it deliberately as a combination point. It was a play on words about the French circuit which usually gets its name shortened by omitting 'Nevers', which is part of its full name. It is also my opinion that he will not be perceived "good enough" for a return to F1 (necessarily in the future), for a combination of reasons; not least that most drivers only get one chance and he has had one already. Thus the chances are that he will 'never' get another chance. The above is quite different to discussing my opinion of Grosjean abilities, but clearly it is time I did, so here it is in green and white: In my opinion Grosjean did not shine brightly enough when his 'moment' came; regardless of the circumstances, he simply did not impress ENOUGH to be likely to get a second chance. This does not imply that he was not impressive. It implies that he was not impressive enough. But of course, it is only my opinionâ¦
The word 'never' refers to the past, present and future, it does not only refer to the future which I think is how the disagreement has come about, or have I missed something? Because saying 'never' only refers to the future does not really make sense.
Well, now we are getting down to semantics. Technically you are right about 'never' of course, Mifune; and I concede that this is likely to have been the source of misunderstanding, so thanks for helping out! However, the fact that the word 'never' can apply to the future validates my use of it in the future tense; and it should by now be apparent that that is how I was using it.
I give you: France has never successfully repelled invaders. Never mind other countries' attitudes, the French often stand alone. France will never have the biggest population in the world.
This I found particularly amusing and I think true. Malaysia, China, Turkey, Monaco, Canada, Hungary, Singapore, Korea, Abu Dhabi and Bahrain can all manage to host a Grand Prix without a driver but France must have one!
Money talks, how many of them countries have a rising economy and / or have oil fields, id say, China, Korea, Abu Dhabi and Bahrain. Money talks Bernie !.
I think F1 needs France and France needs F1. The french have a bit of automotive history that is fading fast. A new F1 revolution is needed there
Yes, I think that, given their illustrious history, there should always be a French Grand Prix but if they make having a French F1 driver a pre-requisite, then they're unnecessarily complicating things and probably creating a strange sort of chicken-and-egg situation.
- A french GP will inspire young viewers in france to become drivers and one of those could be a talent. - A french driver in F1 will encourage the french population to watch F1. - A huge French fanbase would revitalise the french automtive industry and maybe Renault will fall back in love with F1 again!
Exactly! But if, as Cosicave says, the French make having a driver a pre-requisite to resurrecting their Grand Prix, they risk shooting themselves in the foot. If they keep it simple for now and just get the GP back, the rest will follow.
you mean the indian route? An indian driver was to give exposure of F1 in India. France already knows about F1. If French F1 drivers come and go I would consider that normal as There has always been French drivers in F1. Only recently there has been a lull which might of caused the downfall of the french GP. If the UK had no drivers in F1 do you think the interest and attendance of the british GP would be the same?
I wasn't thinking of going down the Indian route, more the opposite. I think they should focus on getting the Grand Prix back without insisting on there being a driver. I mean, if a French driver comes through, then that would be better but just the idea that the GP is coming back would spur ambition. I should add, of course, that India, like France, also has a team which is increasingly competitive. Also, while it will be better if they have a driver, many host nations manage well without one. Also, the Indian idea is an odd one in some ways because they don't have anyone who can really compete and I wonder what effect that may have, whether people will retain their interest, for example. Also, in Britain's case, we almost lost our GP despite having drivers, teams and so much of F1's industry here. I think what I'm trying to say is that it's complicated but by insisting on having a driver first, the French are complicating it further, imao
Analysis of French drivers: The poster boys Alain Prost: The creme de la creme of french motorsport. 4 times world champion and known as the professer. His driving skill is something all drivers inspire to mimic. Jean Alesi: Only won one race but he was an exciting prospect and great to watch. Rene Arnoux: He was an equal to one of the most exciting drivers of all time Gilles Villeneuve. He also raced in a french car as well that drived the french public wild. _____________________________ Recent Talent (I say that lightly): Sebastian Bordais: did ok but not as good as people expected as a 4 times CART champion. Unfairly sacked and was ahead of Vettel in points at the time. Frank Montagny: Renault and Toyota test man got a go at Super Aguri but didnt achieve much but was reasonable against sato. Romain Grosjean: Shoved into the deep end at renault at a time new drivers found it hard to get used to the new cars with minimal teasting rules. Fisico even struggled in the Ferrari. ________________________________________ Upcoming French drivers: Romain Grosjean: worth giving another shot but he doesnt have good financial backing Nicolas Prost: Quite good not as good as his dad. He is also quite old for a F1 newcomer. Test driving for Renault. Jules Bianch: member of Ferrari's young driver development. Shined in lower series but has stumbled a bit in GP2. other notables: Olivier Panis
