AR3-GP wrote: ↑30 May 2023, 17:53
I didn't mention Silverstone to say it's the same circuit as Monaco. I mentioned it because it was the first time that Hamilton drove the car.
How does driving an updated car for the first time at Silverstone give the same indication as driving an updated car in Monaco? The comparison is as disingenuous as it gets.
You couldn't pick a worse track to validate updates. The target was Imola and the team were compromised by the cancellation. Instead of taking any positives in being the 2nd highest scoring team, Russell throwing a podium away(but other teams get the driver excuse, not Mercedes) Or Wolff and Hamilton saying that given the limited scope of the Track to validate the updates they have reasons to be optimistic.
They're also running a compromised rear wing, itself a product of the budget cap. Which makes a "nasty rear end" comment plausible and reasonable until they can dial into a track that will give feedback that's reliable and conducive to given the team a clearer idea of what is needed to move forward from their package. So yes, extremely unrealistic to get a clear picture from a track that isn't conducive to giving clear pictures.
Instead, your expectations being projected onto Wolff or any team member comment, gets put through a negative prism, repeatedly with jibes along the lines of "mixed signals", "PR management" and "cagey" "they don't know if it's the track or the car". And that's just this page...
And if time will tell, why can't you give them time? It really is strange and not conducive to constructive dialogue to repeatedly stick the boot in ad nauseum. Other team threads escape your
repeated criticisms, so I'm sure it's possible that can be reflected here?