You are about to report the comment below to the Crash.Net moderators as being abusive. An abusive comment may contain profanity, personal attacks or commercial SPAM.
Please do not report this comment as being abusive if you simply disagree with the comment posted. If this is the case then you can click on the "disagree" icon () in the upper right of the comment's post to show your dissatisfaction.
Crash.Net moderators will view all reported comments and will act as they deem necessary. This may be editing the comment or total deletion.
"If you take a look at the lap times from 2010 and 2011, you will see that Rossi was generally riding at least as fast and often faster than Stoner did the year before. The Ducati had stayed constant while the other bikes improved."
A guy who was winning races and getting podiums on the Ducati was replaced by a rider who could not do the same. It's an irrefutable fact Bob.
Additionally, the new rider was also hired for his self-promoted development skills. If the bike didn't improve, some of the responsibility must fall on him. You can't have it both ways. You can't say "I had a lot to do with the development machine" for a winning bike and "I had nothing to do with the development of this bike" for a losing bike - especially when the previous rider was having a measure of success before handing the bike to you.