Depends on the situation, I said this to people regarding the Yamaha-Dunlop defection at TT 2015. When you employ a motorcycle racer to get results the employer needs to provide a machine capable of doing so, it's a two way deal and Yamaha didn't uphold their end of the bargain in that situation which led to a star rider taking the unprecedented action of walking out of one team and into another one during the same meeting and as much as Michael was .... on he was justified in his performances.
I agree that there is an agreement between rider and factory (if you're a factory branded rider, satellites riders must operate under a different dynamic) that the factory needs to deliver a competitive machine whilst the rider agrees to ride it to the limit. But some factories are not either willing or capable of it, take for example KTM and Aprillia, they’re trying but are way behind the experience and resources of Honda and Yamaha. Suzuki I think are simply unwilling to put in the balls to the wall effort required to compete with Honda and Yamaha.
In regards to Hopkins, I don’t think we can say he didn’t put his .... on the line to get everything out of his machines, that includes his rookie year. This has left his body quite broken. In this case, I think his employers (Kawasaki and Suzuki GP) let him down. I know you are a Cal Crutchlow fan (and you know I am not, believe me, I cringe knowing my friend Arrabi reads my posts) but the thought that I had as I wrote my post was him talking smack about his RCV when he was interviewed after he had just got the pole position. I felt it was ungracious in the extreme, I mean come on man, you’re on pole position, don’t ruin the moment by saying Honda are costing you time because you’re ‘rightfully’ testing parts. Sure, I don’t mind these guys talking about the deficiencies of the machines when they obviously don’t think they’re to blame, but some of these guys go way overboard, some weaponizing the media not so much to put pressure on their employer but rather to clear themselves of their shortcomings. Rossi is good at doing this for example. Dovi and Hayden were too docile to hold their employer’s accountable.
Marquez was vocal about the power delivery of the previous engine, and this was backed up by Pedrosa and Crutchlow. So I agree, these guys should be free to express themselves about the machine’s shortcomings, but I think there is a distinction between doing this and whining. It’s a fine line, no doubt, and there may be other factors at play. For example, recently the electronics have become a Yamaha talking point, well, unless Yamaha are not privy to what’s going on at Tech3, I don’t see how this can be such a blind spot for the factory given Zarco’s performance, granted he is on a different chassis, but we are talking electronics. Therefore, what’s wrong with the “new” package that the “old” package is doing better? Another thing to consider is this, I remember talking to a Moto2 tech (one of those paddock guys that I recently hosted on a visit to my area) who said sometimes the factories don’t use the better solution because of an agreement with a vendor to use the “newest” product, and so the team struggles to make the new part work knowing damn well the previous model was superior. It comes down to a marketing pressure, the vendor (or factory) have made a “new” product and have spent a large budget to market it. No way are they going to say, ooops we screwed up, the older model is better. That is why when the factory guys want to use a previous chassis/swing arm for example, its not just a question of performance, there is pressure by the rider because he wants to go faster, but there is pressure from the standpoint of the factory that has a reputation to uphold, and they would look stupid that their "new" stuff is ..... The message being they're not progressing normally. I’ve seen this happens with suspension components. So there are probably many layers to this dynamic that we as spectators are not privy.