MS is prolly under a magnifying lense because he is the most successful and the most experienced driver on the grid. It is just amusing when in the eyes of HC Schumi fans there is only black and white - it seems that he is above critizism altogether. I admire MS for what he has achieved but somewhat dislike him for being ruthless to the extreme. Where others might not have rammed their competition in "red mist" or park their cars mid-corner, MS was easily able to do so. Winor try winning at ALL costs, no matter what. Those "old sins" will never fade away although they should not be used against him in races to come.
This season he´s had rotten luck - I´m not sure if he´d be above his teammate in the stangings but close.
I certainly respect your opinion here. Very well put.
I was very disappointed in Michael at Monaco 2006. It took me a while to forgive him since I couldn't understand why he felt inclined to do such a thing at that stage of his career. But then, it's the whole package, isn't it? We, as Schumi, are all human. If he's truly great in one way, the flaws will show up in other ways. I'm very aware of his ruthlessness, but the ones who hold this above all else about him are the ones who were embarrassed by his superiority when they were his teammates and understandably vexed by the teams preferential treatment of Michael; those veteran drivers with their greatness threatened by the looming shadow of Michael's achievements (they'll always point out Michael's flaws and amusedly so); and all the fans of those same drivers and veterans.
It's Michael's abilities that made the cars that he drove seem as dominant as they were during his years at Benetton and Ferrari. No one is denying that he didn't need competitive machinery to achieve what he did, but the commanding way that he did it is a totally different matter and put way too much down to dominant machinery.
The McLaren's were very dominant in 1998 and yet, Michael gave them a serious run for the championship that year. Pretty much as Alonso/Ferrari did with RBR in 2010. Alonso deserves a LOT of credit for his efforts with that Ferrari in 2010. I don't think the Ferrari was supremely dominant in 2000 and this is why that year was so fantastic for all to watch really. 2001.... not dominant. In 2002, the Ferrari was dominant and it was utter domination there. Same for 2004, but not for 2003 or 2006. Again, 1995 was not a championship won in dominant machinery.
In 1997, Michael felt the same as Prost did with Senna in 1989 at Suzuka.
After such an illustrious career and being back for an encore, he makes a comment about the tyres. It's bound to provoke the chatter that now prevails.