Jump to content


Photo

Schumacher: is he nostalgia yet?


  • Please log in to reply
230 replies to this topic

#1 ian senior

ian senior
  • Member

  • 2,140 posts
  • Joined: September 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 12:22

He's done the deed, and called a halt to his F1 career, so even though he has a few races to go yet, are we allowed to talk about him in a nostalgic sense yet?

It's too early, of course. To form a historical assessment of anything, not just racing drivers, to put things into context, the subject needs to be off the scene for a few years so true comparisons can be made without getting to carried away with what we have just seen. But I wonder if future historians will be kind to him?

You can't argue with the statistics that show he won a remarkable number of GPs and championships. But was that due at least in part to the fact that he was around for a long time - 15 years - and he was racing in an era of 16 or 17 championship races each year? Look back at some of the previous acknowledged greats since the World Championship started - say, Fangio, Moss, Clark and Stewart. Their F1 careers lasted around 8 or 9 years, and the championship consisted of far fewer races in those days. Did Schumacher just strike lucky by always having a competitive car, in an era of greater reliablility and when he had more races in which to make his mark?

That's leaving aside, of course, the flaws in his character that led him to make some utterly stupid racing decisions.

Advertisement

#2 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 13:20

If one considers the difference in perception of MS here and in RC (historians vs. fans), I think it's safe to assume that the difference will decrease over the time.

Is he 'history' yet? If we are to believe patron saint of motormouths, st. VtL (Villeneuve the Lesser)- he will never be, and will be forgotten as soon as he hangs his gloves.

As for statistical appraisal of his career- sheer numbers seem to be mind boggling, yet some interpretations of his results put him on par with Sir Stirling Moss (yet, in direct comparison he has performed better, according to the same method)*. and considering their opponents (Moss had Fangio, Ascari, Brabham, for starters) I'd say Moss gets the nod... To be honest, the downside of the method is that there are no pre-war drivers and only WDC GPs, but it seems a good start for discussion.

Historical appraisal? We'll see, but I do believe there are enough cool heads in TNF to start off the sensible discussion. :)

* this is according to stats done by Williams, the RC host (link)- comparison between World Champions + Moss, puts them both on joint 5th spot

EDIT- even though I said I wouldn't do it, when I polled TNF members on their top 10 GP drivers, 70% put Moss on the list, and 56% MS (Stewart, Senna, Prost and Nuvolari were between them)-Fangio was on top with 85%...

#3 mikedeering

mikedeering
  • Member

  • 3,521 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 13:46

It's actually pretty incredible how long Schumacher has been around. Aside from everything else - when he started in F1 it was just after the end of the turbo era. The greats of the 1980s were still racing (and winning) - Senna, Prost, Piquet and Mansell. Alonso was 10 years old(!) and still 10 years from his F1 debut. Barrichello and Coulthard were battling for the British F3 title. Obviously Patrese's career was marginally longer, but with all respect to him, you won't find anyone defining the period 1977-1993 as the "Patrese Era" (well, maybe Maldwyn!) - he just happened to be part of the action rather than the centre of it.

From his very first GP, Schumacher was generating news. To me it's extraordinary that anyone, in any sport can be so utterly dominant for such a time period. Even in the years he was not champion, it was usually acknowledged that his car prevented him from competing - such as 1996. That's how I will remember him. And regardless of era's, number of races per season, points systems etc, no one dominated for so long as he has in the history of motor racing. Granted, many drivers were sadly prevented from competing at the top for so long owing to wars, accidents and so forth rather than any other factor, but still. Schumacher has been THE benchmark for a ridiculous length of time now.

#4 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 13:56

Sure MS will remain as part of motorsports history because, as Mike said, he was so dominant for so many years. However, I guess he will forever be several steps behind drivers like Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart and more of that kind. His controversial, to say the least, moves against other drivers in the tracks make him, imo, a World Champion for the statistics.

#5 2F-001

2F-001
  • Member

  • 2,278 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:01

For all the reasons Ian mentions, the raw figures - staggering as they are - would need the application of subtle and complex statistical methods (and equally complex, and debatable explanations of the parameters used) to render them anything like meaningful.

Alongside his longevity as a serious player, I don't think he has had (compared to others) too many incidents which in a previous age might have been career-ending.
To his credit, though, he has been sufficiently motivated and competitive to be a real spur to those working with him for all of that time.

I think we have seen enough to know that he has been an extraordinarily talented driver, whatever riders, caveats or 'yes buts' we apply to that assessment.
Yes he will be the subject of historical discussion on some level from the end of the season and for as long as the subject is discussed at all.

Whether or not he comes a subject for nostalgia in the sense of a wistful longing for times past, I don't know. For many he is, perhaps, emblematic of an era which they regard for the moment as not one of the best. On the other hand, depending how the Grand Prix circus evolves over the next few seasons and what commercial/sporting/presentational turns it undergoes, is it possible that we will look back on the latter years of Schumacher's racing career as "the last really good years before... whatever horrors came next"?

Although I've always said that his career at the top is hard to assess because for a time he seemed to have less serious opposition that some before him - could there be some element of his dominance making the others look a little worse than they really were? Another thing that struck me was - despite having seen him race the Sauber Group C cars and knew he was a well-rated driver - just how quickly he matured from a slightly untamed rookie setting the World alight in practice at Spa to a serious and polished performer.

#6 Gary C

Gary C
  • Member

  • 4,538 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:15

Schumacher, nostalgic? No bluddy way!!

#7 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:23

Schumacher might be part of history, but I just don't see him, a couple of dozen or so sublime drives apart, as ever being part of "nostalgia". Nostalgia is about characters, and for me Michael Schumacher personifies the current corporate, clean-cut, charisma-free F1, the F1 that's a battle between multinational corporations.

I neither like nor dislike the guy. I admire his ability to drive "to order" to carry out Brawn's strategies; I think he's a true Regenmeister and you have to be good to be one; but I think he's cheapened his reputation by far too many dodgy moves on track, by taking advantage of team orders too many times, and by being with teams that pulled far too many dubious tricks off-track.

Yes, he's one of the all-time greats by any statistical measure you care to use; no, he's not someone who fits any romantic vision of the sport.

#8 Mallory Dan

Mallory Dan
  • Member

  • 2,674 posts
  • Joined: September 03

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:23

Pains me to say it, but a genius IMHO behind the wheel, and in getting a team to work with and for him. Which makes his blatant cheating, 'cos thats what it is/was, so difficult to understand...

#9 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:25

Originally posted by 2F-001
Alongside his longevity as a serious player, I don't think he has had (compared to others) too many incidents which in a previous age might have been career-ending.

Silverstone 1998 would have been life-ending in a previous era.

So would Adelaide 1994 had it been perpetrated on Alan Jones, IMO.

"Nostalgia" strictly means "a pain for the journey home" - something that you look back on with such longing that it hurts desperately that you cannot get back there. The idea of ever looking back on The Cheat with fondness is an interesting one, somewhat similar to looking back to the Black Death and thinking "well, it wasn't so bad, there were plenty of open spaces and no kids yelling".

#10 2F-001

2F-001
  • Member

  • 2,278 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:32

Silverstone 98 was the only one that came to mind instantly.

Adelaide... I was never convinced that was intentional; reckless maybe (just as Hill taking out MS at Silverstone). However, that doesn't alter your prognosis had Jones been on the receiving end! :lol:

#11 roger ellis

roger ellis
  • Member

  • 142 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:39

Now the uncertainty is over.

Colleagues hoped he'd take the hint. Time to move on & let someone else have a turn.

Dammit! It's Schuey not Blair!

#12 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:42

Originally posted by roger ellis
Now the uncertainty is over.

Colleagues hoped he'd take the hint. Time to move on & let someone else have a turn.

Dammit! It's Schuey not Blair!



Yes, Blair's demise is rather more like Damon Hill or Nigel Mansell's departure from F1 - prolonged and rather pathetic (the difference between the three being that I at least felt some sympathy for Damon.;))

#13 ReWind

ReWind
  • Member

  • 2,373 posts
  • Joined: October 03

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:50

Originally posted by ensign14
Silverstone 1998 would have been life-ending in a previous era.

Originally posted by 2F-001
Silverstone 98 was the only one that came to mind instantly.

If you get the year wrong it MUST be nostalgia.;)

#14 Disco Stu

Disco Stu
  • Member

  • 186 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 14:52

Originally posted by 2F-001
Although I've always said that his career at the top is hard to assess because for a time he seemed to have less serious opposition that some before him - could there be some element of his dominance making the others look a little worse than they really were?


I think that's certainly a factor. A driver like David Coulthard for instance has put together a pretty nice career for himself. He's won over a dozen Grand Prix, he's finished as high as 2nd in the championship, he's won the major "classics" (Monza, Spa, Monte Carlo) and he's won his home Grand Prix. That's pretty darn good. And yet, when compared to Schumacher and what he's done, he's almost been regarded as not a lot more than filler. That's the poor fortune of racing in the Schumacher era.

On the flip side, I think history is going to really look back kindly on Mika Hakkinen. As he was the one guy who could really take it to Schumacher in his prime, I think years from now he'll be elevated into the category of the greats because he accomplished what he did against Schumacher.

#15 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:10

Originally posted by ReWind
If you get the year wrong it MUST be nostalgia.;)

A symptom of the depressing monotony of Grand Prix racing. semper eadem.

#16 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,574 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:12

I wish it was Bernie retiring!!

#17 2F-001

2F-001
  • Member

  • 2,278 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:16

Originally posted by ReWind
If you get the year wrong it MUST be nostalgia.;)

And likewise, I was just playing "follow my leader"!  ;)

#18 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:16

Originally posted by Disco Stu

On the flip side, I think history is going to really look back kindly on Mika Hakkinen. As he was the one guy who could really take it to Schumacher in his prime, I think years from now he'll be elevated into the category of the greats because he accomplished what he did against Schumacher.


Yes. I think history will be a lot kinder to Mika than contemporary opinion was. He is someone who in retrospect impresses me a lot. Not only could he regularly defeat Schumacher, Villeneuve, Hill and Coulthard; he could also do it without resorting to amateur dramatics, slaggings-off in the press, or dirty tactics. He was, when all's said and done, a damn fast racing driver, and his qualifying performances were enough to put me in mind of Senna at his best.

It wasn't particularly "fashionable" to admire Mika or McLaren at that point in time, but looking back, what a truly formidable outfit Mika/Adrian/Ron formed.

And towards the end of his time in F1 Mika even loosened up in interviews - he wasn't so much the master of the one-liner as the very drily witty one-worder. (The interesting thing is how outgoing he used to be in his F3 days...)

#19 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 10,854 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:19

An interesting and perhaps little known Schuey-fact that came to light over the weekend (and NOT from the man himself, I hasten to add) is that he has given $50,000,000 to charity through his years in racing.

Now, given that his fortune is estimated at $400,000,000 (it may be £££s but I think it's $$$s) that is still more than 10% of his income.

I would be willing to bet that few other sportsmen, in any arena have been quite so generous.

Cynics may say that he may not have leaked this info but he was behind the leak, but I prefer to think better of him than that.

I have never been a fan of his but I must admit he has been a damn fine race driver if a little flawed at times. Now where have we heard that before....?

Advertisement

#20 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:26

Originally posted by Barry Boor
Now, given that his fortune is estimated at $400,000,000 (it may be £££s but I think it's $$$s) that is still more than 10% of his income.

As opposed to me, who has given something like 40% of my income to Bliar over my working life. Not that I'm disparaging the privatisation of tax, which is what tax exiles do, but it's a bit like the widow's mite.

#21 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,574 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:26

Originally posted by Barry Boor

Cynics may say that he may not have leaked this info but he was behind the leak, but I prefer to think better of him than that.

I have never been a fan of his but I must admit he has been a damn fine race driver if a little flawed at times. Now where have we heard that before....?


Cynics might also say that there must have been a tax break in it somewhere

#22 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:28

Well, his bad sides seem to be numerous, but what probably people resent him is that he amalgamated them into an unbeatable combination...

1) ramming opponents off the track- hardly world's first, but it won him one title and lost another

2) living off the back of the teammates- yep, he's profited from his teammates, but also gifted them wins, as well as having rightful wins 'stolen' by their incompetence; for the record, his opponents had similar things happen to them (admittedly, thinly veiled as 'driver's gentleman agreements')- what is worse, he's the only one who (AFAIK) was object of conspiracy between different teams on track

3) being team's #1 driver- again, hardly unprecedented, as Prost had contract as #1 for Williams in '92 (IIRC)

4) famous chop- it was his opponent (JV) who reintroduced it to F1, yet he perfected it to the point he'd run his kid brother into the wall if Jr didn't back off (but still, he was IIRC first on the recieving end, before adapting it)

5) cheating- it seems to be flavour of the day (modern F1, or is it post-modern?), but does him great disservice when compared with drivers of yester-years, but his opponents (IIRC) won a championship, and has scored points in an illegal car (1 race, admittedly), or being allowed to keep the points scored with tyres that seems to have considered to be illegal. Remember when FIA announced at the end of the season that it was founf 5 of the top teams were using illegal drivers' aids, but did not reveal their identity? Says a lot about acceptability of cheating...

6) conspiracy theories- there's always going to be those, but playing devil's advocate- I don't know many instances when FIA decided to change points system to lessen domination of a driver (Ferrari/Schumacher combo)

TBH, all I have written may seem to be 'justification', but I've tried to put a perspective, yet it may only be perspective against his on-track opponents. Against the Champions of the yore, he'll always be tarnished, and I'd never consider him one of the Greats. He'll just be 'flawed genius', exceptionally skilled driver who may be true champion of what has F1 become (not to be confused with Grand Prix racing ;)).

#23 2F-001

2F-001
  • Member

  • 2,278 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:38

Originally posted by Wolf

...he's the only one who (AFAIK) was object of conspiracy between different teams on track

Jerez? It always surprises me how infrequently that gets mentioned. That seemed a bigger crime to me than any team orders or dubious, but spontaneous, acts of gamesmanship (such as at Monaco this year).

#24 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:42

Barry, I was already thinking of posting this in response to Gary's post about Schumacher being nostalgic, and even set-out to look for details (but abandoned the quest pretty soon)- I think he even helped out a fellow driver, who'se fortunes have turned for worse (both re. health and financialy) and was in a retirement home in Italy. Can't remember any details, but ISTR he was a bit embarrased when press dug it out.

Speaking of this, I've always believed (or hoped it's true) he's much better man off the teack than on the track (aforementioned example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing would suggest that)...

#25 Maldwyn

Maldwyn
  • Member

  • 1,486 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:50

Originally posted by mikedeering
Obviously Patrese's career was marginally longer, but with all respect to him, you won't find anyone defining the period 1977-1993 as the "Patrese Era" (well, maybe Maldwyn!)

:lol: I like the sound of that.

Unquestionably, the last decade and beyond has been the Schumacher era, and it will be looked back on as such. He has dominated the sport in terms of his statistical achievements, and has set the standard in many areas for aspiring world champions of the future.

I hope there will be a time when we can look back and make a balanced assessment of his career alongside the other greats in the sport, without seeing the divisiveness that seems unavoidable now. Schumacher splits opinions like few other drivers before him, for reasons we all know, and that is likely to cloud his record for some time to come.

The passage of time away from F1 may also reveal more of the man, which is apparent to those who know him well, and that may help him and his standing in the history books.

#26 Gary C

Gary C
  • Member

  • 4,538 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 15:59

'Jerez? It always surprises me how infrequently that gets mentioned. That seemed a bigger crime to me than any team orders or dubious, but spontaneous, acts of gamesmanship (such as at Monaco this year).'
I was working for FOM that year (1997), I was supplying the slow motion replays. For Jerez, one of my three cameras for the race was Schumachers' onboard camera.
We knew something was going to happen about 3-4 laps beforehand, as his car was slowing dramatically compared to Villeneuve's Williams. When it came to the 'incident', you could see Schumacher look to his right, as JV had made space and was coming through. Schumacher looked right, went to move across, didn't, looked across again (by which time JV was alongside), then decided to REALLY turn in. His right front hit JV's left barge board, sending MS into the gravel, with JV just keeping the car going. Premeditated? Not sure, but he certainly knew what he was doing.
And I didn't like it one bit!

#27 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,692 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:17

Originally posted by mikedeering
Schumacher has been THE benchmark for a ridiculous length of time now.

By my estimation, 12 years in cars that have been the best or close enough for any of the greats to have challenged for the championship. Without wishing to degrade his achivement, he kinda holds the record for most championships by default :p

#28 James Page

James Page
  • Member

  • 364 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:34

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist

By my estimation, 12 years in cars that have been the best or close enough for any of the greats to have challenged for the championship. Without wishing to degrade his achivement, he kinda holds the record for most championships by default :p


Fangio was always in the right equipment, too. As was Clark in his two title years. I don't think the equipment Schumacher's had access to takes away as much from his reputation as the times when he's blatantly cheated. That's why he'll never be as great as Fangio, Clark, Moss or possibly even Stewart.

#29 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,692 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:39

No, but it takes away from his statistical impressiveness ;)

#30 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:42

Statistically you can chop Schumi in half for the extra reliability (Clark retired 1 in 2 through car problems, I assume he was at the sharp end of most, Schumacher must be getting on for 1 in 10) and half again for the sheer number of extra races. Still means he's on a par numerically, but of course different era &c &c &c.

#31 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,692 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:50

Without putting two much thought/research in to it, Fangio and Prost are probably the only two who had a serious opportunity to attempt seven world championships.

#32 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:52

Originally posted by Gary C
Schumacher, nostalgic? No bluddy way!!


This seems like a reasonable response to me.

Also, I have to take exception to this statement: "Fangio was always in the right equipment, too."

#33 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,692 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 September 2006 - 16:56

Can I just correct myself, and point out that Michael only had 11 years in a championship capable car - I totally forgot about 2005!

#34 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 17:00

Originally posted by MrAerodynamicist
Can I just correct myself, and point out that Michael only had 11 years in a championship capable car - I totally forgot about 2005!

The one year when he had to nurse tyres over an entire race distance...

#35 Tmeranda

Tmeranda
  • Member

  • 605 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 18:02

Stastically, MS is the third best GP driver ever behind only JMF and Ascari. This counts races won per start, poles won per start, Podiums per start, fastest laps per start and points earned per start. One interesting statistic is the points won out of the maxium available. The top ten look like this:
JMF 61%
MS 58%
Ascari 50%
Farina 48%
Clark 47%
Prost 43%
Senna 42%
Moss 35%
D. Hill 35% That's right D. Hill not G.Hill or P.Hill
Mansell 28%

This is read that JMF won 61% of the maximum he could have won based on the number of his starts and the points system that was then in effect at the time of his races. MS won 58% of the maximum points he could have won based on the number of his starts and the points system in effect during those races, etc...

JMF's task was a little harder then MS in that in order for him to win the maximum points during his era he had to not only win the race but also set fastest time. MS "only" had to win the race to score max points.

#36 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 18:05

Originally posted by Sharman
I wish it was Bernie retiring!!


How about laying flowers at Mosley's grave !!!

#37 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 18:47

Originally posted by Tmeranda
Stastically, MS is the third best GP driver ever behind only JMF and Ascari. This counts races won per start, poles won per start, Podiums per start, fastest laps per start and points earned per start. One interesting statistic is the points won out of the maxium available. The top ten look like this:
JMF 61%
MS 58%
Ascari 50%
Farina 48%
Clark 47%
Prost 43%
Senna 42%
Moss 35%
D. Hill 35% That's right D. Hill not G.Hill or P.Hill
Mansell 28%

This is read that JMF won 61% of the maximum he could have won based on the number of his starts and the points system that was then in effect at the time of his races. MS won 58% of the maximum points he could have won based on the number of his starts and the points system in effect during those races, etc...

JMF's task was a little harder then MS in that in order for him to win the maximum points during his era he had to not only win the race but also set fastest time. MS "only" had to win the race to score max points.


Maybe a marginal point, but JMF started racing F1 cars in 1950 being 39 years old .... ;)

#38 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 18:53

Stastically, MS is the third best GP driver ever behind only JMF and Ascari. This counts races won per start, poles won per start, Podiums per start, fastest laps per start and points earned per start.


Somehow, I keep having something Sam Clemens said keep ringing in my ears whenever I see something such as this....

#39 subh

subh
  • Member

  • 1,021 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:18

I can’t add much, but do have some thoughts.

I would like to have seen Häkkinen and Schumacher go toe-to-toe for a greater period of time. Perhaps head-to-head is a better phrase.

In some ways I find Alonso more arrogant than Schumacher.

I haven’t really enjoyed F1 too much for some years - and don’t anticipate any warm nostalgia in the future - but did appreciate the rise of Benetton in the 1980s-1990s.

Schumacher is the oldest F1 driver right now, but de la Rosa is in line for that role next year. However, I have worked out that there are (have been) twelve drivers (testers included) who are younger than MS but older than PdlR. They need to be quick to get back into the sport before being the oldest guy out there. Win a no-prize if you can complete the list here...

Oh, and surely 1989 to 1992 was the Patrese era.

Advertisement

#40 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:24

If I had to pick the year that the music finally, truly died in the farce one arena, it was 1984.

#41 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:25

Luca= Italian soccer scandel, Luca= screwing FA at Monza with bogus penalty...To me if you cheat it really isn't winning...but unfortunately time will wash all of this simey behavior away. It's a shame because he REALLY is/was a good driver; just a little lacking in character.

#42 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,030 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:38

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps


Somehow, I keep having something Sam Clemens said keep ringing in my ears whenever I see something such as this....

All kings is mostly rapscallions.

#43 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,312 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:47

Surely George Amick is the Greatest Grand Prix Driver Ever? Six points per race. Brilliant.

tick tock tick tock

#44 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 19:57

I think one thing this is proving is that Schumacher is still very "RC" rather than "TNF" ;P

#45 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:04

Schumacher: is he nostalgia yet?


Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeez do not start ruining TNF with the Chinman !!

#46 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 8,346 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:15

Whichever way one slices it - I trust the Schmacher era will remain unique in International motor racing history.

I trust that no other driver will survive within the 'sport' for so many years unchallenged by another of equally all-embracing ability, connections and team support.

And I trust that his records will never, ever, be broken.

Because by the time they are, a global majority will surely have become bored to tears, and will have taken their interest elsewhere...and major league motor racing in almost any recognisable form will have surely laid down...and died.

He has achieved something quite phenomenal - we have witnessed an extraordinary era of achievement - and for that he has a very special place.

But quite what it is - and where it is - or rather, where it should be placed... - I'm not yet sure.

DCN

#47 FLB

FLB
  • Member

  • 1,925 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:46

Originally posted by Doug Nye

And I trust that his records will never, ever, be broken.

Because by the time they are, a global majority will surely have become bored to tears, and will have taken their interest elsewhere...and major league motor racing in almost any recognisable form will have surely laid down...and died.

He has achieved something quite phenomenal - we have witnessed an extraordinary era of achievement - and for that he has a very special place.

A lot of people used to say the same thing about Fangio's five World Drivers' Championships, Clark's 25 Grand Prix wins, then Stewart's 27 wins, then Stewart said he thought Prost *could maybe, possibly, unimaginably* reach 40 wins, Prost finally winning 51 Grand Prix, etc.

If there's any constant about the sport, it's that whatever is thought impossible in one era often becomes reality in another.

#48 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:53

Originally posted by Gary C
'Jerez? It always surprises me how infrequently that gets mentioned. That seemed a bigger crime to me than any team orders or dubious, but spontaneous, acts of gamesmanship (such as at Monaco this year).'
I was working for FOM that year (1997), I was supplying the slow motion replays. For Jerez, one of my three cameras for the race was Schumachers' onboard camera.
We knew something was going to happen about 3-4 laps beforehand, as his car was slowing dramatically compared to Villeneuve's Williams. When it came to the 'incident', you could see Schumacher look to his right, as JV had made space and was coming through. Schumacher looked right, went to move across, didn't, looked across again (by which time JV was alongside), then decided to REALLY turn in. His right front hit JV's left barge board, sending MS into the gravel, with JV just keeping the car going. Premeditated? Not sure, but he certainly knew what he was doing.
And I didn't like it one bit!


Gary, with all due respect, it's not what 2F-2001 was referring to. As for the event You refer to, what I saw on TV was MS swerving away from JV (must've caught him by surprise), as a self-preservation instinct, and then turning into him (he composed himself from initial shock and reverted to original plan). It's as bad as it gets.

But what both 2F-2001 and myself were referring to is collusion between McLaren and Williams teams after Ferrari was stranded in gravel at Jerez, where McLaren drivers 'rode shotgun' for JV to ensure he got enough points to win the title, and only on the last lap assumed the 1-2 finishing order. It's abominale in my book because rival teams settled on race result to ensure the driver of the 3rd team (as guilty as he was) didn't win the title. It is also worth noting that there was a follow-up to this when JV repaid McLaren drivers for services provided (off top of my head, can't remember when/where, my memory is as bad as ever- but he did let them through to return the favour)...

#49 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:54

Originally posted by FLB

If there's any constant about the sport, it's that whatever is thought impossible in one era often becomes reality in another.

Not forgetting that it gets duller and duller, year-on-year...

Frankly I'm surprised this thread has taken-off; especially given that the bloke hasn't even hung-up his lid yet.

#50 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 8,346 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 12 September 2006 - 20:57

Twelve years of dominance is almost unbearable - if The Hun's records are ever broken my point is that the public's ever-retreating attention span will have been fatally exceeded.