Jump to content


Photo

Schumacher: is he nostalgia yet?


  • Please log in to reply
230 replies to this topic

#101 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 13 September 2006 - 20:06

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
Hey, it is not age -- which so many of you are so damnedly hung up on for some reason -- that makes a difference, but attitude. Being old or young is irrelevant when it comes to sorting through the mysteries we often face when dealing with history. While a teenager I was very much smitten with the racing from earlier decades as well as the one I was in. This forum is pretty much like the history department in a college in the sense of what people bring to the table and what is discussed. There are those in 101 or 401 classes and then there are those on the faculty. What is often -- or should be -- the focus here is context. This is not a political science department whose attentions are devoted largely to the Here & Now and the generation of data from which the statistics derived are the topic of many discussions. Using our analogy, that is the role of the RC.

It is generally, from my experience, very difficult to develop a clear idea of the context surrounding certain events with any level of clarity if you are closer than 25 or 30 years from the the period being considered.

It is not very important where people come from, it what they do while here. I was quite serious when I said that this was meant to be a refuge from the RC-types of fora. This forum was created out the conflicts that often arose from those with varying ideas and viewpoints on the old RC. This was initially intended to be, for lack of a better phrase, a "kinder, gentler" place. It should not be a just another no-man's land for those spoiling for a verbal free-for-all.

I utterly detest and hate the title of this forum, "The Nostalgia Forum," and have always regretted not having a better title at hand. This was never intended to be a place to wallow in nostalgia, but to be more akin to a history department, an analogy that I have come to like when I think of this place.

Just as college is not for everyone, neither is this forum.

So, if some wish to consider me an asshole for pointing that out, well, so be it. I am sure I will get over it.


Well said Don. Of course it is not age but attitude :up:

Attitudes like the ones of Moss, Fangio, Clark, Stewart, Hill, etc., etc., . They may win or lose, but nobody would dare to discuss their attitude about the sport or their rivals in and off the tracks. The Hun is well below any of their standards, no matter what statistics may say.

Advertisement

#102 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 13 September 2006 - 20:27

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps

Hey, it is not age -- but attitude.

Couldn't agree more.

Arturo... perhaps we could refer to M$ as 'The Chin' - or even 'The Cheat' - instead?

;)

#103 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,918 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 13 September 2006 - 21:21

Originally posted by Twin Window
Couldn't agree more.

Arturo... perhaps we could refer to M$ as 'The Chin' - or even 'The Cheat' - instead?

;)


:rolleyes:

If we really think we're "above RC" the first thing is to stop this 'Hun'/'M$'/'Chin'/'Cheat' thing.
Talk about seeing things in perspective!

It's so low.

#104 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 13 September 2006 - 21:25

Perhaps you missed the irony in my post, matey...

#105 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,918 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 13 September 2006 - 21:34

Originally posted by Twin Window
Perhaps you missed the irony in my post, matey...

Indeed, I did. I have to say I feel it was very, very subtle - especially for non-English readers I guess. But thanks for your explanation.

#106 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 13 September 2006 - 21:42

Apologies. But don't ever try to pass yourself off as a *non-English reader* again!

Your command of our language shames many, many of our born-and-bred - of that, I can assure you...

Tot ziens! :wave:

#107 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 13 September 2006 - 21:48

Originally posted by Twin Window
Couldn't agree more.

Arturo... perhaps we could refer to M$ as 'The Chin' - or even 'The Cheat' - instead?

;)


M$ would enough I guess ;)

#108 EcosseF1

EcosseF1
  • Member

  • 144 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 14 September 2006 - 05:24

I agree that Schumacher does not belong with Fangio, Clark Moss etc as a sportsman. However, we need to take a minute to remember his immediate predecessor.

I believe Ayrton Senna had more charisma than MS and was also a more talented driver, when we take into account the depth of talent he faced. Prost, Mansell etc were real opposition.

There's no question in my mind however that he regularly made use of blatantly unsporting behaviour and we shouldn't be terribly surprised that his successor developed the theme...

#109 cosworth bdg

cosworth bdg
  • Member

  • 1,350 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 14 September 2006 - 05:45

Originally posted by EcosseF1
I agree that Schumacher does not belong with Fangio, Clark Moss etc as a sportsman. However, we need to take a minute to remember his immediate predecessor.

I believe Ayrton Senna had more charisma than MS and was also a more talented driver, when we take into account the depth of talent he faced. Prost, Mansell etc were real opposition.

There's no question in my mind however that he regularly made use of blatantly unsporting behaviour and we shouldn't be terribly surprised that his successor developed the theme...

In some ways i will have to agree with what you are saying... but SENNA , in my mind was the best .........

#110 mikedeering

mikedeering
  • Member

  • 3,521 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 14 September 2006 - 06:12

I realise I am going to get shot down for suggesting this, but while everyone is quick to point out you can't compare eras (rightly so to my mind) when drawing up some ridiculous "The Greatest Racing Drviers...Ever!" thread, people are happy to compare eras when it comes to sporting attitude. I don't see how you contrast Fangio's great sporting attitude against Schumacher when they operated in very different times. I am not suggesting that Fangio would resort to the gamemanship of Michael, or drive rivals off the track, but just as MS wouldn't have lasted very long with his antics in the 1950s, perhaps Fangio would not last very long in the current racing world without adopting a more, um, "aggresive" approach. Just a thought.

#111 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 6,062 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 14 September 2006 - 06:38

In reply to the original question, I must conclude after over 100 posts, that either Schumacher is nostalgia, or TNF is not.

#112 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 14 September 2006 - 07:01

But how many posts actually focus on him from #35 onwards...?

#113 lukywill

lukywill
  • Member

  • 6,660 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 07:58

give it at least 5 years and we´ll have a better nostalgic sentiments about 94 and onwards.

#114 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,732 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 10:06

Don

If the grey hair is missing so are the years which bring personal experience and attitude is modified in the light of experience. It reminds me of the two bulls, one old, one young, surveying a herd of cows. The young one said "Let's run over and have a couple" To which the old one replied "No let's walk over and have them ALL"
I am still as enthusiastic as I was at 13 years of age, fifty seven years later I am more aware of my limitations and the consequences of unconsidered action.

JF

#115 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 11:39

give it at least 5 years and we´ll have a better nostalgic sentiments about 94 and onwards.


Add another five to ten years onto that, perhaps....

However, I find it impossible to find much in the way of "nostalgia" when considering formula one over the past two decades or so. At some point during the 1984 formula one season, I generally wrote it off as something to care about and transferred my attention primarily to CART, IMSA, and Winston Cup -- and the history of motor sport. So, just as it is with Senna for me, there will not be any "nostalgia" for Schumacher.

#116 Rob Semmeling

Rob Semmeling
  • Member

  • 844 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 14 September 2006 - 11:41

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.


Yes, but don't forget Schumacher worked hard at being in the best car. After all, when he joined Ferrari in 1996 their cars were anything but reliable (remember the warm-up lap at Magny Cours!).

My point is that only after Schumacher's arrival the Ferrari turned into the dominant car. Turning the tides around to the extent in which he did - even if he probably was not solely responsible for that - is also quite an achievement.

A bit late to the party, but better late than never.

#117 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 11:50

Originally posted by Roger Clark
In reply to the original question, I must conclude after over 100 posts, that either Schumacher is nostalgia, or TNF is not.

Originally posted by Twin Window
[B]But how many posts actually focus on him from #35 onwards...?

Both are good points. I think that the Stuart's comment underlines the point Roger is hinting at and should give some pause for thought.

Maybe "Geezer's Garage" would not been such a bad choice instead of TNF after all....

#118 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 11:53

Originally posted by mikedeering
I realise I am going to get shot down for suggesting this, but while everyone is quick to point out you can't compare eras (rightly so to my mind) when drawing up some ridiculous "The Greatest Racing Drviers...Ever!" thread, people are happy to compare eras when it comes to sporting attitude. I don't see how you contrast Fangio's great sporting attitude against Schumacher when they operated in very different times. I am not suggesting that Fangio would resort to the gamemanship of Michael, or drive rivals off the track, but just as MS wouldn't have lasted very long with his antics in the 1950s, perhaps Fangio would not last very long in the current racing world without adopting a more, um, "aggresive" approach. Just a thought.



All F1 Champions were aggresive. Farina was not very sweet with his rivals, neither Ascari was. Even Fangio was extremely aggresive when he needed to be so, i.e. 1957 German GP. The way Clark drove his 1967 Italian GP was amazing and extremely aggresive for sure. There are many more examples of ´aggresive´ behaviours in the past. However, I have yet to see a proof of a driver of that era, or of the 60s, trying to push a rival off the track/against a wall on purpose, as the Hun has done several times in the past.

Imo, what makes a difference is the way ´aggresive´ is used nowadays to justify many moves that put in clear risk the physical integrity of other competitor. This is not a kind of aggresive move, but a ´dirt´ one.

#119 Hieronymus

Hieronymus
  • Member

  • 2,031 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 14 September 2006 - 12:01

Interesting sentiments being exposed in this thread.

NOSTALGIA...how does the English dictionary define this word? Where are the English "word scientists"?

For me Michael Schu will never be nostalgic...like most of the current crop of F1 drivers!! Not even in 20 or 30 years time. Nostalgia for me is something from the past you remember with fondness or admiration. Difficult for me to explain it in English - A feeling from the heart for something in the past.

Advertisement

#120 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 12:07

Originally posted by mikedeering
I am not suggesting that Fangio would resort to the gamemanship of Michael, or drive rivals off the track, but just as MS wouldn't have lasted very long with his antics in the 1950s, perhaps Fangio would not last very long in the current racing world without adopting a more, um, "aggresive" approach. Just a thought.

Dunno...Hakkinen was never a dirty driver. With one glaring exception neither was Prost.

#121 312B

312B
  • New Member

  • 29 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 14 September 2006 - 12:23

Oxford English Dictionary has it as:

'sentimental longing or wistful affection for the past'

Being 34 the eighties have as much sense of nostalgia for me... up to 5 multiple world champions all battling each other

The last era when the cars looked noticably different from each team and designers could take a few wild chances (low-line Brabham for example)

I guess nostalgia in this context can't be any thing other than subjective i.e at what point does your affection for the past end?

Is it time to split the forum into a pre and post era? If so where would you make the split, 1960? 1970? 1980?

#122 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 13:28

Dunno...Hakkinen was never a dirty driver. With one glaring exception neither was Prost.


And there are those who would take exception to that comment.

#123 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 14:12

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps


And there are those who would take exception to that comment.

"Potential" exception? IMO though it was a professional foul. But nowhere near as bad as Senna's GBH the next year (and his attempt at Estoril [I think]).

#124 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 14:19

Oxford English Dictionary has it as:

'sentimental longing or wistful affection for the past'

Being 34 the eighties have as much sense of nostalgia for me... up to 5 multiple world champions all battling each other

The last era when the cars looked noticably different from each team and designers could take a few wild chances (low-line Brabham for example)

I guess nostalgia in this context can't be any thing other than subjective i.e at what point does your affection for the past end?

Is it time to split the forum into a pre and post era? If so where would you make the split, 1960? 1970? 1980?


Since there are as many who cannot differentiate between "history" and "nostalgia" as there are those who mistake "history" for "nostalgia," changing the name of the forum to incorporate the term "history"might not produce much of a change in whatever direction this place is going, especially to those to whom anything older than last week is history -- something not age-centric by any means.

#125 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 14 September 2006 - 15:27

Colonel Capps:

As the ad says, "I just wanna ride".

I agree that we need "some" rules and "some" guidelines; but not a full operator's manual. I'm afraid that would remind this ole @#$^ of his Catholic school days!

I like coming to one site and discussing a broad range of topics, even if the link to the pass might be a little thin. After all MS tells of driving the Ferrari F1 126 Turbo and "feeling a little vulnerable"
which I respected greatly because it took a real man to drive that in anger and a big man to admit it scared him a bit. I was then puzzled a bit when he set off on some demo laps in Wilbur Shaw's Maserati at the USGP a few years ago...he was FLYING! It sounded great too!

This forum and my racing are my escape from my HIGHLY structured homelife; don't put me in a cage...pretty please?

As Harry Truman said, The only thing new is the history you haven't read". I'm anxious to learn.

#126 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 2,732 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 16:34

[quote]Originally posted by ensign14
"Potential" exception? IMO though it was a professional foul. But nowhere near as bad as Senna's GBH the next year (and his attempt at Estoril [I think]). [/quote][QUOTE]

1982 FF2000 Oulton Park. For sheer naked agression I don't think I have seen anything to match Senna. For some reason he qualified on the inside of row 3 or 4, the lights changed and he took out the pole sitter before reaching Old Hall

#127 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 18:34

Originally posted by David M. Kane
Colonel Capps:

As the ad says, "I just wanna ride".

I agree that we need "some" rules and "some" guidelines; but not a full operator's manual. I'm afraid that would remind this ole @#$^ of his Catholic school days!

I like coming to one site and discussing a broad range of topics, even if the link to the pass might be a little thin. After all MS tells of driving the Ferrari F1 126 Turbo and "feeling a little vulnerable"
which I respected greatly because it took a real man to drive that in anger and a big man to admit it scared him a bit. I was then puzzled a bit when he set off on some demo laps in Wilbur Shaw's Maserati at the USGP a few years ago...he was FLYING! It sounded great too!

This forum and my racing are my escape from my HIGHLY structured homelife; don't put me in a cage...pretty please?

As Harry Truman said, The only thing new is the history you haven't read". I'm anxious to learn.


Hey, I don't makes the rules here any more. I am just another nobody with an opinion. Nobody really cares whatever I may think or say about these things.

#128 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,702 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 14 September 2006 - 18:40

So why do you continue on?

#129 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 14 September 2006 - 18:59

Don:

I care very much and I hope you continue to post regularly. Your opinion is very much valued, certainly by me.

#130 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 14 September 2006 - 19:00

Ross please send me your email.

Thanks,

dkane3@cox.net

#131 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 14 September 2006 - 19:09

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
So why do you continue on?


Because I still give a shit about what I helped create.

#132 Arjan de Roos

Arjan de Roos
  • Member

  • 2,089 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 14 September 2006 - 20:57

I just dug up a picture of the man and scanned it. On the back I scribbled (difficult to tell) 2006 Italian GP. Didn't he announce his retirement during that same weekend? Seems so long ago...

Posted Image

#133 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 21:02

Originally posted by David M. Kane
Don:

I care very much and I hope you continue to post regularly. Your opinion is very much valued, certainly by me.


Don:

I fully agree with David.

#134 Arturo Pereira

Arturo Pereira
  • Member

  • 842 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 21:04

Originally posted by Arjan de Roos
I just dug up a picture of the man and scanned it. On the back I scribbled (difficult to tell) 2006 Italian GP. Didn't he announce his retirement during that same weekend? Seems so long ago...

Posted Image


Now I can see clear. Being forced to drive such an ugly car should have been a torture.

#135 David Beard

David Beard
  • Member

  • 4,897 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 14 September 2006 - 21:04

Originally posted by Arjan de Roos
I just dug up a picture of the man and scanned it. On the back I scribbled (difficult to tell) 2006 Italian GP. Didn't he announce his retirement during that same weekend? Seems so long ago...


I thought it was his brother Ralf that retired. It would have made more sense...much more of a spent force..

#136 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 14 September 2006 - 21:53

"Force"?

#137 David Hyland

David Hyland
  • Member

  • 289 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 15 September 2006 - 08:14

Originally posted by Twin Window
Arturo... perhaps we could refer to M$ as 'The Chin' - or even 'The Cheat' - instead?;)

Twinny's ironic intent notwithstanding, it always intrigues me that two of the situations that people use to label Michael Schumacher as a "cheat" are:
1) that his 1994 Benetton had traction control and/or an illegal refuelling system, and
2) his "victory" in the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix.

Without wishing to debate:
- the legality of the 1994 Benetton
- the use of team orders in F1
- other situations in which Michael may or may not have cheated
I'm just wondering what people would have expected/wanted Michael to have done differently in these two situations.

I mean, if the 1994 Benetton was illegal and Michael was aware of it, what did people expect him to do? Hold a press conference? Drive a little more slowly to cancel out his "unfair advantage"?

And at Austria in 2002, did people really expect him not to have passed Rubens to take the win?

#138 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 15 September 2006 - 08:31

There's also 1997 Jerez, 1994 Adelaide, 2000 Spa (was it that year?), 2003 Silverstone and so on where he took no account of other drivers' presence or safety. Either you give up trying to get past me, or you go off.

The Benetton was certainly illegal in 1994 because it had illegal software. Benetton's argument was that it could not in practice be used. So if I were MS I would not have used the illegal software. (Not saying that MS did, BTW.) And would be encouraging the team to get it taken out so there was not even the possible hint that there was something iffy going on.

Re Austria 2002 - what glory is there in a win handed to you by default? I'd've stayed behind. I'm with Kipling on that sort of thing.

#139 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 15 September 2006 - 13:19

Once a cheat, always a cheat...once a liar, always a liar...

Advertisement

#140 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 15 September 2006 - 14:09

"Team Orders" -- Why does just about everyone get their shorts in a wad concerning this? Isn't that why they have teams? What a team does is in many areas should be nobody's business but the team's, whether we like it or not. However dumb & stupid it was that the Ferrari team did at the Austria formula one race in 2002, it was their call. That it was done and handled so ineptly was the only reason I even raised an eyebrow. It seems to me that one of the true Signs of the Apocalypse was the FIA getting wound up about the McLaren team shuffle in 1998 and equating "team orders" with body order.

#141 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 15 September 2006 - 14:21

I don't even think it was the team orders at Austria '02 that was the problem as everyone knows they've gone on since the year dot - it's that Barrichello had been telling everyone that he was equal to MS and would not be ordered to step aside for him. Which was total BS and the justifications that poured forth afterwards made it worse.

#142 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 15 September 2006 - 15:02

All trails lead back to the soccer cheat...Luca.

#143 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 15 September 2006 - 15:19

Originally posted by ensign14
Re Austria 2002 - what glory is there in a win handed to you by default? I'd've stayed behind. I'm with Kipling on that sort of thing.

Certainly I didn't like the Austria 2002 show.

But also certainly it was not the first time that something like that happened.

Remember that the 1964 title was gifted to Surtees by his teammate Bandini?
I don't read a lot of complaints about this here on TNF.

#144 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 15 September 2006 - 15:36

Yes - and that was at the last race when points were vital and in an era when deserved victories were lost through mechanical failure. Not after about 5 races when the lead is already 25 points. As mentioned above it was not so much the team orders, which are nearly as old as racing, but the comments that Barrichello would not be ordered to move aside. In those circumstances I would not accept a win on those grounds.

Compare though TKG, when Tracy did NOT slow to let Franchitti past in 2002 late in the season.

#145 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 15 September 2006 - 16:08

Originally posted by giacomo
Remember that the 1964 title was gifted to Surtees by his teammate Bandini?
I don't read a lot of complaints about this here on TNF.


I see this word "gifted" used in large number of discussions concerning recent events. Perhaps it is a matter of linguistics in some cases, but I also see it used by native English users. As with, "Please discuss...", it is a term that makes me cringe each and every time I see it and find another thread to read.

Perhaps there is little discussion on how Bandini "gifted" the title to Surtees by colliding with N.G. Hill because there is a distinct difference between a boneheaded move and a malicious one. This was the former and not the latter, even of it was basically inexcuseable, if for no other reason than the perception it gave. Nor was it something done to "team orders." Bandini managed to botch his copybook all on his own by trying a boneheaded move that was doubtful of success even had things not gone wrong. However, Bandini did own up to his mistake and Hill was very gracious in accepting the apology even though he had been boiling over while in the pits during the repairs (the language N.G. Hill used, as related to me by Cameron Argetsinger, was proof that he had indeed been a sailor...) and was still fuming afterwards.

Different times.

#146 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 15 September 2006 - 16:16

I think giacomo is talking about Bandini slowing down on the last lap to let Surtees into 2nd place, rather than the crunching of the BRM.

#147 Wolf

Wolf
  • Member

  • 7,881 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 15 September 2006 - 16:18

I would be reluctant to use the word 'gifted' even in '58 context, regardless of the fact I'd probably be happier if Moss took the title (and few more)... Maybe Phil 'gifted' Hawthorn a point or two, but those points would hardly amount to anything- had it not been for the 40, or so, he's earned through his skills (and Ferrari's reliability, at least compared to Moss' Vanwall).

#148 giacomo

giacomo
  • Member

  • 6,977 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 15 September 2006 - 16:20

Originally posted by ensign14
I think giacomo is talking about Bandini slowing down on the last lap to let Surtees into 2nd place, rather than the crunching of the BRM.

That's what I meant: The Ferrari teamorders after Clarks retirement.

It clearly was a gift: If Bandini would have refused to let Surtees pass, Hill would have won the title.

#149 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 15 September 2006 - 19:05

It clearly was a gift: If Bandini would have refused to let Surtees pass, Hill would have won the title.


God, but I truly hate that damn term "gift."

Gift, smifth, or whatever, it was Bandini's choice and, you know, so what? It was not an act to be equated with shooting the Archduke in 1914 as seems to be the implication. Perhaps it is nice to know that not everyone on the track is a heartless, selfish, self-centered bastard whose only only interest in life is himself and what is in it for him and screw averyone else..

As peeved as I was with dear ol' Lorenzo for being a knucklehead and ramming N.G. Hill, I have always admired him for backing off and letting Surtees go by. Not that it really mattered then or now since in 1964 we had a wonderful grand prix season where we had four great talents on the grid, any one of which deserved the crown that season -- John Surtees, Dan Gurney, Jim Clark, and Graham Hill. It really didn't matter who won the championship as far I was concern then and something which I believe even stronger about today.

But, I digress....

#150 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 15 September 2006 - 19:21

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps

God, but I truly hate that damn term "gift."

We all have our pet-hates.

Mine are [racing] misspellings like Donnington, Tyrell, Sterling, Techno and so on.

And it's N. G. Hill by the way...