658 replies to this topic

[PayasYouRace]

What, so they requested a three race ban?  That was, AFAIAA, unprecedented.  Originally he only got a reprimand and the team a fine.  But the WMSC decided to send a message and increased that.  I don't think anybody could have factored that in and it was an abnormal situation.

 

Let's get real here.  You can say Hill did very well in 1994 particularly in light of his team mate's death.  But if you're going to use the points difference between him and Schumacher as any kind of measure then you are also going to have to consider how those points were achieved and they do not reflect the on-track driver performance

 

It was a two race ban. (Irvine had a three race ban for his actions in Brazil.) It was not unprecedented. Nigel Mansell got a race ban for ignoring a black flag in 1989, as we've already said repeatedly in the early pages of this thread.

 

I've gone on record saying that Damon performed very well in 1994. But I've also only used the points to illustrate one fact and only one fact: That the championship went down to the wire. Damon and Williams didn't break any rules, and they got what could realistically be considered the best results they could.

[Sterzo]

But if you're going to use the points difference between him and Schumacher as any kind of measure then you are also going to have to consider how those points were achieved and they do not reflect the on-track driver performance

That's a fair point, but surely we should also consider how Schumacher accumulated his points if the car was of dubious legality; also how that affected his pace in relation to Hill; also what points Hill lost when he was apparently rammed deliberately by Schumacher.

 

[PlatenGlass]

I think the outcome of the 1994 season was always going to be unsatisfactory. If Schumacher won, there was the question of the legality of his car throughout the year, and when he did win there was the added negative of the collision that finally sealed the deal. And if Hill won, it would have been despite being uncompetitive on the track compared to Schumacher for almost the entire year and making up a massive points deficit with the bans and disqualifications. Justified or not, it wasn't particularly satisfactory.

[Anuity]

That's a fair point, but surely we should also consider how Schumacher accumulated his points if the car was of dubious legality; also how that affected his pace in relation to Hill; also what points Hill lost when he was apparently rammed deliberately by Schumacher.

 

There's no point in factoring it in, since it has never been proved. Just speculation. And speculate we can about any championship in this manner. 

BAR was also running an illegal car throughout 2004 and first races of 2005. And so on.

Let's not forget Mclaren running a cheating car in 2007 either.

Edited by Anuity, 11 April 2020 - 21:52.

[baddog]

Oh god really? Again? After all these years?

[Myrvold]

There's no point in factoring it in, since it has never been proved. Just speculation.

 

But they were found modifying the fuel rig (see Verstappen-fire)?
Curiously enough, I got my hands on 40 VHS's not too long ago, with a wide range of motorsport, spanning from 1984 to 1994. Always fun to hear what people talked about at the time, and not in retrospect. One of the things that stuck with me after watching the first race in 1994, was the comments that "New for 1994 is refueling. Not everyone is happy about that, as there is a risk involved. Nevertheless refueling is in F1 and it's another thing to think of." Fast forward a little bit and it continues "And just look how much faster the Benetton stops are compared to Williams. It seems like they have done their homework and found a trick to be much more effective". With what we know now, it's does make one think a bit.

[Anuity]

But they were found modifying the fuel rig (see Verstappen-fire)?
Curiously enough, I got my hands on 40 VHS's not too long ago, with a wide range of motorsport, spanning from 1984 to 1994. Always fun to hear what people talked about at the time, and not in retrospect. One of the things that stuck with me after watching the first race in 1994, was the comments that "New for 1994 is refueling. Not everyone is happy about that, as there is a risk involved. Nevertheless refueling is in F1 and it's another thing to think of." Fast forward a little bit and it continues "And just look how much faster the Benetton stops are compared to Williams. It seems like they have done their homework and found a trick to be much more effective". With what we know now, it's does make one think a bit.

 

Not really, since again it's just a speculation.

Williams in partiular have always been notorious for their slow pit-stops. And pit-stops are not only about the refuelling, its about the whole crew working on the car.

[Atreiu]

Oh god really? Again? After all these years?

Used to mean time to close a thread...

[jcbc3]

Indeed.