Michael Schumacher

The Vettel thread surprised me as such that when I searched for a Schumacher thread, I could not find one. So I propose this thread for Schumacher because regardless of your opinion whether his return is succesful or not, I think we can all agree that there's always something to talk about whether he's had a good or bad race.
Historical Discussion may be allowed on the thread as long as it's on topic.
Enjoy!

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

I got ridiculed on 606 when I wrote an 'article'/started a thread that suggested Schumacher stood to benifit most from Kubica's crash. (other than Heidfeld, of course).

Last year Rosberg, in an inferior car, worried Massa ... while Kubica, in an inferior car, worried Schumacher.

Not only would Kubica have been in line for a plum 2012 drive had he not crashed, but Schumacher has one less Ace to deal with this year and next...and, as a result, would be under less pressure for his race seat.

My assumption was that all the other Aces would be better than Schumacher.

Let's be perfectly honest, here. Schumacher is not consistently fast enough and is over-valued at 30M a year whilst Vettel is a bargain at the 7M (including bonuses) he was paid last year and the 12 or 14 Million he's likely to be paid this year.

 

[Slyboogy]

Kubica in an inferior car worried Vettel, Webber, Hamilton, Button, Schumacher and Rosberg aswell...

 

[Tacitus]

Let's be perfectly honest, here. Schumacher is not consistently fast enough and is over-valued at 30M a year whilst Vettel is a bargain at the 7M (including bonuses) he was paid last year and the 12 or 14 Million he's likely to be paid this year.

30 million a year is wrong it was for 3 years
therefore 10 million a year
unless you have a source to back this up

 

[Jen]

30 million a year is wrong it was for 3 years
therefore 10 million a year
unless you have a source to back this up

Either its bloody ridiculous wonga

 

[Slyboogy]

Either its bloody ridiculous wonga

I don't see him complaining either way

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Kubica in an inferior car worried Vettel, Webber, Hamilton, Button, Schumacher and Rosberg aswell...

You forgot Alonso!

Monaco, Spa in particular. Two very tough "drivers circuits".

 

[Slyboogy]

I forgot the rest of the 17 drivers

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Monaco, Spa in particular. Two very tough "drivers circuits".

O, and he also out-qualified Alonso (4th fastest v 5th fastest) at Suzuka, another tough "drivers circuit".

What a prize that Kubica was!

Shame what happened.

 

[RasputinLives]

I got ridiculed on 606 when I wrote an 'article'/started a thread that suggested Schumacher stood to benifit most from Kubica's crash. (other than Heidfeld, of course).

Last year Rosberg, in an inferior car, worried Massa ... while Kubica, in an inferior car, worried Schumacher.

Not only would Kubica have been in line for a plum 2012 drive had he not crashed, but Schumacher has one less Ace to deal with this year and next...and, as a result, would be under less pressure for his race seat.

My assumption was that all the other Aces would be better than Schumacher.

Let's be perfectly honest, here. Schumacher is not consistently fast enough and is over-valued at 30M a year whilst Vettel is a bargain at the 7M (including bonuses) he was paid last year and the 12 or 14 Million he's likely to be paid this year.

With the current Renault isn't it Heikki benifiting most from Kubica not being around?

 

[teabagyokel]

Bill, there has been competition when it comes to the cars.

Mclaren could have won Spain, Monaco, Italy. They did win China, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Japan.

Ferrari could have won Monaco, Canada and Japan. They won in England.

There's been competition.

However, if you compare that to Schumacher in the mid-90s, there was competition vs him with regard to cars.

Williams dominated in 1992, 1993, 1996 and 1997. They didn't dominate the other two years because of Michael Schumacher.

And I certainly think the early-00s driver era (Montoya, Raikkonen in particular) will forever be undersold because Schumacher was so good.

This is a response to the Seb thread, but its going to the Schumi thread.

 

[Vortex]

Don’t forget how dominant the Mclarens were back then too, 98,99.

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Don’t forget how dominant the Mclarens were back then too, 98,99.

Ya think?

How dominant could it have been in 1999 when a nobody like Irvine - a Number 2 at Ferrari - nearly won the title.

Who is rating Irvine amongst the All Time Greats? No one! Yet he ran Hakkinen to the end of the '99 championship.

I could argue that the Ferrari was superior to the McLaren in 1999...but why bother?

 

[Vortex]

but why bother?

Because you just like arguing?

 

[GermanF1]

For some reason (and I know I have no proof and maybe sound a bit ridicolous) I think Ferrari did not want Irvine to win the 1999 WDC. The "committee meeting"-mess at the Nürburgring was so awfully stupid, I can't believe they really supported Irvine 100%.
And to those who would say "Why did they make MSC help Irvine out in Malaysia then?"...I think they just did that to give the impression that they (incl. MSC) were great sportsmen, even though they were probably not...

 

[Vortex]

Jeeze don’t give Ray even more bullets! lol

 

[Slyboogy]

For some reason (and I know I have no proof and maybe sound a bit ridicolous) I think Ferrari did not want Irvine to win the 1999 WDC. The "committee meeting"-mess at the Nürburgring was so awfully stupid, I can't believe they really supported Irvine 100%.
And to those who would say "Why did they make MSC help Irvine out in Malaysia then?"...I think they just did that to give the impression that they (incl. MSC) were great sportsmen, even though they were probably not...

That could be true maybe not, Irvine though let himself down when he didnt change his chassis as he was usuing the one he won his first ever race in (Australia that year) because of that he was getting beat by Salo

 

[GermanF1]

Salo let him thorugh at Hockenheim for the win, didn't he? Don't want to sound disrespectful towards Mika Salo, but that's a bit funny

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

Main point is that McLaren hardly had a dominant car in relation to Ferrari in 1999.

Unless, of course, everyone here thinks that Irvine was as great as Senna or Prost.

 

[Vortex]

I thought your main point was that Schumacher had no competition? Or have you now decided to forget that subject since you’ve been disproved and focus on the only thing left you could find to argue with?

 

[RayInTorontoCanada]

I think you'll agree that once Senna was killed, Schumacher had less competition to deal with in 1994/1995 and of a lesser quality than what Vettel had to deal with in 2010/11.

We're taking about driver quality and depth of talent.

We're talking about Schumacher's first two titles vs Vettel's double.