Formula 1 and other stuff

Clearly you don’t like the sport mate. Michael’s return, alone, will help undo much of the awful damage cretinous, self-interested ‘journalists’ such as yourself have done with your partisan hackery these past 3 years.

i (hearts) this post.

although there is a story that Juan Pablo Montoya was moved to such fury at the Brazilian GP one year when he heard the Ferrari’s engine stutter (signifying the presence of TC) that he drove into Schumacher’s car.

i had no idea!

Sorry Stuart, probably overly personal and that’s not necessary. Just I think that Schumacher brings so much to the sport that mostly make up for his (and I accept inexcusable) excesses.

There have been many drivers in the past, many revered and some indeed current drivers, who have similarly push things too far. Michael was the first driver to do so in the mass-media. Lewis, in just a couple years, has shown similar excess on and off the track.

Michael had his Jerez and Monaco in a career spanning two decades. Lewis has had Australia, and other dubious moments. One could argue about what is worse. To cheat in cold blood as Lewis did in Australia, or in hot-blood as Michael did in Monaco or Jerez.

But this is a well worn topic. The important thing, and what I think you missed, is that Michael’s return sparks interest and passion once again in the sport.

I had no intention of attending any Grands Prix next year, and now I’m working out how to go to as many as possible.

Posts like yours, and indeed reactions like mine, as passionate. People are feeling things again about the sport.

Anodyne, grain-fed media-bred modern drivers are so utterly un-engaging. F1 has become like McLaren’s engineering base. Sterile, stark, un-engaging. Utterly robotic.

Michael, love him (as I do), loathe him (as perhaps you and many in the British media do), we feel something. And it re-kindles a passion in the sport.

That’s what Michael brings to the table, and I think that makes up for the baggage he also brings.

We should be celebrating what this means for the 2010 season. After quite enough turgid, highly sanctimonious prose about Ferrari v McLaren, Flavio v the world, CVC v FOTA and worse, the private life of Max Mosley, we now have a story that is all about what is going to happen on the racing circuit.

About Michael vs Rosberg (and what a story that is, Keke has micromanaged Nico’s career and was one of the loudest critics in Monaco 2006), Alonso v Massa, Lewis v Button, Vettel v Webber.

What will Barrichello manage? What about Robert Kubica?

All these things have the added gravity the name Michael Schumacher brings.

To go off on one hoping the guy hoses his return is such a mindbogglingly shallow, when we think about the greater context of his return.

Again, apologies for the strong reaction. Look forward to it though, because that’s what 2010 is going to be like.

Can’t bleeding wait!

I have serious misgivings about Michael’s return, Stuart, though in my case I have to admit most of these concern how he expects to do himself justice in F1 when he hasn’t raced a car in three years. Steven Roy will probably be around soon to tell you that you don’t just forget how to drive, but the last few drivers to try going back into F1 after a sabbatical have not done themselves justice either.

Now, given Michael’s talent, “not doing himself justice” could still be good enough to give a creditable performance in F1 (partially neck-dependent). However, Michael has been known to… …bend the rules under pressure, and if Michael doesn’t do himself justice, he would be more prone to behaving in an ethically-questionable manner.

The more I think about this, the more I am concerned about the whole business… …and don’t get me started on the effects on Heidfeld and Fisichella.

I agree entirely with Stuart’s comments – but Michael is also back as a huge marketing coup – un-imaginative types at Stuttgart are now calling the tune. I expect the next announcement will be Rory Byrne joining the team. With Todt in power at the FIA the cheating can get even more blatant than in the Ferrari days.

Michael had his Jerez and Monaco in a career spanning two decades.

This is like a Willi Weber whitewash and to compare Lewis Hamilton to Schumacher is obscene but there have always been deniers. Schumacher had his Jerez and Monaco and driving into Damon Hill at Adelaide in 1994 after he damaged his own car and pushed Alonso on to the grass at close to 200mph on the Hangar straight at Silverstone and pushed Hakkinen on to the grass going up the hill at Spa at very high speed etc etc etc. The reason the ridiculous ‘one move’ rule was introduced was because even the FIA which assisted him were embarrassed by his excessive weaving. We have the Schumacher chop on the run to the first corner where he felt that he could chop across in front of opponents or push them off the track or in cases like with his own brother push them into the pitwall.

Schumacher is the biggest cheat in the history of the sport by a huge margin and the FIA let him do it because a successful Ferrari meant more money for Bernie.

Aside from his driving crimes which were worth several life time bans there were the car irregularities. Stuart mentioned illegal traction control which was hidden in a menu that required the driver to use a number of controls in sequence to select and like the illegal launch control was not shown in the menu. According to Benetton the launch control was left in because their software guys thought it would be dangerous to remove it despite ever other team doing so successfully. Benetton also had the nerve to claim they needed it for testing. Montoya was not the only person to spot the traction control being used. Many trackside observers – although no-one from the FIA – noticed odd noises from the car as his Ford V8 powered Benetton managed to power away from the Renault V10 powered Williams which should have been the more accelerative engine.

The FIA did everything they could to help him cheat. We had the magic barge board incident that was illegal on the car in Malaysia but a few days later on a jig in Paris what was claimed to be he same barge board was declared legal.

My only hope is that the Mercedes is a pig and Schumacher gets fed up running around in the middle of the pack and quits.

Must have been some of the froth of fury that led me to miss it, but just curious about this comment stuart

“Let’s not get into the business of illegal traction control systems, although there is a story that Juan Pablo Montoya was moved to such fury at the Brazilian GP one year when he heard the Ferrari’s engine stutter (signifying the presence of TC) that he drove into Schumacher’s car.”

The only year Montoya raced in F1 that traction control was banned was in 2001. At what point did he drive in to Michael during that race? I remember him doing a monster overtake into the first corner but no ram-raiding. He saved that for just about every other occasion.

In 2001 they reintroduced traction control mid-season (in Spain from memory) and it hardly upset the running order. Michael had no need for traction control, he had it in his right foot. There’s plenty of whispers, I’m sure, of all sorts of chicanery from Michael and his followers. But at the end of the day over two decades he was always on top. That says he was a damn good racing driver, and not one that needed to systemically cheat.

Michael had no need for traction control, he had it in his right foot.

Whether he needed it or not he had it.

That says he was a damn good racing driver, and not one that needed to systemically cheat.

So why did he? Presumably you believe that when he damaged his car at Adelaide in 1994 and then threw it at the apex of the corner he did not know Damon Hill was there. It was just luck that happened.

Presumably you believe he really did just lose control at Monaco and did not stop deliberately to ruin Alonso’s lap.

Presumably you believe that it was just instinct as he said that made him ram Jacques Villeneuve at Jerez in 1997 and that he was not just a cynical cheat trying to ram his way to another title.

Presumably you believe when he rammed Hakkinen at Macau that was just an unfortunate accident.

Presumably you believe when he moved over and put Hakkinen on the grass on the run up to Les Combes there was no intent to cheat to hold his position.

Presumably you believe that when he punted Alonso on to the grass at close to 200 mph there was nothing wrong with that either.

Schumacher was a cheat befire he arrived in F1 and he cheated the whole time he was in F1. He may have great driving ability but that did not stop him cheating. He even forced his own brother into a pitwall.

He may not as you suggest have needed to cheat but cheat he did and because the FIA allowed him to do so without punishment he continued to cheat.

No-one has done more in the history of the sport to lower the standard of driver behaviour than Michael Schumacher. Others have played their part but he was by far the worst offender.

Not good, although I would imagine the beer if flowing in Germany.

I think it’s a PR stunt for both parties but Schumi fans will obviously disagree as they seem to have massive orgasms when somebody simply mentions his name.

He’ll plug monstrous Mercedes cars and will be able to cash in on merchandise – I expect new helmet design an all that.

This is wrong because F1 has moved on, there are new heroes, new myths, new legends – Schumi doesn’t fit in the modern world.

I hope Vettel does replace him in 2011. By the way, how reliable is that info?

Great news, great story. Bring on 2010.

@Steven Roy – Senna was worse, its always been this way with champions. Get over it.

Stuart C :

By the way, how reliable is that info?

Pretty credible, I think.

Thank God!

Did you guys read Schu’s interview on formula1.com? It’s a laugh, he’s talking like the time has stopped in the 1990s.

Q: Do you expect the competition to be tougher than it was some years ago?
MS: Probably tighter, yes. Tougher? No, why? There have always been top drivers around – that will never change. And I see chances for me to fit into that mould again. That’s why I am coming back.

Huh? What was that? Arrogance again? He also claims he’ll be racing for 3 years meaning he’s planning to retire at 44 or 45 years of age. I just hope Michael had no previous cases of schizophrenia in his family.

@Steven Roy – Senna was worse, its always been this way with champions. Get over it.

@dans Thank you for the standard Schumacher fan’s response. Dismiss comments by others and provide nothing to back it up. Senna did some things that were unacceptable but nowhere near as many as Schumacher.

Fell free to prove me wrong by listing all Senna’s misdemeanours assuming you actually know any of them. Being a Schumacher fan you will ignore this either because you have no interest in anyone other than blessèd Michael or if you are one of the more inteeligent Schumacher fans you will know that you are wrong.

He practically biffed him off the circuit as he passed, having heard Michael’s TC kick in and enable a monster getaway from the start (so the story goes).

blimey, he did as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovKr-IBFrNY

Hmm I must say you are mistaken if you think we are the same person your blog software should let you see the ip address associated with each post I use o2 on my iPhone o2 bb at home and vodafone bb at work so my posts would all come from those addresses. I post under my name as I take responsibility for my words and I’m relatively well known under it. I as you saw am quite happy to be straight up with criticism without the need for a clone.

Drop me an email if you’d like to talk about it. I can only hazard a guess that many ISPs put their users behind proxies which sometimes can give the appearance of people having similar addreses. Do a reverse lookup on the adresses to make sure this isn’t the case here.

Let’s not get into the business of illegal traction control systems, although there is a story that Juan Pablo Montoya was moved to such fury at the Brazilian GP one year when he heard the Ferrari’s engine stutter (signifying the presence of TC) that he drove into Schumacher’s car.

Yes I remember that now. Ferrari were exploiting a big loophole in the rules that allowed 150ms for a gearchange, which was ludicrous because everyone could make one in less than 30ms due to semi-automatic gearboxes. Therefore they made a system which led to Ferrari being able to use 120ms of TC for each gearchange, which is quite a lot when you consider how many gearchanges there are per lap.

The other teams found out and protested, and the FIA were forced to bring back TC as they had no way to police it until they came up with the idea of a standard ECU.

Fell free to prove me wrong by listing all Senna’s misdemeanours assuming you actually know any of them. Being a Schumacher fan you will ignore this either because you have no interest in anyone other than blessèd Michael or if you are one of the more inteeligent Schumacher fans you will know that you are wrong.

Off the top of my head: Portugal 88, Imola 89, Suzuka 89, Suzuka 90. And just like Schumacher, there would probably be more that I can’t remember.

That said, Steven, I know you’re no Senna fan either, so it probably doesn’t change your position on this at all.

Off the top of my head: Portugal 88, Imola 89, Suzuka 89, Suzuka 90. And just like Schumacher, there would probably be more that I can’t remember.

I think Suzuka 1989 was more Prost’s fault although I doubt either of them could have made the corner on the trajectory they entered it on. Prost left the door wide open when there was absolutely no need to. Senna took a flier on heading up the inside and Prost just turned in on him.

Senna like Schumacher had a history of avoidable incidents before he reached F1. Schumacher’s best known example is punting Hakkinen out of the seconf heat at Macau and Senna had several clashes with Brundle in F3 and all of them when Brundle was ahead. Going into the last round of that championship Brundle was ahead on points despite Senna setting a record for the number of wins. I can imagine Senna’s reaction if Brundle had just rammed him.

Senna introduced the concept of deliberately ramming a car off the road but Schumacher was a far worse offender.

I have to say I am more a fan of Senna for a number of reasons. Schumacher always wanted the team wrapped round him and a docile team mate. Senna on the other hand went to McLaren when it was team Prost and blew Prost out the door. Schumacher would never have had the bottle to do that.

Senna was also a better driver. In terms of pace Schumacher is right up there with the best of them but wheel to wheel Senna was in a different league. Both of them were prone to throw it into the barrier under pressure though.

It would be interesting to see how they would have faired if they were both at their peak now going into next season. Schumacher has to find a way to succeed without Ross Brawn’s clever fuel strategies but Senna would have to find a way to carry excess fuel or change his unique throttle technique.

The “one only weave” rule was introducted because of Senna, not Schumacher. IIRC It was Senna’s actions at one Hockenheim race that led to it, Senna having been particularly difficult to pass because he weaved back and forth several times on one of the straights. I can see it in my mind but can’t recall which of the straights (on the old track).