I hope you're joking. How was he anywhere near "poor" if you look back at the championships, reliability cost kimi ALOT. I'm not denying he's done a good job, just saying he's not a worthy champ.
The F1 Thread 2009 Season
- Thread starter Leg-End
- Start date
I hope you're joking. How was he anywhere near "poor" if you look back at the championships, reliability cost kimi ALOT. I'm not denying he's done a good job, just saying he's not a worthy champ.
I'm not denying he's done a good job, just saying he's not a worthy champ.
Massa was driving the same car was he not?
Devil_forever has convinced me, if Button wins the championship he is lucky and unworthy, obvious innit.
Like I said he was inconsistent last season.
have they released the final standings for Malaysia yet? or should i wait a few months for them to decide?
I was talking about the shocking reliability issues he had at mclaren!
Lewis Hamilton’s reputation risked by people who drove him down the road to chicanery
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6047185.ece
There are two ways that the Lewis Hamilton cheating saga can affect his future with McLaren Mercedes, which is now on a knife edge. Either Hamilton and his father Anthony, who manages him, can find a way to forgive and rebuild, or the trauma of what happened at the Australian Grand Prix will weep poison into the relationship and it will eventually fall apart.
The more we have found out about what caused Hamilton to lie to the stewards in Melbourne and then repeat those lies four days later to try to cheat Jarno Trulli, the Toyota driver, out of third place, the more it is possible to sympathise with Hamilton and particularly with his father's deep, deep anger about the affair. In short, Hamilton Sr, who is likely to be seeking advice on what to do next, believes the team recklessly sold his son's reputation as a fine, upstanding sportsman and budding icon in a tawdry and ham-fisted bid to gain a championship point to which they had no right.
There is no doubt that Hamilton himself should carry some of the blame. He has told us that he was “misled” and “instructed” by Dave Ryan, the now suspended McLaren team sporting director, to lie to the stewards and he did as he was told. He should not have done so and he knows it and the world champion would give almost anything to turn back the clock.
Having said that, we now know much more about the forces that were bearing down on Hamilton on that fateful Sunday evening in Melbourne. As always with errors of judgment of this magnitude, passions were running high at the critical moment. When Hamilton passed Trulli under the safety car three laps from the end of the race after the Italian briefly went off the track, Ryan made a mistake. He told Phil Prew, Hamilton's race engineer, who talks to Hamilton on the radio during races, to tell Hamilton to give the place back in the mistaken belief that Hamilton might have broken the rules.
But Ryan was wrong and he quickly realised, after Hamilton had moved across to let Trulli by, that what he had in fact done was to give third place on the podium to Trulli on a plate. And this is where the rot started because Ryan was determined to rectify his error in the stewards' room and he recruited Hamilton to assist him, as Martin Whitmarsh, the McLaren team principal, explained on Sunday. “I think Davey carried some guilt because he had made a mistake and was very hard on himself,” Whitmarsh said. “In the heat of the moment with the stewards, [he] unnecessarily caused Lewis, and led Lewis, to mislead the stewards and one event fell into another.”
In this way Ryan had repaired the damage caused by his initial error but the cost was about to spiral out of control and this is where Anthony Hamilton can feel so betrayed. A senior team manager at McLaren - the man who “ran” the team, according to Whitmarsh - had persuaded or induced Hamilton to lie and had done so at the risk of ruining his reputation for good.
In the long run, the general public will forget which teams Hamilton drove for, just as they have in the case of greats such as Nigel Mansell, Damon Hill or Sir Jackie Stewart. But they will remember Hamilton the man and they will remember that he was a champion and that he was also caught cheating, just as Michael Schumacher is widely remembered for at least three acts of gross bad sportsmanship. Whitmarsh, Ryan and everyone else involved will all be forgotten but not Hamilton.
And Hamilton is no ordinary Formula One driver. He is a remarkable young man with maturity well beyond his years and he is ambitious in every way. Not content to be just a great driver, Hamilton wants to set an example to millions of others such as him from poor backgrounds. He revels in the chance to meet iconic figures such as Nelson Mandela, he enjoys the comparisons made with Tiger Woods and he dreams of going on to do great things after his driving career is over. But all this depends on reputation and it was never part of his game plan to lose that.
The media often glibly call for heads to roll in a crisis such as this. Whitmarsh has demonstrated fairly comprehensively that Hamilton was under the influence of Ryan and Ryan alone and that is why Ryan alone has paid the price. But the affair has inflicted permanent scars on the image of arguably McLaren's greatest ever human asset in Hamilton and this has happened under Whitmarsh's watch and that of his chairman Ron Dennis. No doubt they will think about this a little more in the coming days.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/formula_1/article6047185.ece
There are two ways that the Lewis Hamilton cheating saga can affect his future with McLaren Mercedes, which is now on a knife edge. Either Hamilton and his father Anthony, who manages him, can find a way to forgive and rebuild, or the trauma of what happened at the Australian Grand Prix will weep poison into the relationship and it will eventually fall apart.
The more we have found out about what caused Hamilton to lie to the stewards in Melbourne and then repeat those lies four days later to try to cheat Jarno Trulli, the Toyota driver, out of third place, the more it is possible to sympathise with Hamilton and particularly with his father's deep, deep anger about the affair. In short, Hamilton Sr, who is likely to be seeking advice on what to do next, believes the team recklessly sold his son's reputation as a fine, upstanding sportsman and budding icon in a tawdry and ham-fisted bid to gain a championship point to which they had no right.
There is no doubt that Hamilton himself should carry some of the blame. He has told us that he was “misled” and “instructed” by Dave Ryan, the now suspended McLaren team sporting director, to lie to the stewards and he did as he was told. He should not have done so and he knows it and the world champion would give almost anything to turn back the clock.
Having said that, we now know much more about the forces that were bearing down on Hamilton on that fateful Sunday evening in Melbourne. As always with errors of judgment of this magnitude, passions were running high at the critical moment. When Hamilton passed Trulli under the safety car three laps from the end of the race after the Italian briefly went off the track, Ryan made a mistake. He told Phil Prew, Hamilton's race engineer, who talks to Hamilton on the radio during races, to tell Hamilton to give the place back in the mistaken belief that Hamilton might have broken the rules.
But Ryan was wrong and he quickly realised, after Hamilton had moved across to let Trulli by, that what he had in fact done was to give third place on the podium to Trulli on a plate. And this is where the rot started because Ryan was determined to rectify his error in the stewards' room and he recruited Hamilton to assist him, as Martin Whitmarsh, the McLaren team principal, explained on Sunday. “I think Davey carried some guilt because he had made a mistake and was very hard on himself,” Whitmarsh said. “In the heat of the moment with the stewards, [he] unnecessarily caused Lewis, and led Lewis, to mislead the stewards and one event fell into another.”
In this way Ryan had repaired the damage caused by his initial error but the cost was about to spiral out of control and this is where Anthony Hamilton can feel so betrayed. A senior team manager at McLaren - the man who “ran” the team, according to Whitmarsh - had persuaded or induced Hamilton to lie and had done so at the risk of ruining his reputation for good.
In the long run, the general public will forget which teams Hamilton drove for, just as they have in the case of greats such as Nigel Mansell, Damon Hill or Sir Jackie Stewart. But they will remember Hamilton the man and they will remember that he was a champion and that he was also caught cheating, just as Michael Schumacher is widely remembered for at least three acts of gross bad sportsmanship. Whitmarsh, Ryan and everyone else involved will all be forgotten but not Hamilton.
And Hamilton is no ordinary Formula One driver. He is a remarkable young man with maturity well beyond his years and he is ambitious in every way. Not content to be just a great driver, Hamilton wants to set an example to millions of others such as him from poor backgrounds. He revels in the chance to meet iconic figures such as Nelson Mandela, he enjoys the comparisons made with Tiger Woods and he dreams of going on to do great things after his driving career is over. But all this depends on reputation and it was never part of his game plan to lose that.
The media often glibly call for heads to roll in a crisis such as this. Whitmarsh has demonstrated fairly comprehensively that Hamilton was under the influence of Ryan and Ryan alone and that is why Ryan alone has paid the price. But the affair has inflicted permanent scars on the image of arguably McLaren's greatest ever human asset in Hamilton and this has happened under Whitmarsh's watch and that of his chairman Ron Dennis. No doubt they will think about this a little more in the coming days.
Well, more playboy tanned but I think he's got more Daily Mail "golden boy" potential due to the colour of his skin, yes.
Well that's that then. The bald over-opinionated twat has spoken...
Lewis Hamilton will live the lie for rest of his career
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/matthew_syed/article6054328.ece
Matthew Syed, "Sports Journalist of the Year"
Lewis Hamilton’s reputation is in tatters and it will never be fully repaired. No matter how much he tries to heap the blame on to the shoulders of Dave Ryan, the sacked McLaren sporting director; no matter how much his father fumes about the injustice of it all; no matter how many World Championships he wins in what remains of his tainted career.
This, at bottom, is a question of morality and judgment, and Hamilton has shown that he is lacking — culpably so — in both departments. First he lied before the stewards in a quasi-judicial hearing in Melbourne. Then he compounded the deception ten-fold by repeating the lie four days later. If the first piece of moral handwringing may be understood, if not excused, as having occurred in the heat of the moment, the second provides conclusive proof that Hamilton is prepared to deceive in cold blood.
It hardly needs stating that, in leading the stewards on a merry dance, he was not only staking a claim to points to which he had no right, but he was also, by implication, calling Jarno Trulli a liar and a cheat. He was implying that Trulli’s claim that he had been allowed to overtake was a deception; that it was right and proper for Trulli to be handed a 25-second penalty, robbing him of points. In short, he was prepared to trash a fellow driver’s reputation and opening race in pursuit of a measly extra point in the drivers’ championship.
That Hamilton lied under the instructions of a senior team member offers no mitigation whatsoever and tells us everything we need to know about the strange world Hamilton and his father inhabit that they think it does. Every 10-year-old understands that the demands of morality and honesty are not suddenly made void the moment somebody gives you a nod and a wink, or even a nudge. Hamilton’s defence adds up to nothing more than a tawdry “But he told me to, Sir”.
Had Hamilton come out at that pitiful press conference in Malaysia and admitted that he had lied, that he had done so willingly, that he had been blinded by ambition and the lust for a second title, we could have understood and, in time, forgiven. He could even have recounted Ryan’s role in the deception and we would have understood the moral dynamics of the choice he made.
But by choosing the weasel words “I was misled” he compounded his original error and shone a powerful light on his own moral confusion. Does he not recognise that he could have said “no” when Ryan cooked up the plan of deceiving the stewards and swindling Trulli? That he could have cut across his sporting director to say: “But that is not true?” That he could, at any moment in the 96 hours between his two deceptions, have picked up the phone to his father or to Martin Whitmarsh, the McLaren chief operating officer, and said: “My conscience is troubled. I need to come clean about something.”
Ask yourself this question: had the stewards not unearthed the deception, do you think that Hamilton would have voluntarily confessed his deceit or offered the theatrical contrition witnessed in that claustrophobic room in Malaysia?
Ask yourself this, too: given what we know about Hamilton — that he is one of the most single-minded drivers to have entered the paddock; that he has been known to defy team orders — was it really beyond him to tell Ryan to take a running jump?
Anthony Hamilton is now running around in a state of fury that the fairytale of his son’s rise from a Stevenage council estate to world champion has warped into a morality play of very different dimensions. He is angry at Ryan, at Whitmarsh, at almost everyone except the one person who was in a position to end this sordid saga before it began: his son.
It is even reported that Hamilton Sr has sought the advice of Max Mosley, the FIA president, on the possibility of his son jumping team mid-season, leaving McLaren in the lurch.
This is almost beyond parody. Hamilton has been nurtured by McLaren since he was 13, having been given access to resources beyond the dreams of other aspiring drivers. When he entered Formula One as a 22-year-old rookie, he was handed arguably the best all-round car in the paddock, enabling him to drive to victory in his second season in one of the most thrilling climaxes in the history of the sport last year. He is paid an annual salary by McLaren of about £15 million.
Now he is reportedly planning to betray the entire organisation, with a staff of about 900, all of whom work to make him look good, because a single member of that organisation — unilaterally and without the consent of anyone else — suggested that he tell a lie.
Lewis Hamilton will live the lie for rest of his career
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/matthew_syed/article6054328.ece
Matthew Syed, "Sports Journalist of the Year"
Lewis Hamilton’s reputation is in tatters and it will never be fully repaired. No matter how much he tries to heap the blame on to the shoulders of Dave Ryan, the sacked McLaren sporting director; no matter how much his father fumes about the injustice of it all; no matter how many World Championships he wins in what remains of his tainted career.
This, at bottom, is a question of morality and judgment, and Hamilton has shown that he is lacking — culpably so — in both departments. First he lied before the stewards in a quasi-judicial hearing in Melbourne. Then he compounded the deception ten-fold by repeating the lie four days later. If the first piece of moral handwringing may be understood, if not excused, as having occurred in the heat of the moment, the second provides conclusive proof that Hamilton is prepared to deceive in cold blood.
It hardly needs stating that, in leading the stewards on a merry dance, he was not only staking a claim to points to which he had no right, but he was also, by implication, calling Jarno Trulli a liar and a cheat. He was implying that Trulli’s claim that he had been allowed to overtake was a deception; that it was right and proper for Trulli to be handed a 25-second penalty, robbing him of points. In short, he was prepared to trash a fellow driver’s reputation and opening race in pursuit of a measly extra point in the drivers’ championship.
That Hamilton lied under the instructions of a senior team member offers no mitigation whatsoever and tells us everything we need to know about the strange world Hamilton and his father inhabit that they think it does. Every 10-year-old understands that the demands of morality and honesty are not suddenly made void the moment somebody gives you a nod and a wink, or even a nudge. Hamilton’s defence adds up to nothing more than a tawdry “But he told me to, Sir”.
Had Hamilton come out at that pitiful press conference in Malaysia and admitted that he had lied, that he had done so willingly, that he had been blinded by ambition and the lust for a second title, we could have understood and, in time, forgiven. He could even have recounted Ryan’s role in the deception and we would have understood the moral dynamics of the choice he made.
But by choosing the weasel words “I was misled” he compounded his original error and shone a powerful light on his own moral confusion. Does he not recognise that he could have said “no” when Ryan cooked up the plan of deceiving the stewards and swindling Trulli? That he could have cut across his sporting director to say: “But that is not true?” That he could, at any moment in the 96 hours between his two deceptions, have picked up the phone to his father or to Martin Whitmarsh, the McLaren chief operating officer, and said: “My conscience is troubled. I need to come clean about something.”
Ask yourself this question: had the stewards not unearthed the deception, do you think that Hamilton would have voluntarily confessed his deceit or offered the theatrical contrition witnessed in that claustrophobic room in Malaysia?
Ask yourself this, too: given what we know about Hamilton — that he is one of the most single-minded drivers to have entered the paddock; that he has been known to defy team orders — was it really beyond him to tell Ryan to take a running jump?
Anthony Hamilton is now running around in a state of fury that the fairytale of his son’s rise from a Stevenage council estate to world champion has warped into a morality play of very different dimensions. He is angry at Ryan, at Whitmarsh, at almost everyone except the one person who was in a position to end this sordid saga before it began: his son.
It is even reported that Hamilton Sr has sought the advice of Max Mosley, the FIA president, on the possibility of his son jumping team mid-season, leaving McLaren in the lurch.
This is almost beyond parody. Hamilton has been nurtured by McLaren since he was 13, having been given access to resources beyond the dreams of other aspiring drivers. When he entered Formula One as a 22-year-old rookie, he was handed arguably the best all-round car in the paddock, enabling him to drive to victory in his second season in one of the most thrilling climaxes in the history of the sport last year. He is paid an annual salary by McLaren of about £15 million.
Now he is reportedly planning to betray the entire organisation, with a staff of about 900, all of whom work to make him look good, because a single member of that organisation — unilaterally and without the consent of anyone else — suggested that he tell a lie.
Absolute bollocks article. The last sentance really grates me, betraying the organisation with a staff of 900, what did Alonso do in 2007 when he put all of their jobs on the line with his FIA emails? Hamilton and McLaren seeked to gain an advantage by unfair means, much like a certain red machine with a german behind the wheel did for 10 years. The people at McLaren only care about winning.
The way this is turning out it will either make Hamilton and McLaren stronger OR it will lead to Hamilton leaving the team and I can see him not looking at the old establishments but for a new project, I just hope he doesn't do a Villeneuve but I dont think he is in it for the money and he has bags more talent than him.
It's just a shame his first season as a champion has already been overlooked by controvesy after just 2 races and I am not sure if its his teams fault or his own.
The way this is turning out it will either make Hamilton and McLaren stronger OR it will lead to Hamilton leaving the team and I can see him not looking at the old establishments but for a new project, I just hope he doesn't do a Villeneuve but I dont think he is in it for the money and he has bags more talent than him.
It's just a shame his first season as a champion has already been overlooked by controvesy after just 2 races and I am not sure if its his teams fault or his own.
I cant see him leaving
Well that was another case of McLaren cheating, wasn't it? The jobs Alonso put on the line with those emails were on the line because they'd stolen data from Ferrari. Not Alonso's fault he was working for cheats at the time.
And it's no surprise to see a senior member of McLaren's hierarchy cheating again. Hamilton is getting some unfair stick here - yes, he could have "come clean" at any point, but this is the team that nurtered him. If your parents lied in court, would you pipe up and contradict them? Like hell you would.
But I don't think it's a coincidence that a senior member of McLaren led him to this - that team is clearly rotten to the core. Hamilton would be best off leaving. Ferrari are said to be interested, and that'd be the perfect riposte. Punish the team that tarnished your reputation by dominating them for years for their closest rival.
Love it, absolutely love it.
Lewis has already admitted defeat in his pursuit to be named one of the all time greats.
Senna, Prost and Schumacher all had something in common. They never ever ever ever said sorry for what they had done. What Lewis has done, is given ammo for the competitors he races against, and has displayed some what of a fragile mentality.
Lewis has already admitted defeat in his pursuit to be named one of the all time greats.
Senna, Prost and Schumacher all had something in common. They never ever ever ever said sorry for what they had done. What Lewis has done, is given ammo for the competitors he races against, and has displayed some what of a fragile mentality.
I think he had little choice, potentially that apology might save him and his team this season, we shall see. It's an offtrack thing really, if he had say rammed Trulli off the track I very much doubt he would have apologised. It's like what Eddie Jordan said when Vettel went and apologised to Mario Thiessen after his clash with Kubica, it shows a weakness and it was absolutely the wrong thing to do even if he has long term ties to that team.
This won't effect Hamilton on track in a fighting situation, he will still be one of the hardest racers out there.
But this whole debacle has really damaged both McLaren and Hamilton for the long term, it's embarassingly incompetant from both of them. But I am more concerned about the diffuser 3 at the hearing on the 14th, I really want them to just put that to bed early.
This won't effect Hamilton on track in a fighting situation, he will still be one of the hardest racers out there.
But this whole debacle has really damaged both McLaren and Hamilton for the long term, it's embarassingly incompetant from both of them. But I am more concerned about the diffuser 3 at the hearing on the 14th, I really want them to just put that to bed early.
What are you talking about? Schumacher apologised when he smashed Villenueve off the road and was later punished for it. He said it was the "red mist" that descended, and if that's not admitting responsibility then I don't know what is.
And how does showing contrition mean that you'll never be a great? I think those things tend to be judged by your ability to win loads of races and championships - something that won't be affected by Hamilton saying "sorry".
No idea whom your source is, but there is absolutely nothing I can find, that ever shows an apology by Michael Schumacher about the Jerez incident, and knowing Michael's mentality, he never would have.
Lewis has essentially consented to defeat. He's allowed himself to be overcome by what has happened, and felt compelled to "apologize" for what happened. Unlike the great drivers of the past who said nothing and just got on with it, he's been left to dwell on the circumstances of his and McLaren's actions hence the fragile mentality.
Hamilton's over inflated ego has popped and the drivers will eat him alive.
You can't walk and talk like he does and then come out and say sorry. It just doesn't work like that and he'll pay the price.
You are quite strange.
So are you saying he will not win any more races? Any more championships? Seriously?
No I don't say that. He'll never be a great driver is what im saying. Wouldn't be surprised if he never wins another title however. Seen this before with Jaques, and seeing it again now. He's been able to live off the brilliance of Alonso for the past 2 years, but with the new regs he and McLaren have flopped.
So he won the championship last year..... because of Alonso?
WUM
He won the title on the back of a highly developed Alonso race car. McLaren already have the blueprint for a successful design and they utilized it to their full advantage.
Folks I've experienced Marchi before, the shocking thing is that he isn't on the WUM, he actually believes this toss
Oh this is such a sad sad sad few weeks for me 
So Alonso joining McLaren in December 2006 all of a sudden made the 07 car fast? Do you even watch F1 or understand how it works? The 2007 car would have started its design in maybe January 06 and would have been an evolution of the 06 car, I would say they more or less had the 07 cars ready by January 07, you think Alonso had a big influence in the speed of that car and 08? Not to the extent you are talking about, not his special "6 tenths" he always talks about. You are talking complete and utter toss in regards to Hamilton's talent and a comparison with Jaques is completely wrong at this stage.
Hamilton is already written into F1 history purely by what he did in his first 2 seasons, not ever going to be a great? We shall see.
What price Brawn being stripped of their two wins due to not being Ferrari?
The 2007 car was more then likely in the early design faze midway through 2005. Up until November 2006, the car's performance used the basis provided by the 2006 car to draw from. When Alonso joined in late November 'McLaren paid Renault an awful lot to release him from his contract early', Alonso was able to do much of the development work in and around the mp4 22. Remembering that up until November, the car only works in theory and is subject to driver input to create the overall finished product.
Alonso was able to stamp his authority on the overall car design as McLaren where still tossing up who to put in the 2nd seat. I believe it was PDR, Mika or Lewis to choose from.
Throughout 2007 Alonso was able to assist in development, which allowed McLaren to have a strong base for the 08 car that had some minor changes to remain competitive for the change in regulations 'loss of TC'. When Fernando left, McLaren where given a strong car to further develop into a title winning package.
Contrary to what the incompetent fool Brad will have you believe, the 2007 McLaren was a more complete car then the 2008 car. The 08 car tended to suffer from slight oversteer mid corner, which tended to slow Lewis down which led to a more erratic driving style and probably loss of rear grip towards the end of a stint. Last year the Ferrari was a superior car, but faltered due to poor management and driver error.
Remembering that Lewis has never really had to develop a car from scratch. Most of his career, he's been in parity series that require the driver to focus more on race setups then anything else. You'll see it more and more as we progress in the future with parity becoming more and more apparent in racing.
Compared to Ferrari whom developed their 2009 car at the same time, McLaren are some distance off in terms of car speed.
This leads to the whole Jaques debate.
There is no secret that Damon Hill was a quality driver. Silly at times but quality. Jaques 'like Lewis' wonders into a team with a strong base. Jaques is automatically given a car that can win races 'Like Lewis'. When Damon was fired 'Like Alonso' at the end of 1996, Jaques was given the lead role in Williams 'Like Lewis'. Already a strong car to develop off, Jaques waltzed through the 1997 series, making a meal of it and allowing the in-superior Ferrari of Michael Schumacher back into the title hunt. When Williams lost Rothmans and Renault, the team dropped off pace dramatically. Even though in the previous two years they had been title winners, it meant sweet FA if the drivers could not develop a car to win races.
Now I ask, what is the difference between Jaques and Lewis?
Both young fast drivers that where touted as the next great, but all falter when new regs and brand new cars are created?
Lewis is undeniably quick, but he lacks what the truly great drivers have.
And Brad, aren't you the clown that blamed the entirety of Adelaide 1994 on Schumacher?
And Brad, aren't you the clown that blamed the entirety of Adelaide 1994 on Schumacher?
Yes
It was the whole Schumacher purposely driving into Damon Hill when he knew his car was fecked having driven it into the wall thing that tipped me off
And in case any idiot gave him the benefit of the doubt, he wonderfully did it again to Villeneuve a few years later. Only this time, given he failed, they saw fit to punish him with the savage sanction of... taking away his points and wins for the season
Although of course, in his 'records', those wins are still counted...
Because Hill had to overtake Michael at that corner
Michael being the lead driver, was perfectly entitled to take the race line. Hill had no reason to need to overtake if you stand by the reason that Michael's car was stuffed. Had he waited, he could have overtaken him on the straight leading to a possible title victory. Instead his eyes lit up like a balloon and made a foolish choice. Williams should have told him to wait as they saw the same footage on the tv as everybody else, but had no idea 'and more then likely the same as Michael due to the length that he drove the car for' the condition of his car.
Because Hill had to overtake Michael at that corner
He hadn't seen Schumacher had just smashed his car into the wall you prat. He saw an opportunity to pass. He's a racing driver. He took it. His reason to overtake was that doing so, and guiding it home, would make him World Champion. Schumacher is a cheat, as has been proved numerous times since too, and intentionally smashed into Hill as he went passed. They were side by side, Hill on the inside, you can see Schumacher turn his head to look at him going passed, and he does what he does
To be honest mate, you critically weaken any argument you make by virtue of the fact it's YOU making it. So if anybody was of a similar opinion to you, they can now safely assume it was a bollocks one
...
TBF Hill blatantly does see Schumacher crash into the wall (2nd replay of the incident) so should have waited till after the corner.
I'm right in thinking Schumacher wasn't punished for this arent i? Would have been harsh to punish him imo.
What a load of shite. You have no idea that Schumacher directly crashed into Hill. The idiotic F.I.A. who at the time had a vendetta against Michael couldn't prove it then, and you can't prove it now, even with that abysmal replay.
Michael Took the race line which he was completely entitled to do. Hill is a racer yes, but anybody who knows anything about racing, know it takes more then speed to make you a champion. You need to have a brain and Hill simply didn't have one that day. He chose to race for position even though Michael had clearly slapped the wall and the whole world including the Williams team had seen it.
The fact that your dismiss my evidence because "its me", takes away and integrity that your counter argument has, because it encroached with bias against my opinion not the fact.
Schumacher has only had two errors of poor judgement and thats both Jerez and Monaco. Other then that, it was filled with brilliance unseen by any driver in the past or present and possibly in the future. While idiots like you go on about a massive mistake on Damons part, Michael will sit at home admiring his 7 world titles and 90 winners trophies 'remembering he gave Austria 2002 to Rubens'.
Poor sportsman or not, he's the best of the best and will be lucky to ever see anybody like he race again.
To be fair, If Alonso had been in the Brawn since they started testing, they'd be even further ahead then they are now and thats seriously scary.
First time i've heard of that to be fair. I'll consult my brains trust
. I'm not saying that Lewis has stolen Alonso's work. What i'm saying is that he's fully utilized the car that had had an fair amount of Alonso development work to his advantage.
If anything I think Fernando brings about 3 tenths. Thats the tenths that differentiates, the Hill's to the Prost's.
Jaques however never had the backing of one of the biggest teams in f1. Although he stepped in at 26, the f1 car was completely different to anything he'd driven where as Lewis is brought up through classes that build you up to that level.
To come in at 26 and be competitive is a rather solid effort considering most start between 20 and 24.
It's obvious that McLaren do not like the new regs. They are unable to create as much downforce as they use to, and thats where they were stronger then everybody else, but thats when Lewis needs to use his technical ability to give feedback on mechanical grip where I think he's not fullfilling that potential.
Stop, stop please stop, my sides are splitting...
Please Bradly. Tell me more tell me more tell me more of your bull shit.....
Let me guess. Austria 2002
That would be Todt's choice not Michael's.Folk have been arguing about it for years. For me it's pretty clear he deliberately drives into him, and as I said before, any benefit of the doubt surely evaporated with Villeneuve
This 'should have waited to overtake' thing is daft though. Hill doesn't know what's happened, Schumacher crashed around the corner from him. He just see's an opportunity to overtake, and he goes for it. You can never blame a racing driver for going to overtake like that. And to be fair, it would have been fine, if the cheating German hadn't driven into him...
I understand now why marchi got a mention in the Axis of Spastic thread. Well deserved.
So where do we see this decision on diffusers going? It would be pretty farcical for the FIA to overturn these grand prix results wouldnt it, why has it taken so long to act? Ive no real idea about the technicalities, Alonso doesnt seem to be assured over the rights and wrongs:
"We'll have to see what they (the judges) decide," said Alonso. "It's a complicated issue, but the championship could be more or less decided.
"If the diffusers are legal, the Brawns are going to be nearly unreachable for any other team."
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12433_5186754,00.html
"We'll have to see what they (the judges) decide," said Alonso. "It's a complicated issue, but the championship could be more or less decided.
"If the diffusers are legal, the Brawns are going to be nearly unreachable for any other team."
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12433_5186754,00.html
Sorry I misread what you said there earlier. You think Hill saw him hit the wall? I don't think so, I've heard Hill speaking about it, pretty sure he said he obviously knew Schumacher had gone wide, maybe had a problem, and so he saw an opportunity to take the place. To be fair, we don't know how badly damaged Schumacher's Benatton was, there's no saying the wall crash definitely would have put him out, and either way, there's absolutely no way Hill could know
Those who don't think Schumacher cheated need to re-watch the view from Damon's car perspective. A Formula 1 car just does not take a corner like Schumacher is doing there. If you take Hill out of the picture, Schumacher would have been driving into the chicane
I don't think anyone can question Schumacher's quality. He is arguably the greatest Formula 1 driver of all time, certainly the most successful. I was at the Monza GP where he announced his retirement, he'd won the race, really putting the title pressure on Alonso, but the place was almost in mourning. But what also can't be questioned is that he's a cheat. A cheat who should not got the benefit of the doubt. He knew what he was doing
Am i right in remembering Schumacher "deliberately" crashed his car on a qualifying lap to slow down a competitor behind him?
I still respect him as a legend of the sport regardless.
I still respect him as a legend of the sport regardless.
Yeah he tried to stop Alonso beating him to pole in Monaco.
Cheating bastard
Cheating bastard