Stirling and the Schumacher Hate
- This topic has 23 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Ok so now he says Schumacher will be cut down to size thanks to stricter rules on “Dirty Driving”. It was not long ago he re-ignited his view that he only deserved 2 of his 7 titles, there have been many more comments.
But what is Stirling’s problem with the great man? Jealous of his success? Coming back and proving he can cut it with the new crop? Why can’t he just wind his neck in and maybe compliment him for once, god this is a man that has done so much good in the sport yet it’s his bad points that are constantly being highlighted.
His comments seem more a lot more bitter than Sir Jackie Stewart’s- the Scottish three time champ usually talks about how Schumi coming back was a mistake, and how he needs to up his game to make the decision worthwhile (IIRC).
And yet Jackie is one of the biggest campaigners for safety, so I would agree with the sentiment that Moss just has issues with the great man.
Yeah, I’ve noticed how he does seem to have it in for Schumi. Can anyone tell me whether this is just a recent thing, or if he has been on his back through his whole career?
Moss comes from an age where racing was pure. Schumacher (although he didn’t start the revolution in driver manners so to speak) embodies the ‘dirty’ driver. He is the reason that blocking is widely accepted as part of racing – it never used to be.
Of course, we also know of his three dirty moves – against Hill, Villeneuve and a Monaco wall – which resonate as cheating rather than racing incidents. Senna managed to avoid that tag – whether deserved or not. I think for that reason Stirling dislikes Schumacher. Although it is irrational, their respective nationalities probably don’t help either.
Well, if it is because of the 3 incidents you mentioned I would love to hear his opinions of Senna, I guess him being dead is a reason to not label anything other than greatness on him.
But, when I was watching Schumacher’s move on Barrichello at Hungary my Dad mentioned something in Estoril ’88 involving Senna pushing Prost almost just as close to the pit wall. Now…how is this different?
To be great you have to be “Dirty” or in another sense do what is necessary to win, maybe this is something Moss lacked (Although it was a lot more dangerous to be wild back then).
Schumacher and Senna were/are equally dirty, but I really think that Senna’s death have given him a kind of saintly status. I do not disrespect him in any way, but he was not always as perfect as people may think. I never watched him drive, but I have certainly seen footage that shows me he was not always the good guy. Problem is that we never saw a battle between Senna and Schumacher. When Senna was still racing I have the impression that he made the races interesting. When Schumacher was at his high point, he made it boring
I know that this is gonne upset som people but I really think: To make good racing, you need good drivers. To make boring racing you need perfect drivers.
To avoid this turning into a Senna topic, i’ll keep it brief.
Each generation of driver has progressively become more ruthless in how they overtake and defended their positions. This became natural as the sport gained more prestige, and money became involved.
Senna was not the first ‘dirty’ driver. However, he was one of the first champions to use dirty tactics. Other drivers had to become dirtier to beat him. The move at Estoril 88 was this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zznJjSncGCE – notice the pitboard guy who has to move out of the way when the incident happens!
Senna escaped most of the criticism though because of his godlike status – and his more human and emotional side. Further, when confronted, Senna could admit that he had done wrong.
Schumacher has always been somewhat robot like with his emotions and never admitted to doing anything wrong. Even if 94 and 97 were unfortunately misjudged defences, parking at Monaco was simply cheating. But he never admitted that. Hence he’s disliked by a lot of people, such as Moss. It doesn’t help that Schumacher won his first two championships in very dubious circumstances too – one with the incident with Hill and the other with a traction control button on his car (supposedly never used…)
I think thats why Moss has issues with him. Personally, I like Schumacher but thats because I can also see that behind his flaws lies a great driver – one who was the master of the sprint series that F1 became during the fuel pitstops era.
It doesn’t help that Schumacher won his first two championships in very dubious circumstances too – one with the incident with Hill and the other with a traction control button on his car (supposedly never used…)
Both incidents were on 1994, not 1995. In 1995 Schumacher simply bossed.
Sounds to me like sour grapes. Moss is still bitter that he never won anything and clearly thinks that he himself deserved more and Schumacher deserved less.
I think it all boils down to the fact that Schumacher and Ferrari got away with alot of “questionable” actions where as in Moss’ day you did things with nobility and respect instead of putting someone in the position of endangering themselves in order to make them back off as Schumacher did on multiple occasions.
But surely Moss should know, since he has followed this sport for over 50 years, that things move on.
In his day, everyone was a gentleman, that was the norm, but as F1 has become more professional, competitive and far more of a results business, the racers have to adapt to become far more efficient and ruthless in order to survive. Part of this will include actually doing what you can to defend your position, rather than wave through a faster car. Many watch for the drivers they love and love to hate, the likes of Schumacher, Alonso and Hamilton. The former two definitely wouldn’t have fitted in with the gentleman 50’s crowd.
Rookie Kobayashi won a lot of fans in Brazil 2009 doing the sort of thing to Button and Nakajima that would make Moss spit out his crumpets and tea, but it’s guys like these that rake in the fans (and anti-fans) who make up the viewing figures.
I would tread cautiously on “dirty driving” being a new phenomenom in racing. Things are now more blatant because of television and the endless loop of the net but I remember some drivers complaining how Jack Brabham, when followed too closely, used to have his rear wheel going over the shoulder of the track for pebbles to rain on his opponent. Ickx was known to be very hard to pass, not to mention Jarier or Hunt and Farina, who was involved in two deadly accidents where his responsabilities where hotly debated. In the 70’s, the debate about whether Patrese was to blame for the Peterson crash went on and on.
Moss and Stewart on the other hand are the epitomy of the clean drivers. But they’re more the exception than the rule.
Part of this will include actually doing what you can to defend your position, rather than wave through a faster car.
This is a canard put forth often by Schumacher fanboys – that anyone who objects to his ramming-off-the-road antics wants to go back to the era of “politely waving faster cars through”…
Schumacher is the only driver of any era who has coldly and repeatedly used this tactic.
It does raise the issue that these days if you crash, or hit someone off it just ends in a dnf and a bruised ego..
While back in the day’s if you crashed, or hit someone off you could easily die.
It seems that F1 Drivers have become almost “too confident” and while still not willing to crash, are not scared of it either.
Back in the day they must have been using Gentleman Racing tactics because it was important to stay alive..
and yeah, that was getting off topic.. back to the Stirling/Moss ;)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.