Discussion
I can't see how you can argue your proposition.
From my memory of F1 at the time, and I'm no fan of schumacher (and never forgave him for cheating, our Damon in Melbourne in 94') but straight off, ask yourself this, had Schumacher been in the Williams that year and Hill in the Bennetton, do you think Schumacher would have walked away to the title?
For his faults, I used to think Schumacher was the best driver, and could carry a car to a small degree, to begin with the Ferrari was inferior, in the same way Senna seemed to lift the McLaren in the Williams v McLaren years, so much so he moved to the team, then the McLaren v Ferrari era, I thought he carried the Ferrari, certainly in the early years, (by how much he carried was difficult to measure and won't be huge, and be both indeterminate but significant amount, as he also appeared to engineer a no.1 status, with subbordinate no.2s, which if nothing else got all the engineering resources of his team behind him) but again, if its about winning, rather than the "spirit" and even if, some of that was surrounding himself with the best people. Didn't he ask Brawn & Byrne to join him at Ferrari. F1 is a team sport. Could you argue that part of his talent, what made him a "great" driver was creating the situation where he was at an advantage.
So my answer to your question is yes and no, or no and yes, or both. After your debate, the stats will show he won those GPs, those titles. end of.
(but still cheated Damon!)
From my memory of F1 at the time, and I'm no fan of schumacher (and never forgave him for cheating, our Damon in Melbourne in 94') but straight off, ask yourself this, had Schumacher been in the Williams that year and Hill in the Bennetton, do you think Schumacher would have walked away to the title?
For his faults, I used to think Schumacher was the best driver, and could carry a car to a small degree, to begin with the Ferrari was inferior, in the same way Senna seemed to lift the McLaren in the Williams v McLaren years, so much so he moved to the team, then the McLaren v Ferrari era, I thought he carried the Ferrari, certainly in the early years, (by how much he carried was difficult to measure and won't be huge, and be both indeterminate but significant amount, as he also appeared to engineer a no.1 status, with subbordinate no.2s, which if nothing else got all the engineering resources of his team behind him) but again, if its about winning, rather than the "spirit" and even if, some of that was surrounding himself with the best people. Didn't he ask Brawn & Byrne to join him at Ferrari. F1 is a team sport. Could you argue that part of his talent, what made him a "great" driver was creating the situation where he was at an advantage.
So my answer to your question is yes and no, or no and yes, or both. After your debate, the stats will show he won those GPs, those titles. end of.
(but still cheated Damon!)
Edited by Northern Munkee on Tuesday 14th April 18:48
Edited by Northern Munkee on Tuesday 14th April 18:50
heebeegeetee said:
There's possibly an element of truth in it, but i still think he might have been a multiple wdc whichever good engineer he had.
The same could possibly be said of Jim Clark. Would he have been as successful without Colin Chapman?
Yes MS was helped very much by the team around him as are all race drivers. The same could possibly be said of Jim Clark. Would he have been as successful without Colin Chapman?
Could MS have been as good without a good team?
We will never know.
But we do know that he will never be considered as a true great like Jim Clark because, unlike JC he resorted to cheating.
Why, with his talent, he felt the need to cheat is another question we will never know.
BTW I don't consider Chapman and Brawn to be in the same league, but thats another thread in itself
There might be argument that Clark might have been more successful such was chapmans obsession with weight, his cars were often very flimsy, so broke down and he was always pushing the technology to its limit and all fingers he had in different pies he made some mistakes.
Clark stuck with chapman, and of course, it's great imponderable that had clark moved teams, always been in the right car at the right time and of course lived longer, then who knows, etc, etc.
It's why the original premise is also just to simplistic...
Clark stuck with chapman, and of course, it's great imponderable that had clark moved teams, always been in the right car at the right time and of course lived longer, then who knows, etc, etc.
It's why the original premise is also just to simplistic...
nashman said:
The Debate question is:
"Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Absolutely impossible to conclude, however it is essential in any motorsport to have a great package, and confidence if you are going to win - Rossi and Burgess for example."Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Don't take the last 2 Grand Prix results as being an indication of some kind of Midas touch that Ross Brawn possesses, and that you could put anyone in one of "his" cars and see them win.
mat205125 said:
nashman said:
The Debate question is:
"Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Absolutely impossible to conclude, however it is essential in any motorsport to have a great package, and confidence if you are going to win - Rossi and Burgess for example."Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Don't take the last 2 Grand Prix results as being an indication of some kind of Midas touch that Ross Brawn possesses, and that you could put anyone in one of "his" cars and see them win.
Discuss..............
nashman said:
mat205125 said:
nashman said:
The Debate question is:
"Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Absolutely impossible to conclude, however it is essential in any motorsport to have a great package, and confidence if you are going to win - Rossi and Burgess for example."Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Don't take the last 2 Grand Prix results as being an indication of some kind of Midas touch that Ross Brawn possesses, and that you could put anyone in one of "his" cars and see them win.
Discuss..............
If Schumi cannot be considered a great due to cheating, what about Senna?
Everyone always has, and always will cheat as much as possible in motorsport. When Honda were penalised for hidden fuel tanks, I know for a fact Renault (and supposedly most others) had to change the designs of their cars to get rid of their hidden fuel tanks as it was considered a "standard" cheat (from the wife of a Renault F1 employee).
I also heard from a Red Bull F1 employee that everyone (including them obviously) had seen the Ferrari designs when Mclaren were done by the FIA for having them.
Cheating and racing go hand in hand, always will.
Everyone always has, and always will cheat as much as possible in motorsport. When Honda were penalised for hidden fuel tanks, I know for a fact Renault (and supposedly most others) had to change the designs of their cars to get rid of their hidden fuel tanks as it was considered a "standard" cheat (from the wife of a Renault F1 employee).
I also heard from a Red Bull F1 employee that everyone (including them obviously) had seen the Ferrari designs when Mclaren were done by the FIA for having them.
Cheating and racing go hand in hand, always will.
But back on topic; the great drivers have always been able to command the best team around them, and are often the one's who are very good at developing a car, the good engineers don't want to work for (relatively) rubbish drivers so you tend to get both together.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other I reckon
6 of one, half a dozen of the other I reckon
nashman said:
mat205125 said:
nashman said:
The Debate question is:
"Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Absolutely impossible to conclude, however it is essential in any motorsport to have a great package, and confidence if you are going to win - Rossi and Burgess for example."Michael Schumacher was only World Champion because of Ross Brawn"
Discuss.................
Don't take the last 2 Grand Prix results as being an indication of some kind of Midas touch that Ross Brawn possesses, and that you could put anyone in one of "his" cars and see them win.
Discuss..............
Conversely you have Newey at RBR and they aren't exactly fighting for WDCs year in year out are they?
Ross was only a part of the ingredient. Rory Bryne doesn't seem to get enough credit for the continuation of top cars he designed.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff