"Sebastian Vettel a 'massively overrated one-trick pony"
Discussion
spunkytherabbit said:
Fundoreen said:
By coincedence last week I looked at an F1 racing mag from just after they season eddie didn't win the title due
to a feeble effort in the last race.
Journalist (proper paid ones in those days) summed him up as a driver of racing cars not a racing driver.
Always thought he was a tool as he spent more time boasting about his investments and going to discos.
I think Rosberg showed Shumi was not that great and it was more a collective effort of the craftiest people in f1 at the time that helped him to 7 wc.
Sorry, I have to call that out as rubbish.to a feeble effort in the last race.
Journalist (proper paid ones in those days) summed him up as a driver of racing cars not a racing driver.
Always thought he was a tool as he spent more time boasting about his investments and going to discos.
I think Rosberg showed Shumi was not that great and it was more a collective effort of the craftiest people in f1 at the time that helped him to 7 wc.
I loathed the man when he was driving in his main period in F1 - how could a man 'play' so dirty when he clearly didn't need to? Why did Ferrari treat us all like idiots claiming they weren't being underhand when it was there for us all to see?
But Hungary 1998 was proof of his genius and one Nico Rosberg could never come close to emulating. 20 laps to pull a 19 second margin to switch to a 3 stop race and take the win from a lightning fast Mclaren steam rollering the field. Schumacher just said 'Okay' to Ross Brawn and he did it.
Schumacher had been out the sport for considerable time when he joined Mercedes and the cars had gone through at least two major changes and were nothing like the one he last drove. Plus the guy retired because he knew he'd peaked. He was never going to come back and find his old form. To claim Rosberg showed how average he was and his titles were down to nothing but the best cars, the best people and underhand tactics is so blinkered and deliberately ignoring the context above of the circumstances of his time at Mercedes.
I need no excuse to sneer about Schumacher's character and dislike him, but that statement is factually incorrect and like or loathe him, I doubt there are many in here who would dispute that. Surely?
Rosberg kept both Hamilton and Schumacher honest over 7 seasons and there's not many that could do that. Yes you can argue Schumacher's power had waned, but it wasn't by that much as it was more the car's lacking and some will quote Button's record against Hamilton as proof that Hamilton is not all that, but Hamilton had a season to forget in 2011 and is a much much better driver now than he was back then.
I hope history looks favourably on Rosberg as I think he deserves a lot more praise than he seems to get.
cb1965 said:
I am not going to dissect the minutiae your post as it is your opinion and that is fair enough, but you're right overall that Schumacher was a truly great F1 driver. What I do also think though is that Rosberg is a far better driver than most people realise. I genuinely don't think there is another driver on the grid outside of Alonso (who has now sadly retired) that could get a WC off Lewis in that Mercedes. Yes I know Rosberg needed a little bit of luck and massive dedication, but despite that he was a lot more talented than many seem to think.
Rosberg kept both Hamilton and Schumacher honest over 7 seasons and there's not many that could do that. Yes you can argue Schumacher's power had waned, but it wasn't by that much as it was more the car's lacking and some will quote Button's record against Hamilton as proof that Hamilton is not all that, but Hamilton had a season to forget in 2011 and is a much much better driver now than he was back then.
I hope history looks favourably on Rosberg as I think he deserves a lot more praise than he seems to get.
Sorry, my post did sound a lot like I was inferring I thought Rosberg was rubbish. I should have spent more time on it. I agree, Rosberg hit his peak and was NOT rubbish, Rosberg won the championship and you have to be on your game to do so. Same with Button and the view that he was 'just lucky'.Rosberg kept both Hamilton and Schumacher honest over 7 seasons and there's not many that could do that. Yes you can argue Schumacher's power had waned, but it wasn't by that much as it was more the car's lacking and some will quote Button's record against Hamilton as proof that Hamilton is not all that, but Hamilton had a season to forget in 2011 and is a much much better driver now than he was back then.
I hope history looks favourably on Rosberg as I think he deserves a lot more praise than he seems to get.
My point was that saying Schumacher wasn't really that good and Rosberg proved that wasn't correct.
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
I think we can all agree that Michael Schumacher was an average 7 x WDC.
Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
Interesting... so what’s average then? Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
Bo_apex said:
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
I think we can all agree that Michael Schumacher was an average 7 x WDC.
Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
Interesting... so what’s average then? Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
I think Schumacher, with his talent, exploited whatever Ferrari produced at the time to the maximum. Brawn finally delivering great cars, bespoke Bridgestone tyres, able to test all day at Fiorano... more well prepared than drivers get in recent times. As much as I hate the fact that team mates were always wing men, getting told to mover long before maths came in it it’s clear that Michael had more in his locker than the other drivers. I rate Senna more, though he was no angel, because he had to fight his team mate as well... I like the art of the mind game too. Getting there is not all about what happens on the track.
I remember Linford Christie talk about the mind games played out before the start of the race and how he knew he’d already had the beating of his main rival.
Michael never gave presents away, unlike Vettel.
Vettel got it done though... unlike Irvine.
Having the best car is one think, you still have to get the best out of it like Button, Vettel, Lewis and Rosberg. I’m a big Lewis fan but Rosberg deserves his title. He pushed, played his mind games, had some luck... did what he to do. A worthy champion...
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
I think we can all agree that Michael Schumacher was an average 7 x WDC.
Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
Interesting... so what’s average then? Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
I think Schumacher, with his talent, exploited whatever Ferrari produced at the time to the maximum. Brawn finally delivering great cars, bespoke Bridgestone tyres, able to test all day at Fiorano... more well prepared than drivers get in recent times. As much as I hate the fact that team mates were always wing men, getting told to mover long before maths came in it it’s clear that Michael had more in his locker than the other drivers. I rate Senna more, though he was no angel, because he had to fight his team mate as well... I like the art of the mind game too. Getting there is not all about what happens on the track.
I remember Linford Christie talk about the mind games played out before the start of the race and how he knew he’d already had the beating of his main rival.
Michael never gave presents away, unlike Vettel.
Vettel got it done though... unlike Irvine.
Having the best car is one think, you still have to get the best out of it like Button, Vettel, Lewis and Rosberg. I’m a big Lewis fan but Rosberg deserves his title. He pushed, played his mind games, had some luck... did what he to do. A worthy champion...
Mika Hakkinen and McLaren were mighty,
And it would have been 9 x WDC for Schumacher had the FIA and Bernie not suddenly dumped on Bridgestone, as confirmed by Brawn.
Rosberg provided a tough battle which was excellent for the sport, and a well deserved WDC.
2019 could also provide a few fun surprises.
Bo_apex said:
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
HighwayStar said:
Bo_apex said:
I think we can all agree that Michael Schumacher was an average 7 x WDC.
Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
Interesting... so what’s average then? Hamilton and Vettel are currently just below average.
Irvine was quite a bit below average.
I think Schumacher, with his talent, exploited whatever Ferrari produced at the time to the maximum. Brawn finally delivering great cars, bespoke Bridgestone tyres, able to test all day at Fiorano... more well prepared than drivers get in recent times. As much as I hate the fact that team mates were always wing men, getting told to mover long before maths came in it it’s clear that Michael had more in his locker than the other drivers. I rate Senna more, though he was no angel, because he had to fight his team mate as well... I like the art of the mind game too. Getting there is not all about what happens on the track.
I remember Linford Christie talk about the mind games played out before the start of the race and how he knew he’d already had the beating of his main rival.
Michael never gave presents away, unlike Vettel.
Vettel got it done though... unlike Irvine.
Having the best car is one think, you still have to get the best out of it like Button, Vettel, Lewis and Rosberg. I’m a big Lewis fan but Rosberg deserves his title. He pushed, played his mind games, had some luck... did what he to do. A worthy champion...
Mika Hakkinen and McLaren were mighty,
And it would have been 9 x WDC for Schumacher had the FIA and Bernie not suddenly dumped on Bridgestone, as confirmed by Brawn.
Rosberg provided a tough battle which was excellent for the sport, and a well deserved WDC.
2019 could also provide a few fun surprises.
I think that was a big mistake by the FIA...
If a team exploits the rules better than the others then so be it... that’s F1, how it is and how I like it but a general supplier shouldn’t be able to be exploited by one team to be to all intents and purposes the that teams factory supplier.
Agree with the special tyre advantage Ferrari and shumi had. Its the single most important thing and seems to make a mockery of all the millions spent on twiddly bits of aero.
On your day on the right tyres even a average combo can win as nearly occured with damon and his arrows with bridgestone tyres one amazing time.
If the car feels right most of the grid can put in 20-30 quali laps in a row.
As for the original argument its a bit risky for Irvine to question Vettels F1 ability as it just shines a light on how useless his own time in F1 was.
Probably trying to set himself uf for a new punditry career as he probably got turned away for the local disco due to being about 70.
On your day on the right tyres even a average combo can win as nearly occured with damon and his arrows with bridgestone tyres one amazing time.
If the car feels right most of the grid can put in 20-30 quali laps in a row.
As for the original argument its a bit risky for Irvine to question Vettels F1 ability as it just shines a light on how useless his own time in F1 was.
Probably trying to set himself uf for a new punditry career as he probably got turned away for the local disco due to being about 70.
Bo_apex said:
I've always supported the single tyre brand approach. If the FIA can justify two manufacturers it could just as easily justify six. That would get messy !
Sport is a funny old business. Just last night Millwall beat Everton with a handball goal allowed
you could have multiple manufacturers I think - just make it mandatory for them to supply any team that asks at a capped price (teams would be free to have an exclusive partnership if they choose but would be free to chose different manufacturers at different races)Sport is a funny old business. Just last night Millwall beat Everton with a handball goal allowed
ETA.
As for irvines rambling, if Lewis raced on Schumacher terms he'd have at least 7 and quite likely more titles already...
Edited by Teddy Lop on Sunday 27th January 16:27
geeks said:
Teddy Lop said:
HighwayStar said:
Irvine always struck me as someone with no really love of F1... like Villeneurve, saying controversial stuff and liking the sound of his own voice, getting a little attention along the way. Never generally a driver that held my attention when he spoke.
they come across more as having a massive chip to me.Is he after a job at Ferrari in public relations?
Schumacher bashing again... only on a British-biased forum.
To achieve what he did in those '96-99 Ferraris (particularly making a title fight from the '97 car) and to beat a prime Mika Hakkinen in an even battle in 2000 makes him a great, and then there's his accomplishments 2001-2006. Even his final Ferrari race in Brazil 2006 was godly while on the back-foot.
Jenson Button said last month that Michael was the best driver he'd ever raced against.
While "one-trick pony" is ott on Vettel, I agree with a lot of what Eddie Irvine says, especially this:
"I think Lewis is in a different league from all of them," said Irvine, although that praise is tainted by comparison. "He's not in Michael's league and I don't even think he is close, although he's racking up lots of wins. He's got the best car, there are more races and the competition is debateable. I think Vettel is good if he is at the front and doesn't have anybody to race. When you watch Lewis race, he's focused on racing and Lewis is really focused on getting ahead of the other guy.
"Michael was on it every day, like Senna, but Lewis has his off days," he added. "No-one ever did that to Michael, his level of performance was consistently higher. Lewis is an amazingly talented driver. When he first came to Formula 1 he was fantastic to watch and his overtaking was second to none. He's probably a better overtaker than Michael was, but for pace, and consistency over a whole weekend, over a whole year, I don't think anyone touches Michael."
And to anyone who talks down about Eddie Irvine's ability, he couldn't be that bad to score a couple of podiums for Jaguar. And the fact Ron Dennis was eyeing him up to replace David Coulthard at McLaren. To win an F1 race, you have to be a damn good racing driver, period.
To achieve what he did in those '96-99 Ferraris (particularly making a title fight from the '97 car) and to beat a prime Mika Hakkinen in an even battle in 2000 makes him a great, and then there's his accomplishments 2001-2006. Even his final Ferrari race in Brazil 2006 was godly while on the back-foot.
Jenson Button said last month that Michael was the best driver he'd ever raced against.
While "one-trick pony" is ott on Vettel, I agree with a lot of what Eddie Irvine says, especially this:
"I think Lewis is in a different league from all of them," said Irvine, although that praise is tainted by comparison. "He's not in Michael's league and I don't even think he is close, although he's racking up lots of wins. He's got the best car, there are more races and the competition is debateable. I think Vettel is good if he is at the front and doesn't have anybody to race. When you watch Lewis race, he's focused on racing and Lewis is really focused on getting ahead of the other guy.
"Michael was on it every day, like Senna, but Lewis has his off days," he added. "No-one ever did that to Michael, his level of performance was consistently higher. Lewis is an amazingly talented driver. When he first came to Formula 1 he was fantastic to watch and his overtaking was second to none. He's probably a better overtaker than Michael was, but for pace, and consistency over a whole weekend, over a whole year, I don't think anyone touches Michael."
And to anyone who talks down about Eddie Irvine's ability, he couldn't be that bad to score a couple of podiums for Jaguar. And the fact Ron Dennis was eyeing him up to replace David Coulthard at McLaren. To win an F1 race, you have to be a damn good racing driver, period.
Edited by TobyTR on Monday 28th January 21:26
Andy S15 said:
I'm not the biggest or even the smallest fan of Vettel, but you don't just win 4 titles on the bounce by luck. His racecraft hasn't seemed as good as Ham's lately but he has had a number of good drives throughout his career.
How many wins/drives were equal to that amazing first win in the wet back in Monza, 2008?TobyTR said:
Schumacher bashing again... only on a British-biased forum.
To achieve what he did in those '96-99 Ferraris (particularly making a title fight from the '97 car) and to beat a prime Mika Hakkinen in an even battle in 2000 makes him a great, and then there's his accomplishments 2001-2006. Even his final Ferrari race in Brazil 2006 was godly while on the back-foot.
Jenson Button said last month that Michael was the best driver he'd ever raced against.
While "one-trick pony" is ott on Vettel, I agree with a lot of what Eddie Irvine says, especially this:
"I think Lewis is in a different league from all of them," said Irvine, although that praise is tainted by comparison. "He's not in Michael's league and I don't even think he is close, although he's racking up lots of wins. He's got the best car, there are more races and the competition is debateable. I think Vettel is good if he is at the front and doesn't have anybody to race. When you watch Lewis race, he's focused on racing and Lewis is really focused on getting ahead of the other guy.
"Michael was on it every day, like Senna, but Lewis has his off days," he added. "No-one ever did that to Michael, his level of performance was consistently higher. Lewis is an amazingly talented driver. When he first came to Formula 1 he was fantastic to watch and his overtaking was second to none. He's probably a better overtaker than Michael was, but for pace, and consistency over a whole weekend, over a whole year, I don't think anyone touches Michael."
And to anyone who talks down about Eddie Irvine's ability, he couldn't be that bad to score a couple of podiums for Jaguar. And the fact Ron Dennis was eyeing him up to replace David Coulthard at McLaren. To win an F1 race, you have to be a damn good racing driver, period.
As much as a fan and huge respect for Michael's talent and success he never had an equal as teammate so is it surprising he was much more "on it" compared to Lewis battling Nico for a number of years, though Michael would still be more on it than Lewis as Michael was much more humble and less distractions.To achieve what he did in those '96-99 Ferraris (particularly making a title fight from the '97 car) and to beat a prime Mika Hakkinen in an even battle in 2000 makes him a great, and then there's his accomplishments 2001-2006. Even his final Ferrari race in Brazil 2006 was godly while on the back-foot.
Jenson Button said last month that Michael was the best driver he'd ever raced against.
While "one-trick pony" is ott on Vettel, I agree with a lot of what Eddie Irvine says, especially this:
"I think Lewis is in a different league from all of them," said Irvine, although that praise is tainted by comparison. "He's not in Michael's league and I don't even think he is close, although he's racking up lots of wins. He's got the best car, there are more races and the competition is debateable. I think Vettel is good if he is at the front and doesn't have anybody to race. When you watch Lewis race, he's focused on racing and Lewis is really focused on getting ahead of the other guy.
"Michael was on it every day, like Senna, but Lewis has his off days," he added. "No-one ever did that to Michael, his level of performance was consistently higher. Lewis is an amazingly talented driver. When he first came to Formula 1 he was fantastic to watch and his overtaking was second to none. He's probably a better overtaker than Michael was, but for pace, and consistency over a whole weekend, over a whole year, I don't think anyone touches Michael."
And to anyone who talks down about Eddie Irvine's ability, he couldn't be that bad to score a couple of podiums for Jaguar. And the fact Ron Dennis was eyeing him up to replace David Coulthard at McLaren. To win an F1 race, you have to be a damn good racing driver, period.
Edited by TobyTR on Monday 28th January 21:26
spunkytherabbit said:
cb1965 said:
I am not going to dissect the minutiae your post as it is your opinion and that is fair enough, but you're right overall that Schumacher was a truly great F1 driver. What I do also think though is that Rosberg is a far better driver than most people realise. I genuinely don't think there is another driver on the grid outside of Alonso (who has now sadly retired) that could get a WC off Lewis in that Mercedes. Yes I know Rosberg needed a little bit of luck and massive dedication, but despite that he was a lot more talented than many seem to think.
Rosberg kept both Hamilton and Schumacher honest over 7 seasons and there's not many that could do that. Yes you can argue Schumacher's power had waned, but it wasn't by that much as it was more the car's lacking and some will quote Button's record against Hamilton as proof that Hamilton is not all that, but Hamilton had a season to forget in 2011 and is a much much better driver now than he was back then.
I hope history looks favourably on Rosberg as I think he deserves a lot more praise than he seems to get.
Sorry, my post did sound a lot like I was inferring I thought Rosberg was rubbish. I should have spent more time on it. I agree, Rosberg hit his peak and was NOT rubbish, Rosberg won the championship and you have to be on your game to do so. Same with Button and the view that he was 'just lucky'.Rosberg kept both Hamilton and Schumacher honest over 7 seasons and there's not many that could do that. Yes you can argue Schumacher's power had waned, but it wasn't by that much as it was more the car's lacking and some will quote Button's record against Hamilton as proof that Hamilton is not all that, but Hamilton had a season to forget in 2011 and is a much much better driver now than he was back then.
I hope history looks favourably on Rosberg as I think he deserves a lot more praise than he seems to get.
My point was that saying Schumacher wasn't really that good and Rosberg proved that wasn't correct.
TobyTR said:
Schumacher bashing again... only on a British-biased forum.
I'm not sure it is only on British based forums. In fact, I'm sure it is not.Edited by TobyTR on Monday 28th January 21:26
On the subject of Bridgestone, they were worth a considerable reduction in lap times. The inters were a case in point; kept from other teams and then only used when they showed at their best. The GP was over as soon as they were put on MS' car. Really quite an unsporting move by Ferrari and B'stone.
Irvine didn't try in his Ferrari days. He wandered around, doing just enough. He was embarrassing. If he had put as much effort into his driving as he does to bad-mouthing every other driver, except Schumacher of course, then he'd have knocked half a second of his lap times. That said, it didn't do to get near Schumacher's times.
entropy said:
As much as a fan and huge respect for Michael's talent and success he never had an equal as teammate so is it surprising he was much more "on it" compared to Lewis battling Nico for a number of years, though Michael would still be more on it than Lewis as Michael was much more humble and less distractions.
Mika Hakinnen was the only other driver to have similar speed to Michael, but his loyalty to Ron and his magnificent McLaren prevented him from being Schumacher's teammate. Probably to Mika's advantage as the Ferrari was dog rough for a while. It would have been great to watch them a teammates though !Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff