"Sebastian Vettel a 'massively overrated one-trick pony"
Discussion
sparta6 said:
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 !It would have been more likely to find Michael at McLaren. Ron has since said that he was trying to sign him before he opted to go to Ferrari. I assume that would have paired him with Hakkinen, since he was already established in the team then, and McLaren have never been shy of pairing two top drivers together.
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !Seriously!!! Top line drivers? How many WDCs do they have between them... oh wait....
I thought we were talking drivers on the level of Hakinnen and Schumacher duking it out for the title.
We've seen plenty of team mates scrapping lower down the grid. Max and DRic, Ocon and Perez.
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !Seriously!!! Top line drivers? How many WDCs do they have between them... oh wait....
I thought we were talking drivers on the level of Hakinnen and Schumacher duking it out for the title.
We've seen plenty of team mates scrapping lower down the grid. Max and DRic, Ocon and Perez.
Both Alesi and Berger were fast, albeit with different approaches.
The Ferrari was a bit of an unreliable dog and they only managed a diminutive amount of race wins.
A worthwhile read
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article...
Derek Smith said:
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.
I think that's a spot on assessment of Irvine. Ron Dennis had the measure of him when Irvine approached him to go to Mclaren to try and replace Coulthard. Ron told him he was no better than Coulthard and it wasn't worth his trouble to do so and Irvine then went for broke rubbishing and bad mouthing Coulthard every chance he had. Indeed, embarrassing himself in the process. The net result, if I remember correctly, being increasing mistakes and poor performances as his concentration on his real job waned and he spent all his time talking to the press pushing his vendetta.As such, I think Irvine's comments about Seb deserve all they get. The casual attention of F1 fans waiting for nothing more than the season to start.
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !Seriously!!! Top line drivers? How many WDCs do they have between them... oh wait....
I thought we were talking drivers on the level of Hakinnen and Schumacher duking it out for the title.
We've seen plenty of team mates scrapping lower down the grid. Max and DRic, Ocon and Perez.
Both Alesi and Berger were fast, albeit with different approaches.
The Ferrari was a bit of an unreliable dog and they only managed a diminutive amount of race wins.
A worthwhile read
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article...
Neither Alesi or Berger were getting near a title in a Ferrari at that time.
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !Seriously!!! Top line drivers? How many WDCs do they have between them... oh wait....
I thought we were talking drivers on the level of Hakinnen and Schumacher duking it out for the title.
We've seen plenty of team mates scrapping lower down the grid. Max and DRic, Ocon and Perez.
Both Alesi and Berger were fast, albeit with different approaches.
The Ferrari was a bit of an unreliable dog and they only managed a diminutive amount of race wins.
A worthwhile read
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article...
Neither Alesi or Berger were getting near a title in a Ferrari at that time.
That does not automatically mean Ferrari put all their eggs in one basket - and without seeing the contract it's pure speculation.
Even Ross Brawn stated they wanted Irvine to win the WDC when Schumacher was out with a broken leg.
Ferrari has always been gunning for wins and the coveted WDC, with all of its drivers. If that car had been upto the job Alesi or Berger would have bagged a WDC.
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
HighwayStar said:
sparta6 said:
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 !Seriously!!! Top line drivers? How many WDCs do they have between them... oh wait....
I thought we were talking drivers on the level of Hakinnen and Schumacher duking it out for the title.
We've seen plenty of team mates scrapping lower down the grid. Max and DRic, Ocon and Perez.
Both Alesi and Berger were fast, albeit with different approaches.
The Ferrari was a bit of an unreliable dog and they only managed a diminutive amount of race wins.
A worthwhile read
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article...
Neither Alesi or Berger were getting near a title in a Ferrari at that time.
That does not automatically mean Ferrari put all their eggs in one basket - and without seeing the contract it's pure speculation.
Even Ross Brawn stated they wanted Irvine to win the WDC when Schumacher was out with a broken leg.
Ferrari has always been gunning for wins and the coveted WDC, with all of its drivers. If that car had been upto the job Alesi or Berger would have bagged a WDC.
Austria 02, 6 races in to a 17 race season. Rubens got the call to step aside. He didn't. Then he got the think about your contract. He moved over.
1B = all their eggs in one basket.
With Michael out of commission and Eddie in with a shot at the WDC, why wouldn't Ross want Irvine to win it?
Just to veer back on topic for a second, I think Vettel is bloody quick despite being flattered by his favoured status in RB and Ferrari.
Unusually Ferrari may not be 100% behind him this year and we’ll see his true performance against a rated rookie.
My guess is that Vettel won’t be troubled too much.
Unusually Ferrari may not be 100% behind him this year and we’ll see his true performance against a rated rookie.
My guess is that Vettel won’t be troubled too much.
swisstoni said:
My guess is that Vettel won’t be troubled too much.
I just can't agree with this! Sorry! Leclerc is the real deal make no mistake about this. Vettel has form for being usurped by a faster or more capable team mate. He has a talent for qualy and finding an extra something on one lap pace but Leclerc can do that and also manage a race and be quick all at the same time, just look at his GP2 runs to see what I am getting at here. I really think the "rookie" will make Vettel look a bit s
t.Thats not to say Vettel is s
t, far from it, you don't win 4 on the bounce without talent even in the faster car, I have really warmed to him since he joined Ferrari and what I am actually hoping is that Leclerc raises Vettels game, Kimi is great I enjoy his personality but he has hardly challenged Vettel to do better which I was gutted about if not, not surprise IYSWIMHighwayStar said:
There was a press conference, Barrichello had re-signed to Ferrari. He was asked if he was a number 2 or equal status to Schumi... He claimed they had equal status. When questioned further he again stressed they were equal, Michael was 1 and he was 1B.
Every teammate of Schumacher I've ever heard has conceded MS was faster in equal cars. As a team you want both cars to finish - or you risk accidents trying to hold up a charging Michael Schumacher.
This is where I applaud Red Bull, allowing their drivers to really duke it out.
Brave but good for the sport.
swisstoni said:
geeks said:
swisstoni said:
My guess is that Vettel won’t be troubled too much.
I just can't agree with this! Sorry! spunkytherabbit said:
Derek Smith said:
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.
I think that's a spot on assessment of Irvine. Ron Dennis had the measure of him when Irvine approached him to go to Mclaren to try and replace Coulthard. Ron told him he was no better than Coulthard and it wasn't worth his trouble to do so and Irvine then went for broke rubbishing and bad mouthing Coulthard every chance he had. Indeed, embarrassing himself in the process. The net result, if I remember correctly, being increasing mistakes and poor performances as his concentration on his real job waned and he spent all his time talking to the press pushing his vendetta.As such, I think Irvine's comments about Seb deserve all they get. The casual attention of F1 fans waiting for nothing more than the season to start.
Hakkinen was for sure a great driver, and to finish within two points of him is decent - Coulthard never came that close to a WDC and McLaren had the faster cars in '97, '98 and '99.
Irvine isn't in the same league as Hakkinen or M.Schumacher, but he was a quality F1 driver and scored a couple of podiums for Jaguar - respect.
I can't help but like him - he's a multiple F1 race winner, drove some awesome V10 F1 cars to their limits in one of the greatest eras of the sport, made a tonne of money and as a result carries his wallet in a private jet and has a mighty car collection. Fair play to him.
I enjoyed this insight from Irvine in that article:
"I remember at the Japanese Grand Prix, Michael was fastest and I was second fastest, in my first grand prix into the pit lane. Senna was only fourth of fifth. Michael practiced the pit entry and Senna didn't, so there's things that he missed.
"Technically, he (Michael) wasn't that great but his actual talent with his feet, arms, feel and anticipation were second to none. There were corners I couldn't do what he was doing. Then he would just copy me in the corners I was quicker than him. I remember Silverstone I was much faster at the last corner and he couldn't figure out what I was doing. He'd always go through the telemetry and figured it out, then he'd just copy me. So that was the problem for me, he just had an amazing talent which you couldn't copy."
There are 20 episodes of "a drink with Eddie Irvine" on YouTube; in one episode he talks on how he altered his driving style to achieve 3rd place for Jaguar at Monza, among other fascinating anecdotes.
I'll try to cover my views on the different points raised....
Vettel -
I do not believe is massively over rated. I don't think you can fluke or get lucky on 4 world titles. The last 3 years have been massively disappointing though, I would say as a Ferrari fan. he is fast, works well with the team, but is not delivering the consistency.
Berger / Alesi -
Both were good, solid drivers. I think Ferrari hoped Berger was the all round reliable one and Alesi was going to be the superstar. Ultimately I don't think either were your world title material. Plus they never really got the car from Ferrari to go for it. My love of F1 started in 93 and followed Ferrari from that time.
Schumacher -
The best. Too easy to dismiss the success over the infamous incidents. He was all round fast, consistent, clever, brutal, driven and changed the game with work ethic and preparation.
Probably best to discuss how I see drivers on the grid now before going onto Irvine. They are all top of their game, but like any sport there are those who sit at the top and those who sit at the bottom. We aren't talking about a huge degree of skill difference, but there are those who operate at the top, those in the middle who sometimes reach the top and then those who make up the bottom level. Split into Cat A, B and C.
Irvine -
For example, i'd say he was a Cat B. And I reckon he'd agree with that also. He openly said he couldn't fight Michael and never pretended he was there to win the title from him. He performed the solid team mate role and he nearly got his WDC reward when Michael broke his leg. Unlike Massa or Barrichello, each Cat B also, they would come out every year and say this was their year to beat Michael and then as the year wore on the excuses came out. They had their good days, but they could not fight all the time with Cat A.
Webber, Coulthard, Raikkonen, Bottas, Ricciardo all Cat B.
Vettel -
I do not believe is massively over rated. I don't think you can fluke or get lucky on 4 world titles. The last 3 years have been massively disappointing though, I would say as a Ferrari fan. he is fast, works well with the team, but is not delivering the consistency.
Berger / Alesi -
Both were good, solid drivers. I think Ferrari hoped Berger was the all round reliable one and Alesi was going to be the superstar. Ultimately I don't think either were your world title material. Plus they never really got the car from Ferrari to go for it. My love of F1 started in 93 and followed Ferrari from that time.
Schumacher -
The best. Too easy to dismiss the success over the infamous incidents. He was all round fast, consistent, clever, brutal, driven and changed the game with work ethic and preparation.
Probably best to discuss how I see drivers on the grid now before going onto Irvine. They are all top of their game, but like any sport there are those who sit at the top and those who sit at the bottom. We aren't talking about a huge degree of skill difference, but there are those who operate at the top, those in the middle who sometimes reach the top and then those who make up the bottom level. Split into Cat A, B and C.
Irvine -
For example, i'd say he was a Cat B. And I reckon he'd agree with that also. He openly said he couldn't fight Michael and never pretended he was there to win the title from him. He performed the solid team mate role and he nearly got his WDC reward when Michael broke his leg. Unlike Massa or Barrichello, each Cat B also, they would come out every year and say this was their year to beat Michael and then as the year wore on the excuses came out. They had their good days, but they could not fight all the time with Cat A.
Webber, Coulthard, Raikkonen, Bottas, Ricciardo all Cat B.
DS240 said:
I'll try to cover my views on the different points raised....
Vettel -
I do not believe is massively over rated. I don't think you can fluke or get lucky on 4 world titles. The last 3 years have been massively disappointing though, I would say as a Ferrari fan. he is fast, works well with the team, but is not delivering the consistency.
Berger / Alesi -
Both were good, solid drivers. I think Ferrari hoped Berger was the all round reliable one and Alesi was going to be the superstar. Ultimately I don't think either were your world title material. Plus they never really got the car from Ferrari to go for it. My love of F1 started in 93 and followed Ferrari from that time.
Schumacher -
The best. Too easy to dismiss the success over the infamous incidents. He was all round fast, consistent, clever, brutal, driven and changed the game with work ethic and preparation.
Probably best to discuss how I see drivers on the grid now before going onto Irvine. They are all top of their game, but like any sport there are those who sit at the top and those who sit at the bottom. We aren't talking about a huge degree of skill difference, but there are those who operate at the top, those in the middle who sometimes reach the top and then those who make up the bottom level. Split into Cat A, B and C.
Irvine -
For example, i'd say he was a Cat B. And I reckon he'd agree with that also. He openly said he couldn't fight Michael and never pretended he was there to win the title from him. He performed the solid team mate role and he nearly got his WDC reward when Michael broke his leg. Unlike Massa or Barrichello, each Cat B also, they would come out every year and say this was their year to beat Michael and then as the year wore on the excuses came out. They had their good days, but they could not fight all the time with Cat A.
Webber, Coulthard, Raikkonen, Bottas, Ricciardo all Cat B.
I agree with your overview.Vettel -
I do not believe is massively over rated. I don't think you can fluke or get lucky on 4 world titles. The last 3 years have been massively disappointing though, I would say as a Ferrari fan. he is fast, works well with the team, but is not delivering the consistency.
Berger / Alesi -
Both were good, solid drivers. I think Ferrari hoped Berger was the all round reliable one and Alesi was going to be the superstar. Ultimately I don't think either were your world title material. Plus they never really got the car from Ferrari to go for it. My love of F1 started in 93 and followed Ferrari from that time.
Schumacher -
The best. Too easy to dismiss the success over the infamous incidents. He was all round fast, consistent, clever, brutal, driven and changed the game with work ethic and preparation.
Probably best to discuss how I see drivers on the grid now before going onto Irvine. They are all top of their game, but like any sport there are those who sit at the top and those who sit at the bottom. We aren't talking about a huge degree of skill difference, but there are those who operate at the top, those in the middle who sometimes reach the top and then those who make up the bottom level. Split into Cat A, B and C.
Irvine -
For example, i'd say he was a Cat B. And I reckon he'd agree with that also. He openly said he couldn't fight Michael and never pretended he was there to win the title from him. He performed the solid team mate role and he nearly got his WDC reward when Michael broke his leg. Unlike Massa or Barrichello, each Cat B also, they would come out every year and say this was their year to beat Michael and then as the year wore on the excuses came out. They had their good days, but they could not fight all the time with Cat A.
Webber, Coulthard, Raikkonen, Bottas, Ricciardo all Cat B.
On Alesi - he certainly had Cat A skills, his moves on Senna at Phoenix were evidence alone.
It's a pity the Ferrari could not deliver.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff