Lewis Hamilton G.O.A.T. ?

[MarkwG]

ELUSIVEJIM said:

paulguitar said:

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It was a severe misjudgment on Hill's part. He only had his front wheel in that gap hence why he retired.

I am sure if it was the other way around it would still be Schumacher fault

Incorrect - Hills car was alongside when Schumacher hit him - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91JoW4mSiZo . Even without the telemetry available today, it's pretty obvious from the onboard.

[vdn]

Someone stating MS wasn't a dirty driver... checks username... "that explains it!"

[HighwayStar]

ELUSIVEJIM said:

paulguitar said:

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It was a severe misjudgment on Hill's part. He only had his front wheel in that gap hence why he retired.

I am sure if it was the other way around it would still be Schumacher fault

Hmmm... so while you’re on it, what are your thoughts re his 2nd attempt, Jerez ‘97, on Villeneuve?

[nickfrog]

vdn said:

Someone stating MS wasn't a dirty driver... checks username... "that explains it!"

[Siao]

paulguitar said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

And for the record, it was Hill going for an overtake that was never going to work in Australia. A bit like his career when it came to trying to overtake Schumacher.

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It is a bit unfair to remember one of the greatest careers in F1 by the handful of negatives. Also, remember that in the previous 5 years two of the WDC's were decided exactly like that. The FIA didn't nip it in the bud when they had the chance, I put equal blame on them for allowing this.

I still would think that common sense should have prevailed, but in red mist drivers did these things. Vettel did 3 years ago. We need to forget also the notion of the gentlemen drivers from the 50's, with the cars getting safer there were a lot more risks and dirty games from drivers. I remember Irvine mentioning how he pushed someone to the grass because they annoyed him. Or Alboretto in the example I used before, he pushed Senna on the barriers in Monaco. It happened, they finally grew balls in 1997 and put a stop to it. We can now move on.

[MarkwG]

Siao said:

paulguitar said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

And for the record, it was Hill going for an overtake that was never going to work in Australia. A bit like his career when it came to trying to overtake Schumacher.

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It is a bit unfair to remember one of the greatest careers in F1 by the handful of negatives. Also, remember that in the previous 5 years two of the WDC's were decided exactly like that. The FIA didn't nip it in the bud when they had the chance, I put equal blame on them for allowing this.

I still would think that common sense should have prevailed, but in red mist drivers did these things. Vettel did 3 years ago. We need to forget also the notion of the gentlemen drivers from the 50's, with the cars getting safer there were a lot more risks and dirty games from drivers. I remember Irvine mentioning how he pushed someone to the grass because they annoyed him. Or Alboretto in the example I used before, he pushed Senna on the barriers in Monaco. It happened, they finally grew balls in 1997 and put a stop to it. We can now move on.

The difficulty with that, is that it wasn't a "handful" - & this is a thread about whether one driver deserves the title of Greatest Of All Time. The poor behaviour was relentless, affected many races &, to my mind, caused far more damage to F1 than the Hamilton/Mercedes dominance has. Many long term fans were switched off by the cheating & foul play, & many newcomers walked away when it seemed to have more in common with WWF than sport. I agree the authorities should have stopped it from the off, but they failed to distinguish between engineers & designers pushing the limits, & drivers behaving like thugs - things only improved when Schumacher, the last of that era, finally retired.

[CoolHands]

Schumi was a better driver and champion than hill anyway so I don’t mind that’s how it was concluded.

[paulguitar]

CoolHands said:

Schumi was a better driver and champion than hill anyway so I don’t mind that’s how it was concluded.

He was a better driver, but he was a cheat. And that's not acceptable.

[Halmyre]

CoolHands said:

Schumi was a better driver and champion than hill anyway so I don’t mind that’s how it was concluded.

Better driver, probably, but not necessarily a better champion, given his behaviour on the track.

[MarkwG]

paulguitar said:

CoolHands said:

Schumi was a better driver and champion than hill anyway so I don’t mind that’s how it was concluded.

He was a better driver, but he was a cheat. And that's not acceptable.

I'd also say I'm not sure he was a better champion either: the word "champion" encompasses being a role model others to look up to, & that means behaving in a certain manner, & espousing certain attitudes & behaviours. Obviously Schumachers accident denied him some of that opportunity, but I don't recall him putting much back into the sport, or the wider community, post retirement. However, it's clear that Hill takes that role very seriously & is well respected for it & good at it. Being a champion is more than just winning the title.

[CoolHands]

I just mean hill is boring. Who wants a boring champ? Schumi may have been a cheat at times, but the fact is he was interesting to watch all those years, including the controversies, therefore that is why I say ‘better’. Not necessarily a better man

[glazbagun]

CoolHands said:

I just mean hill is boring. Who wants a boring champ? Schumi may have been a cheat at times, but the fact is he was interesting to watch all those years, including the controversies, therefore that is why I say ‘better’. Not necessarily a better man

Schumacher exciting to watch all those years? I switched off F1 after Barrichello in Austria, but the Schumacher Era processions up until then make the Lewis ones look like knife fights. Plus the TV in those days paid little attention to the midfield unless they were bad at being lapped, so there wasn't even the best-of-the-rest intrigue of today.

Hill was plenty exciting nearly winning in an Arrows, winning in a Jordan and beating Schumi in a monsoon in Japan.

[CoolHands]

Yes I may be romanticising it

[paulguitar]

CoolHands said:

Yes I may be romanticising it

He was an outrageous talent, but it was dull for years on end!

[Siao]

MarkwG said:

Siao said:

paulguitar said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

And for the record, it was Hill going for an overtake that was never going to work in Australia. A bit like his career when it came to trying to overtake Schumacher.

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It is a bit unfair to remember one of the greatest careers in F1 by the handful of negatives. Also, remember that in the previous 5 years two of the WDC's were decided exactly like that. The FIA didn't nip it in the bud when they had the chance, I put equal blame on them for allowing this.

I still would think that common sense should have prevailed, but in red mist drivers did these things. Vettel did 3 years ago. We need to forget also the notion of the gentlemen drivers from the 50's, with the cars getting safer there were a lot more risks and dirty games from drivers. I remember Irvine mentioning how he pushed someone to the grass because they annoyed him. Or Alboretto in the example I used before, he pushed Senna on the barriers in Monaco. It happened, they finally grew balls in 1997 and put a stop to it. We can now move on.

The difficulty with that, is that it wasn't a "handful" - & this is a thread about whether one driver deserves the title of Greatest Of All Time. The poor behaviour was relentless, affected many races &, to my mind, caused far more damage to F1 than the Hamilton/Mercedes dominance has. Many long term fans were switched off by the cheating & foul play, & many newcomers walked away when it seemed to have more in common with WWF than sport. I agree the authorities should have stopped it from the off, but they failed to distinguish between engineers & designers pushing the limits, & drivers behaving like thugs - things only improved when Schumacher, the last of that era, finally retired.

It wasn't a handful? We have the two incidents with Hill and JV (even Hill's is debated by some, but anyway) and the Rascasse corner. What poor behaviour made people switch their TV's off and caused damage to F1? Are you sure you're not being a bit over dramatic here? Care to share some examples or anything to back this up?

[Siao]

glazbagun said:

CoolHands said:

I just mean hill is boring. Who wants a boring champ? Schumi may have been a cheat at times, but the fact is he was interesting to watch all those years, including the controversies, therefore that is why I say ‘better’. Not necessarily a better man

Schumacher exciting to watch all those years? I switched off F1 after Barrichello in Austria, but the Schumacher Era processions up until then make the Lewis ones look like knife fights. Plus the TV in those days paid little attention to the midfield unless they were bad at being lapped, so there wasn't even the best-of-the-rest intrigue of today.

Hill was plenty exciting nearly winning in an Arrows, winning in a Jordan and beating Schumi in a monsoon in Japan.

That era was different, but it had it's own excitement and there were few but rewarding overtakes, much like football. Do you prefer gimmicks and push-to-pass buttons? Plus, every era that one driver/team wins all the time gets boring. Same as the RB Vettel era, the Merc era or the Ferrari one. If you decide that the team that does the best job and gets rewarded for it is boring and want to see different race winners on each race, then F1 is probably the wrong sport.

[paulguitar]

Siao said:

Care to share some examples or anything to back this up?

Almost running Rubens into the wall at 180 MPH was insane and could have resulted in a car in the pitlane at that speed.

There were other incidents too.

[MarkwG]

Siao said:

MarkwG said:

Siao said:

paulguitar said:

ELUSIVEJIM said:

And for the record, it was Hill going for an overtake that was never going to work in Australia. A bit like his career when it came to trying to overtake Schumacher.

There's barely a driver on the planet who wouldn't have gone for that overtake.

Thankfully, there are relatively few that would have cynically and deliberately sideswiped the other car as Schumacher did. Then again, it was not a surprise, he was always a dirty driver.

I don't think there's any doubt Schuey was in a different league to Hill as a driver, but he was so good there was no need for the repeated lack of sportsmanship.

It is a bit unfair to remember one of the greatest careers in F1 by the handful of negatives. Also, remember that in the previous 5 years two of the WDC's were decided exactly like that. The FIA didn't nip it in the bud when they had the chance, I put equal blame on them for allowing this.

I still would think that common sense should have prevailed, but in red mist drivers did these things. Vettel did 3 years ago. We need to forget also the notion of the gentlemen drivers from the 50's, with the cars getting safer there were a lot more risks and dirty games from drivers. I remember Irvine mentioning how he pushed someone to the grass because they annoyed him. Or Alboretto in the example I used before, he pushed Senna on the barriers in Monaco. It happened, they finally grew balls in 1997 and put a stop to it. We can now move on.

The difficulty with that, is that it wasn't a "handful" - & this is a thread about whether one driver deserves the title of Greatest Of All Time. The poor behaviour was relentless, affected many races &, to my mind, caused far more damage to F1 than the Hamilton/Mercedes dominance has. Many long term fans were switched off by the cheating & foul play, & many newcomers walked away when it seemed to have more in common with WWF than sport. I agree the authorities should have stopped it from the off, but they failed to distinguish between engineers & designers pushing the limits, & drivers behaving like thugs - things only improved when Schumacher, the last of that era, finally retired.

It wasn't a handful? We have the two incidents with Hill and JV (even Hill's is debated by some, but anyway) and the Rascasse corner. What poor behaviour made people switch their TV's off and caused damage to F1? Are you sure you're not being a bit over dramatic here? Care to share some examples or anything to back this up?

Not really: those incidents don't get tucked away & ignored, particularly when were just the ones significant to the championship at the time. It's a pattern of behaviour that poisons the show, which is why they're still debated & discussed, decades further on. His time with Benneton was mired in controversy, of which he was part, prior to F1 he had already developed a reputation It was quite obvious that Shcumacher was playing with a loaded deck, most of the time - at Benneton because they were regularly caught cheating, & Ferrari because the FIA were turning a blind eye. As for examples: Derek Warwick, 1991 430k of Nürburgring; pushing Frentzen off the track in the '98 Canadian; pushing Barrichello at the pit wall in the 2010 Hungarian.

[nickfrog]

paulguitar said:

Almost running Rubens into the wall at 180 MPH was insane and could have resulted in a car in the pitlane at that speed.

That was ugly, even by his standards.

[Siao]

nickfrog said:

paulguitar said:

Almost running Rubens into the wall at 180 MPH was insane and could have resulted in a car in the pitlane at that speed.

That was ugly, even by his standards.

Ah, the Rubens squeeze, yeah, that was not nice, very hard racing for which he apologized to Rubens. Did you call out Webber when he did it to Massa or Senna when he did it to Prost?