Benneton a race winning team?
They won 5 races over a five year spell before Schumacher joined and only 2 more over the next two seasons; that is hardly a race winning team.
Ok, so first thing to point out is that I'm not for one minute saying that Schumacher wasn't one of the greatest drivers in history. He absolutely was; probably the second best ever; to Hamilton. Who knows where we would be if Senna had lived for the last 3-4 years of his career; Schumacher would likely have 2 fewer titles I suspect. But I would still suspect Hamilton was the more complete driver.
Benetton were a race winning team. I don't deny they were a race winning team
in the hands of Schumacher. But they were a team that had a car that was capable of winning Grands Prix. The evidence of that is clear; Schumacher was winning races in that car even before Senna died, which I think was 4 races in. Did he help make them a race winning team? Of course. But Hamilton joined a Mercedes team that had won ONE race since then 1950s (and that team had had Schumacher for 2 years).
The traction control issue was utter bollocks; Benetton eventually handed over the source code from their engine management system which proved conclusively nothing was untoward, but the rumours would not go away.
Come on! Everybody at the time knew Benetton were cheating. Just look at the penalties they accrued; forgive me for not believing Briatorie's explanation. They were doing it, they stopped doing it. How often does a two race ban get given out?
And it is totally correct that it took 16 years for Ferrari to win the Constructors title; 13 years prior to Schumacher joining was the last time when Rene Arnoux was driving for them - 1983
Yes, but they had always been a race winning team. He didn't go to some shit newcomers; they were the F1 equivalent of Liverpool and always have been
And Rory Byrne played a far bigger role at Ferrari than Brawn did, but both have mentioned plenty of times the role Schumacher played; he was described as a genius at knowing how to set a car up, the best since Lauda.
I'm not going to deny that for a second. Martin Brundle tells a great story from early in his career, where Schumacher was following his team mate (can't remember if it was Brundle, or if it was just Brundle telling the story), studying his teammates tyres and decided to pit early; and won the race.
He was guilty as charged over the Damon Hill incident and its that what has coloured everyone's judgement against him.
Yes, and he tried to do it again to Villeneuve. I wondered if he would do it again to Hakkinen in 99 to make Eddie Irvine champion under similar circumstances; but no, he didn't really bust a gut to make that happen.
Team orders have been in place for as long as I can remember and Hamilton will have benefitted from them just as much as anyone.
In fact was it not Hamilton who played a part in driving Alonso out of McLaren?
I seem to remember it, was so he is not totally devoid of employing dirty tricks himself.
Dirtiest trick Hamilton has played was in the last race of 16 when Rosberg just needed second; Hamilton slowed to try to push Rosberg into the battle for third place. He was very half hearted about it though, and you could tell he was uncomfortable.
I've explained the Alonso issue elsewhere, but I cannot honestly remember an example of Hamilton benefitting from team orders to win a race. It might well have happened, but I cannot remember it. Schumacher used to get the lead handed to him on the home straight by Barrichello.
It does not matter how many good drivers are around these days, and there does not appear to be many, there are only two or three cars, at the most, which can win a race, and that will not change anytime soon because the big boys will not allow it to.
They decide who gets what engine and gets the best tyres and decide which technology can be used; its a massive carve up.
The game has given in to financial doping; it is dead as a spectator sport; If I am paying the best part of £200 to get in I want to see a race not a fucking procession.
Its always been the same more or less. In 88 McLaren won 15/16 races. In 92 Mansell won I think 9/15 himself. There have always been dominant cars and drivers. People talk about Jim Clark, but he made races boring he was so good!
Last season was fantastic; the title race was worthless, but you had so many absolutely fascinating individual races. We have had four winners from three teams this season as well, and that would be four teams if Ferrari hadn't built a shite car.
The worst seasons are ones where you have a prolonged period of one team dominance where the second driver isn't allowed to/able to really compete; Schumacher 00-04 at Ferrari, Red Bull 10-13. Mercedes have had 6 years of dominance, but their drivers have always been able to race for the title; in 14 it went down to the last race, Rosberg won in the last race of 16, and Ferrari were genuine competitors in 18 and 19
