I usually take The Sun's Murdoch-tainted editorial with more than a pinch of sea-salt (especially when on a beach); but surely there's substance in this safe-tanning, wrinkly old bet? Anyone with the slightest interest in motor-sport cannot have escaped awareness of a come-back written for a 'Boy's Own' annual - except that the ending went wrong: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/motorsport/4095472/Michael-Schumacher-to-retire-again-at-end-of-2012-season.html Laced on tight with the finest support, just how long can one put up with a Schu's holed soul; a hole so big we can all feel the flaw?â¦
I really hope Mr Hunt didn't spend more than 2 minutes on that article. I assume it was a quiet day in the office and he was looking for ways to try and show his bosses he was doing something I can see him staying till the end of 2013, unless 2012 is a good season for him... then I can see him leaving on a relative high (beating a team mate / podiums)
Do you believe everything you read in the Sun? I think you posted this to try to get a bite from EMSC but think Cosi if MSC retires - who will you have to rant about?
He wasn't that far off Rosberg last year and with a bit of luck might have beaten him. He is improving, there is no doubt of that and this year he may be even better. Anyway it's Mercedes' that decide his future, so if they think he is doing fine, then there is no reason to doubt them.
Well, even a Sun reporter like Hunt had to get it right sometime, most thinking people have been saying the same thing since Schumacher made his comeback.
Although on balance it appears to have been an unmitigated disaster from all perspectives, it's still worth remembering where the team was during the Honda years and how they've managed to maintain fourth place in the pecking order. Much of that is due to budget and being a works team but, and I say this as a confirmed Schumiphobe, I think the Brawn/Schumacher relationship has probably had a positive effect on the team and the development of the car, even if Schumacher himself has had a very negative effect on F1 and sport in general. From his personal perspective there's probably nothing positive to take away from this - he's added nothing of note to his substantial statistical achievements. It's hard to see what Mercedes as a car manufacturer has got out of it - certainly not the kudos Ferrari received when he raced for them. The only positive I can imagine is that Brawn extracted every ounce of Schumacher's expertise and backroom professionalism to keep the car where it is (which is no mean feat itself when the cars ahead are Red Bulls, Ferraris and McLarens) and hopefully encourage better teamwork and innovation in the factory. Perhaps the benefits of Schumacher's Mercedes years won't be realised until the blighter's gone.
I don't know if the ending for the boys own annual went wrong, surley the bad guy gets what's coming to him in the end, I can't think of anything better than being comprehensively beaten by a mediocre driver whilst enjoying preferential treatment from his team, as for his records, the 7 may stand, but I wouldn't be too sure Vettel won;t be able to beat that record as well.
Oh dear. As long as he is as fit as a 20 year old and can defend and attack like nobodies business, use his expertise wisely in a new team, do 10x better than his first season after his retirement, finish around 10 points behind his teammate after 3 more retirements in races and still fight for wins which he did in Canada...there is nothing more to say, and there is no substance to your arguments. Pathetic. The most experienced and oldest driver on the grid, he is going in for another fight.. a massive applaud to him.
He said "I think" right at the start of the sentence. I would also agree though that Schumacher has had a negative effect on F1.
He has given most of his career in F1, helped improved safety years after Senna's death in Imola, made Ferrari what is is today. Are you being silly on purpose?
His efforts to drive Barrichello, Kubica, Massa and Hamilton off the road with zero regard for sportsmanship, safety or what could realistically be achieved have confirmed the opinion I had in the 2010 pre-season, which was that he's past it and was brought back to satisfy commercial rather than sporting interests. I see him as a hazard on the race track rather than a competitor and I think F1 would be better off if a genuine talent was in his seat. I'd rate twenty or more of the 2011 field higher than him. In terms of what he's achieved on a sporting level, both for F1 and sportsmanship as a concept, what leads you to consider his Mercedes career to be positive?
Well he made F1 a bit boring for a few seasons. I don't personally hold this against him as its not his fault he was performing far better than anyone else. Him, his car, whatever it was made F1 very predictable but being that good is every driver and teams aim so its a argument that can be interpreted in many ways depending basically on who you supported during those years.
Schumacher only won iun superior machinery and had it written into his contract that his team-mate wasn't allowed to beat him, and when he realised he wasn't going to win he'd do his best to cheat, not caring what would happen as a result, he dragged F1 through the mud far more than the far more talented Senna.
Maybe the fact that he has been able to work with a team once again to improve the car slowly and intensively, bonding with the team and Nico to gain the best relationships as he has done in the past. He knows how to work a team, unlike 3/4 drivers you have mentioned above, who have proven do gain nothing in the 2011 season. If he was to satisfy commercial interests, why did he not bail out in 2010 after all the rumors were floating about "as they do here" to say that he is going to? A hazard on the race track? in what way Spa?-Canada?.. if it is the way I am thinking then Hamilton should be called a massive hazard on the F1 circuits based on the 2011 season due to his many, many collisions with other drivers. Most of Michael's collisions were accidents caused by himself or by the other driver (6 of one half a dozen of the other). I think he has genuine talent, he always did... and still has, because of his many controversial moments in his career, is it OK to base his whole career on this? -- No. None of you have pointed out the stuff that made him a 7 time world beater. None of you. And that is ridiculous. [video=youtube;xwWFL_Y8Jis]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwWFL_Y8Jis[/video] I agree with Bright, half your foundations are based on the fact that he raced and beat the drivers you supported in the past, and it doesn't sit that he is still here, he is as fit as a ferret. You listen to the BBC commentators who are known to be biased against Michael, listen to them in the video. And Miggins, comparing him and Senna shows your arguments are invalid, because they mostly drove in different eras, which was fate. I know you love Senna so much Miggins. "Everybody forms his own opinion on anyone, I just want to be treated fair.. who likes me or loves me I am happy.. who doesn't I understand" His driving has spoken for itself on the track.. incomprehensible one-sided gutter-prone mumbling on forums behind a laptop screen does not stand up to that. Threads like these make me want to leave a forum for good.
I wonder if you're actually a relative of Arsene Wenger, as you never seem to see anything he does, how many people has he had off the track in his come-back, probably more than Hamilton, I remember 3 seperate incidents in one dry race.
