No. I just checked. All intact and no blood here. Have you read what I said about manslaughter? Or have you considered that here in the USA they have different degrees of murder? Or why the punishments for causing someone's death vary so hugely? Have you actually read any of what I wrote? Perhaps I should refer you directly to the bits you missed, where I spoke of Senna? Sorry Manny, you've lost me with this bit. Check your feet…
Your attempt at agreement, if that's what it was, included a suggestion that I did not accept that Senna cheated, in spite of me making it absolutely clear that this is my view, after which, you suggested that such a view would be foolish. This has nothing to do with stubbornness: it is clearly not my view and is wrong for you to suggest otherwise! However, we do agree that Schumacher is a cheat.
Schumacher cheated. Senna cheated. But why does Schumacher have some sort of tag associated with him as being a cheater and Senna does not? Is it because people hated Prost?
Well, as I have tried to make abundantly clear, Sam; I consider them both to have cheated. I'm not sure who you refer to as 'tagging' them, but they both qualify for my definition of the word. However, as I have also been at pains to explain, I consider that any difference in perception between the two is probably a question of 'degree' and the manner in which they did it. Jim Clark and Peter Arundell were both racing drivers, but there is a consensus which places one ahead of the other. Similarly, Schumacher and Senna are/were both cheats, but there is a consensus which places one ahead of the other.
I hope so Westy! But if people ask reasonable questions, I see no problem in trying to present a concise answer. And if someone else makes inaccurate remarks about what I've said, together with a character slur, I have every right to defend myself!
Yes, I know. Just getting a bit fed up of most threads ending up with either a Hamilton argument or a Schumacher argument. I haven't been posting a lot recently for this very reason.
I might disagree with you on a few things Cosi, (maybe because of my youth and other things) but I certaintly see you do talk sense and I respect your views mate.
I've noticed Westy. You are an asset to any forum and it raised a smile to see you here today. It is also a great shame your contributions have dwindled. Indeed, your relative absence - along with other former top members such as Genji, Ernie, Roadie, Bergkamp and several others, has perhaps contributed to the odd weed being allowed to proliferate! Unfortunately, some people are a bit careless in 'interpreting' what is said. If everyone made more effort to avoid such inaccuracies and slurs, there would be less need for such lengthy, boring diversions. For this reason, I usually steer clear of such discussions. The original conjecture of Mercedes point-scoring seemed a reasonable one. Perhaps I was caught off guard!
I'm not going to get into yet another Schumacher arguement but it still amazes me that intelligent people have bought into the GOAT sort of hysteria hype, the bloke can only just beat a third rate teamate and that was probably contrived much like his previous history. No-one can win seven WDCs fairly, it's just not possible.
Bleh @ this thread! And bleh @ all people who love to slander.. I don't care how old you are, Grow up! I just skimmed through this thread so im not directing this towards someone in particular, but the general atmosphere of the thread. Does anyone actually think that Schumacher and/or Senna won their respective WDC's because they cheated? Or did they win because of their massive true raw talent that was on a level of its own in their respective era? I became a fan of ayrton senna before I were old enough to understand the concept of "cheating". I merely cheered for in my opinon the fastest and most passionate and exciting driver. Though over the years as I grew up, watching more or less every single race and clip of Senna, I really can't see how anyone could call him a cheat, unless they are only assuming things after not having seen the entire "story"/picture of his endeavors. Senna was always very open and honest to what his motives and actions were. You can't call someone a cheat unless he is doing something "wrong" secretly, which was never the case with senna. And about Schumacher, he was in my opinion undoubtedly the fastest driver on the track after senna died in 1994, though it took a few years before I started cheering for him because I stopped following the sport actively for a few years. And also because I cheered for Hakkinen who was a country neighbour. There has been alot of headlines about Schumacher and his "ethics" over the years but I never felt he was ever THAT bad. I think the British media sometimes angle things too much. And even if they do not, it is something worth giving a thought to. Benetons alleged illegal "traction control" is something you can't blame Schumacher for. No driver in that race seat would protest and refuse to drive the car if they suspected something was not ok. The only real incident were you could accuse him of cheating is in monaco were he parked in the middle of the track to end qualify prematurely while he still had pole. Even if nobody could say 100% that this was the case, I also believe he did it on purpose and is his only real blip through his career. Though he WAS disqualified for it and got his punishment so no need to hold it against him as he didn't benefit from it in the end. I am not saying you have to like any of them, but calling them cheat is just immature. We have FIA and its regulations for a reason and I like to blame the system rather than the driver. Sorry for this semi Off Topic post but I had to write something to place at the other end of the "scale" to even things up a bit. A last note, every current driver on the grid are there because they have been among the best of the best in previous formulas and they all rock! I think people do not always realize how little a few hundreds or tenths or even seconds is over a lap. Any of us being put in one of those cars would probably be a minute of pace at the best. I'd love to see less slander and more admiration. And if you can't admire, keep it to your self if you may. At least try to be mature about it and acknowledge that we are all different. But this is the 21st century so no need to be cavemen about it. I respect all your views on here, please respect mine
Chrispa: what an excellent contribution. It is a breath of fresh air. We may (or may not) have a few differences of opinion with regard to some of the things you've said, but the most important thing is that you have verbalised a respect for others and expressed a similar wish that you be treated in a similar manner. Your comment above serves as an example to any forum. It is great to see the view of a larger perspective. Thankyou.
Thanks for the kind words sir. After posting it I didn't know what to expect and almost didn't want to check for a response as I feared my view(the general one) was my own alone. It is nice to know I wasn't shooting in the dark. Cheers!
Whilst I may disagree with some of the opinion you have expressed, what I like is the way you've gone about it. This is proper debating and something others would do well to learn from.
@Cosi Yes I understand. That's why I meant with "my general idea". And that was the point of my original post, to debate civilized, which you clearly got. Hope others do the same.
I tried hard to avoid getting into this tired old diatribe..... But 'I am not saying you have to like any of them, but calling them cheat is just immature. We have FIA and its regulations for a reason and I like to blame the system rather than the driver.' Me? immature for using the word cheat? You've lost me there. Schuey drove into Hill INTENTIONALLY. That was CHEATING. Even worse the FIA (PAPER TIGERS) allowed the former to still win the WDC. Respect for him and the FIA died right there. I'll now try to refrain from reply to the attacks that are surely to follow.
Mate, No attacks from me, but I will try to clarify what I am trying to get through. I guess you are talking about Adelaide 1994. It is funny I remember how me and a classmate of mine fought about that incident. And believe it I was on Hills side and really disliked Schumacher back then. At the time I also thought Schumi did it on purpose. However, not having access to the telemetry and such, we can only speculate about that.As FIA did NOT disqualify him, I have to assume that everything was in order. So by no means is it fair to call him a cheat based on that incident and pure speculations. So yes I call that slander and immature. All it does is to feed negative energy through this thread forum. Note that I do not say that it wasn't on purpose. I am saying it doesn't matter what I think or not about that incident, or others. Who am I to judge? That's what FIA is for. I will keep such negative opinions for myself should I have them. We should be able to debate things without having to accuse based on nothing more than assumptions. And if I feel that I just HAVE to say something about it, it would be close to the lines "I think it looked like MSC drove into hill on purpose and don't think he won that WDC fairly." It is basically the same thing only without the "immature" name calling.
Like I said, I'm getting into no more Schumacher arguments it's all been said too many time's and my opinion is not going to change.
