Talk:Michael Schumacher/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

lots more to say

there's so much more to say about Schumacher than is currently up here. I've started added subheadings to the career history, as someone said when this was nominated for featured article, there should at least be a full paragraph on each of his F1 seasons. I hope others can help fill in the many gaps. Spute 14:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Classification of F1 records

It's a good idea to classify Schumacher's F1 records on the basis of the year in which he attained them. I'll start working on this soon, though it might be a while before I gather all the information. Vikram 19:02, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I have attempted to categorize the records by year. Let me know if I'm wrong anywhere. Vikram 13:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Number of Pole Positions

I have added some points concerning the rule changes to the qualifying format in 03->05, and the fact that this should be taken into account when contemplating total number of pole positions. Tysmeister 08:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The Villeneuve incident

This article claims Schumacher hit Villeneuve when the former turned into the corner. Sorry, but as I recall the corner in question was a right hander and Schumacher's car moved left as Villeneuve passed, colliding with the Canadian. Schuey was excluded for cheating - or at least attempting to. Let's tell something resembling the truth here. 86.7.209.99 22:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

It was a right-hand corner but Schumacher left the door open and as Villeneuve came through on the inside, Schumi turned right, into Villeneuve's sidepod. See images of the incident: [1], [2], [3], [4]. I've reverted your change. AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 05:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

IIRC MS later admitted that he has deliberately caused this incident. Can anybody provide a reference? --El-dodo 19:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, as much as I enjoy seeing Schumacher Disqualified (being a Damon Hill fan), I'd be more the happy to help reference the Jerez '97 incident...

• [5] Pre-race cartoon, I don't need to mention what it's referencing to...
• [6] I beleive this was written BEFORE Schu admitted he tried to take Villeneuve out on purpose
• [7] An interesting line from this article, it suggests that Schu could've gotten a much worser penalty, such asthe punishment Senna was threatened with...
• [8] I believe this video might have him admitting it...I'm not very sure...

Anyway, I'm not entirely sure that this is a good set of reference, but I think that it's a good start, wouldn't you say? --Skully Collins _{Review Me! Please?} 13:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I came across this quote recently: “I knew it was not right but this was an important moment. It was everything or nothing and you go for it.” It's from an an AtlasF1 article in June 2001.--Don Speekingleesh 13:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Don Speekingleesh, your quote is behind a subscription wall, so it can't be used. And Skully Collins, your video does not have MS saying anything other than it might have been a racing incident, in a round-about way.

Until someone can come up with at least one source verifying MS admitting guilt, I believe we must remove any reference to MS purposely taking out Villenueve, and I am doing so. See Biography of living persons for more information.

We have to limit the discussion to the facts: there was a collision, there was disclipinary action, and there is still controversy.

--BarnacleKB 01:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Here we are then: http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=27091 --Don Speekingleesh 06:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about that website's credentials, but they quote an unattributed BBC interview. I searched pretty hard on the BBC website, but I didn't find this quote. Since F1racing.net didn't source the quote, I think that it has to be treated as hearsay, in essence. If anybody can find that BBC article, then I have no objections to including the quote in the article, but I don't think that the article you found is enough. --BarnacleKB 23:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe that it is quite obvious for anyone who knows how to drive and for anynone watching formula 1 races in the Schumacher era that whatever he did in this incident he did it on purpose. If he admits or not is another controversy. To not mention or suggest this suspicions on that part of the article is to missinform readers. It is the dutty of this site to state the controversies and mention that almost every rational person in this world believes Schumacher drove his car towards Villeneuve one's to take him out of the race.

Pole record section = POV

The pole record section has been removed, as it was neither in the correct section, nor was it appropriate for an encyclopedia. As is always the case in sport, comparing people across different eras is nearly impossible, and that sort of apologetics belongs in its own section, if anywhere at all - opinion has little place here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.34.57.65 (talk • contribs) (24 April 2006)

I've deleted it twice now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.34.57.65 (talk • contribs) (25 April 2006)

If that's the case, the section on controversy, which is also purely POV of people on different sides of the fence, doesn't find it's place here. Any comments? Vikram 15:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Vikram, I agree with you. Not just this article, but almost every article in Wikipedia has a criticism section. Defenders of this say that it is fact and it is ok to put that here. But what they don't understand is that News are facts but facts are not news. - Krazy

Formula One records (Controversy)

I've added a new sub-section in the controversy section of the article. any POV related change please disscuss it first. It uses the most pole position record paragraph so it can be discussed here. C trillos (2 May 2006)

Most Pole Position Record

For Almost every record Schumacher holds there is controversy. for the most WDC record detractors point out there haven`t been drivers/teams good enough to rival Schumacher in his dominant seasons... at least a competition not as hard as Fangio had or as Prost had....

so it is not like there must not be a section of pole record controversy ...in fact there must be a paragraph in the controversy section that shows the not unanimity of opinions regarding the worthiness of Schumacher's records... in fact Schumacher himself has said that what he has done cannot be compared with what Fangio did....

Sorry, but as you said that those are just what you said: detractors. Objectivity doesn't just mean not to be biased in favour of the article's subject but not to be biased against him either! Everything can be brought into controversy! Some of Senna's succees are too controversial. Or I cannot see how Fangio had stronger opposition than Schumacher. Who did he have? Ascari, who died too early to be a long time rival. Some people claim Schumacher didn't have any good rivals (really, there were no good drivers in F1 for more than 15 years besides him?), but then the guy just went to a struggling Ferrari team from a WDC/WCC team and threw away a couple of possible titles with that and fought against rivals in stronger cars often enough. That has to be told as well! Some people try to belittle Schumacher's achievments (IMO out of envy) by saying they are "controversial", you can debate them if you want, but not in an article that meant to be objective! Schumacher's achievments and titles, thus records are no more or no less "controversial" than any other WDC's! Or should we say then that, let's say, Jim Clark's title's are "controversial" (suggesting not worthy) because he won them in a dominant car? Or is Mansell's, Hill's, Villeneuve's, Alonso's etc. etc. title "controversial" because they won them in the best, or sometimes even dominant cars? You cannot be serious! As for the pole record: he has it, it's a fact wether you like it or not. Starting to make "excuses" about it (e.g. for Senna) looks like something coming from a jelous Senna Fan or anti-MS, or something. I don't think it has been remarked, when Senna got his pole record, that despite of that he was not the driver with the best pole/race ratio. That was - and still is - Clark. 80.98.174.230 13:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

So dear anonymous wikipedian, stop removing a paragraph like that!... if you considered POV just rewrite it!... Do not drop it from the article as it is an important part of it... C trillos

I think fact is fact. And FACT says he has 66 pole positions. whatever the conditions it is 66. Which does make him the record holder. --Teemeah Gül Bahçesi 18:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. There's no controversy surrounding the fact that he currently holds the pole record. What that record means in an impossible debate is an entirely different matter. Many arguments could be thrown back and forth regarding who has been the all-time best at X, but records are records (unless you're Barry Bonds, ahem).

The statement in this section, that Senna needed to out-qualify poorer cars, what does it mean? Does it mean that his opposition was poorer than Schumacher's, or that his own cars were poorer than Schumacher's? If the latter case is implied, I don't think that's true since Senna always drove the fastest car of the time, whether McLaren or Williams, certainly not the case with Schumacher until Ferrari in 2001 (and then too apart from that Ferrari were the best in 2002, 2004 only). So the Pole Position section should be modified to reflect this. Deletor 22:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor.

The section must be rewritten... that's all... we have to include a section that shows that despite schumacher holding every important record, he's not considered the best driver ever. So don't despair, of course it is going to be changed... User:C trillos

I had originally placed the Most Pole Positions section under the Records section of the article, as I felt it was worth mentioning it along with the records that Schumacher holds. I don't believe there is anything controversial about it, and if there is consensus, the section should be moved back to the Records part of the article. Vikram 12:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Driving skill

Regarding Schumacher's receiving help from marshals: Schumacher did receive help from marshals, and the marshals did push his car back on track on both occasions, so please do not delete the paragraph. If you must, then change the sentence structure to your liking. You might want to give some examples of others getting help from marshals if you think the paragraph portrays Schumacher unfairly. So far, I couldn't think of one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.19.133.3 (talk • contribs) 23 June 2006.

The FIA rulebook says drivers can't receive a push start unless they're in a dangerous position, which is apparently why MSC got his push-start on both occasions. Can't think of any other driver who has gotten the same benefit though.

With regards to Silverstone 1998 the issue is more complicated than presented. The FIA stewards failed to follow their own procedures in issuing the penalty (which was for overtaking while the SC was out). They penalty should have been issued within 25 minutes, but it wasn't. There's a full explanation on grandprix.com [9]. The allowed number of laps to take the penalty is three. Also the wiki article seems to imply that it was MSC's decision to delay stopping, which is unlikely to have been the case - Ross Brawn and others on the pit-wall would have had some say, and more likely come up with the idea. --Don Speekingleesh 08:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Jackie Stewart's statement: "Michael Schumacher makes more mistakes every Grand Prix weekend than any Grand Prix multiple world champion I've ever known. I mean, the number of times I went off in a Grand Prix in my entire career I could count on one hand, because if you went off the road there was a very good chance you were gonna hit something hard, and you were gonna hurt yourself, nevermind the car." should be qualified that Stewart was talking about two very different eras. The 5th gear show in which Stewart made the statement was about safety in F1, so the context of the statement is that in those days the drivers did not have the liberty to make mistakes, while in modern, vastly safer F1 top drivers always try to find the limits and going off the track is not a big deal. I'm editing the section to reflect this. Deletor 14:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor

Why not remove this section? It is simply the opinion of one person. Besides, he is 7 times World Champion. -Krazy

Yeah, I agree. This section :only: states the view of Jackie Stewart, and that too in a context related more to safety in different eras than driver skill. This section should be removed after some consensus has been achieved - anyone else care to back this up? Deletor 04:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor

Agree. Jackie Stewart's comments were in the context of the advancements in F1 safety that have taken place between his era and the current era. Moreover, Ross Brawn's comments were totally unrelated to Stewart's.Vikram 08:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright then, I'm removing this section in its entirity from this article, and in fact will see if it can be put in the main Formula One or Formula Cars articles' safety section, where it belongs. Deletor 22:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Deletor

This video is much better as the one mentioned under links

• Video Compilation of Michael Schumacher in Action (length 11min) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.77.16.77 (talk • contribs) (8 August 2006)

Most WDC record - Controversial?

I frankly don't believe that there is any controversy in Schumacher holding the record for most world championships. Agreed that Fangio competed in a different era, but Schumacher's championships go to prove that he has been the most dominant driver of his era and drawing any comparison with Fangio to show his record in a controversial light is unfair.

As for the most pole positions record, Senna and Schumacher belonged to relatively similar eras of F1, which justifies the comparison of their records. Vikram 13:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I added a POV tag to the F1 Records section under controversies. I don't think there is anything controversial about breaking records. I suggest we delete this section since we already have a Records section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.235.153.104 (talk • contribs) (9 May 2006)

Agreed. It might be worth saying 'it is difficult to compare drivers of different eras', although I think that is a bit of a truism and necessary. And that comment would merely go under the records section, not in the controversies section. ... Also, the talk of using illegal launch control etc in the Benetton years section would be better off moved to the Controversies section. I just said the word 'section' far too much. Damiancorrigan 19:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I suggest moving the Most Pole Positions record section from Controversy to Formula One Records, as a note to the list of records that he holds. As far as most WDC is concerned, in my humble opinion, Schumacher's record is undisputed, and that part of the article should be removed. Vikram 09:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Right, I've done something about it. It was long winded and repetitive, and the bit on Fangio's era being wilder has nothing to do with his records. I hope this is more satisfying. Damiancorrigan 11:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Brilliant, I add a paragraph and you just drop it.... furthermore a section of records must not be trashed with further commentaries... and you put no link on Fangio... It is controversy because not all the people think MS is the best ever (must people don't)... A new section called comparisson with other WDC could be the solution... (outside the records section, outside the controversy section in order to avoid POV in the placement of the section)... I'll do that some time sooner, if you let me... C trillos

If you can do so without it coming across as Senna apologetics, then it will be appreciated. However, to date, the majority of your work on this page has not been to better explain Schumacher's life and career, but to push a personal agenda. That may have something to do with the reactions you've been getting.70.34.57.65 09:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

When I can be bothered, I'll give this article a major overhaul. It has loads of overly-pro and overly-anti Schumacher, and lots of irrelevancies. Maybe today I'll sort it out. Damiancorrigan 09:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Good. I trust you'll do a solid job at it. I was just looking at the paragraph about his co-drivers, and it's so bad I'm tempted to rewrite it right now. Hopefully you'll get to reworking the whole page soon so it won't annoy me any more. ;)70.34.57.65 03:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Silence of the Lambs?

Does anyone have a source to say this is Mikey's favourite movie? I've never heard or seen this supposed fact anywhere...sounds like a "joke". AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 04:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

There's a decent chance it was just poached from some user submissions on IMDB[10], for what that's worth (which isn't much)!70.34.57.65 11:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what his favorite movie is but I do know that he is a big fan of Tina Turner's music. hazimmer

The Removed Section

Lets look at the removed section in detail:

The most emblematic symbol of Juan Manuel Fangio, at being considered the best driver of all time, was holding nothing less than five World Driver's Championship titles; Titles that were won by the Argentinean in extremely contested conditions. Such an outstanding record was considered almost untouchable during many decades and in fact it was so until the first decade of the 21th century...

Long winded and irrelevant - this is not an article about Fangio

...Michael Schumacher equaled and surpassed the legendary Argentinean by setting a new landmark, unimaginable seven WDC...

suitable for the intro to the article - nothing controversial so far...

...However, every world championship won by Fangio seems to have more validity at the eyes of the critics, including a considerable portion of the media and the fans...

POV - which critics? Reference?

...whom...

Bad English - it is 'who'

... state that Fangio's racing times were far wilder and more temerary than modern times in the sense that in the 1950s the drivers didn't race with fire protective wear, nor wear a helmet, there were not protective barriers or other type of safety oriented design in the circuits and the cars were not built to protect the driver's life...

Completely irrelevant (and bad English) - danger and records have nothing in common. If we were debating who was the most daring driver, that would be different.

• • • Sorry - I disagree. The dangerousness is very relevent to records. Dying before the record can be set is onviously something of a handicap. *** —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.9.216 (talk • contribs) (14 June 2006)

Most notably, critics point out that Fangio had not the benefit of team orders, even with Farina letting him drive his car during the final race in the dispute of a Chamionship.

Valid, but repetition - there is already a section on team orders.

Also critics point out that while Alain Prost had Ayrton Senna as his bitter rival, and Juan Manuel Fangio had both Stirling Moss and Alberto Ascari as his fircest rivals, Michael Schumacher has not had a rival of his own calibre which has made the German's path to success a lot easier. Fans of former Schumacher rivals would declare them as of equal status as the German. Truth is, Schumacher has been superior to his contemporary rivals and the achieved successes speak in his favor, but has himself declared that he would never try to compare his successes with what Fangio did.

Fair pointed, and I've included it.

...Though Schumacher has surpassed the late Ayrton Senna's record of 65 pole positions, a portion of the Formula One community believe that in extracting the maximum over a single flying lap, Senna's raw skill is not challenged by the new record set by the German...

What portion? Reference? How is it not reflected in the record? If there is a point here (and there might be) it needs developing.

...Senna's 65 poles came in 162 races, while Schumacher's 66 poles took 236. Apart from a significantly higher pole position strike rate (Senna's 40% to Schumacher's 28%), Senna had to fight with team mates of the calibre of Alain Prost and rivals like Nigel Mansell, Nelson Piquet and even Schumacher himself, while the German was benefited by a superior machine, specially during the 2000s, and virtually no team mate opposition...

Fair point, and I've included it.

...In Schumacher's favour, it could be argued that changes made to F1's qualifying format since 2003, requiring cars to qualify with race fuel loads, have reduced the onus on qualifying as tuning the car for a strong qualifying performance invariably undermined the race strategy. Many believe that these rule changes were introduced to end the dominance of Schumacher and his Ferrari team, and make Formula One a more interesting spectacle...

Debatable. You could put this back if you wanted.

Are we in agreement? If you want to move it to a section called "comparisons with other WDC" you are welcome to, but I don't think it makes much differece. Damiancorrigan 18:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you about talking too much about Fangio... Just trying to make a point...

I agree about bad english. Some things like : ...senna extracting the maximum in the qualifying, and things like ... in schumacher's favor... were not written by me.. I wanted'em out... I'm still doubtful about a new section; As it is right now it doesn't make for a new section but when it becomes bigger (and I think it'll be expanded) it can be moved... I'll have no time to watch over this, but think about this: Fangio had to fight very talented drivers and risking his life at every corner, you already accepted the rivals point why didn't you accept the point about the risks involved ? wasn't it harder to be consistant and score five WDC in Fangio's time than in Schumi's ? just a reflection... whatever, thanks for making your point...C trillos

If Rooney played football with pits of fire and brimstone around the pitch, would that make him a better player than Pele? Danger has nothing to do with ability, and so is irrelevant. Is that the only bit that you question? Looks like we agree that the rest was longwinded, repetitive and lacked references. Comparing drivers of different eras is oversimplifying matters, only the very strongest points can be made - hard facts, like the ratio of poles to starts - the rest is just speculation. Damiancorrigan 09:56, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

One could argue that it's harder to be consistent in this era of massive teams, cutting-edge technology and intensely focused competition. Could Fangio have brought Ferrari to the position it's in now from where it was in the mid-90s? How is it possible to have anything more than an entirely speculative opinion on the subject? That's the reason you're not getting people to blindly accept your points; things like this are never clear-cut and thus it risks coming across as one-sided fanboy rhetoric at worst, or endless give-and-take at best. For every argument claiming why any sportsman is the best of his breed, there's always a counterargument. Senna never took the leap that Schumacher did to go to a struggling team to put it in championship-winning order. So do the early years Schumacher spent with Ferrari have anything to do with his lower pole percentage? Quite probably. Does that mean he isn't as talented at qualifying as Senna was? Basing it off that is ridiculous, as is most of this. F1 is not a spec series (and FWIW, a spec series doesn't solve very many problems, just look at GP Masters; obviously the cars are suiting some drivers' styles better than others; does that mean they're better drivers period? Is that a comment on their driving now, or does it retroactively rate their performance in their respective eras?). The entire "Comparison with Formula One legends" section should probably be left finished at the second sentence (and until someone can provide a reasonable source for "it is said..." and reword that to not be so biased, I've removed the second half of the first paragraph of the section) - or broken out into its own page, as it's an issue that needs a generous amount of qualifiers, disclaimers and general nit-picking, which wouldn't contribute page and would only serve to bog it down.70.34.57.65 10:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with you. When I made my edit I tried to leave as much in as possible so as not to upset people, but the whole section is a bit rubbish in my opinion. I do think the majority of people would say that competition hasn't been that strong in recent years, but to compare them to drivers of a previous era is a bit silly. Damiancorrigan 10:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I've deleted it, and he can hate me for it as much as he wants to; it just doesn't belong on this page.70.34.57.65 10:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

1994 Belgian GP disqualification

I have changed the reason for the disqualification to illegal plank, as this is what is reported on the offical F1 site [11]. Please discuss here before changing it to anything else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bajajvikram (talk • contribs) (12 May 2006)

It was correct as it was. The plank was(is?) effectively a 'unit of measurement', if it has worn away too much, it suggests that the ride height was wrong. 'Wrong' plank suggests that the FIA said something like "your plank is made of cedar when it should be made of pine". Also, when you are disqualified for something, the reason given is usually related to the perceived crime in your actions - Schumacher's crime was not 'having the wrong plank' (which is misleading anyway, it would be 'having an overly-worn plank') but infringing rules on ride heights. I've changed it back. Damiancorrigan 10:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Agree that the wood plank of his car had worn more than the allowed amount and hence he was disqualified. I wasn't sure if this affects the ride height, so I thought it would be safer to mention illegal plank. Vikram 10:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I've sorted it now and included a reference from the official GP encyclopedia. But it was still wrong, cos he didn't get his two race ban for that, it was for ignoring the black flag at Silverstone. Damiancorrigan 10:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The plank isn't made out of wood - it's a constructed material :-) ~~AF

Monaco 2006

Perhaps it would be better to include some of the finer points of Schumacher's 'intentional' spin under the 'Driving Tactics' section. Anybody agree...? --Edgy t 22:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes this must be added. Schumacher is a very controversial driver and this "incident" helps to clarify other moves he did like Hill and Villeneuve's incidents.

Team orders fine 2002 Austrian Grand Prix

The most infamous episode of usage of 'team orders' by Ferrari was at the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix ... The result was a ban on team orders and a $1 million fine for Ferrari. If I recall correctly, the $1 million fine at the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix was not for using team orders, but for disrupting the podium ceremony as it happened before the ban was in place. Schumacher ushered Barrichello to go onto the top step, and this was against the rules. Gemertp 09:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe the 'team orders' were the sole reason for the fine. Please check out this link [12] --138.38.32.84 00:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Gemertp is correct. The team were fined $1m (half suspended for one year) for breach of podium procedure. Try these links: [13] [14] and the official press release: [15] The BBC is not a particularly good source of F1 news I find.--Don Speekingleesh 19:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Management talents

There are more sides to F1 world champions than just good driving. Schumacher also has a talent of shaping a team around him. This leads to good cooperation within the team and motivation for the engineers and mechanics. This is a major contributing factor in his succes. I believe a reference should be made in the article about this. Gemertp 09:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a reference/quote? Without a reference it's just your opinion. Whether Schumacher is the one who shapes the team or whether the team has been shaped around Schumacher by the powers that be in Ferrari is a matter of debate and any claims as to such need to be cited Nil Einne 14:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Nil Einne, without a quote it's your opinion. You say it's Schumacher who motivates the team, someone else could say its Jean Todt or Ross Brawn, or Luca di Montezemolo... Mark83 23:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

One could argue that Schumi recruited Ross Brawn and Rory Bryne from Benneton 2 years after leaving the team —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.137.214 (talk • contribs) (20 June 2006)

Monaco incident

As a result of an inquiry by stewards into the incident Schumacher was stripped of all times set in the qualifying session, forcing him to start from last on the grid. Schumacher and Ferrari maintain that the incident..............

Shouldn't we at least mention that the inquiry found/believe he did it deliberately? At the moment, it just says there was an inquiry. A reader who is not in the know could easily assume the inquiry didn't care but decided the incident was bad enough whether deliberate or not

In an article that appeared on the AtlasF1 site one of the stewards involved in investigating the incident clarified things a little by saying that "they don't know if the initial loss of control was deliberate or not" - it was the stopping and remaining on the track afterwards that was "the problem".

While they didn't know whether or not the inital loss of control was deliberate or not, they were very sure the rest of the incident was, and that's why they punished him. It really should be mentioned in the article.--Don Speekingleesh 18:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I've just re-read that section of the article. Personally I think the grammar needs a wee bit of a tidy, but the essence of it seems pretty much correct. T h e M a v e r i c k 03:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Team orders

During much of his time at Benetton he was consistently dominant over his teammates; since moving to Ferrari, his team has guaranteed he is given a clear Number 1 status.

I'm always amazed at how many people claim to know what's "guaranteed" for Schumacher in his contracts with his teams. As long as we don't have his contracts such remarks are speculations thus POV.80.98.174.230 13:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronounciation

The new version /mikaɛl ʃumaɹɚ/ is bogus, so I revert to the old /miçaɛl ʃumaxɐ/. Please have a look at the actual articles about IPA before making changes. (Übrigens habe ich de:Wikipedia:Liste_der_IPA-Zeichen benutzt, nicht die englische Seite. In der entsprechenden englischen Liste fehlen schlicht einige Laute.) A short look into International Phonetic Alphabet for English shows that k is pronounced like cut, which is simply wrong, even in Bavaria. The example for ç on the German page is ich, a perfect match. The ɹ is nearly unpronouncable in German in this position, it sounds like a speech impediment. The example for x is Dach, another perfect match.

About the last ɚ I'm not so sure, but the example for ɐ matches better (Bauer instead of Falle) and given the track record of 87.74.130.76 so far I'll change it back along with the others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.235.210.210 (talk • contribs) (6 June 2006)

Most consequtive victories?

In the records section it states that he has the record for the most consequtive race wins. He does not however. Alberto Ascari holds that record. He won 9 Formula One races in a row, but many people don't realise that because the Indy 500 (Which was counted in the championship) was held during his winning streak. But he still managed to win 9 races on the trot, because the Indy wasn't a Formula One race, it was just included in the championship. He won races in 1952 (Belgium - Italy) as well as the following season in 1953 (Argentina - Belgium) with the Indy 500 in between. Manipe 15:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Driving Tactics

In the Driving tactics section, the paragraph about 1998 Great Britain GP contains some errors.

He was issued a 10s stop-and-go penalty for an illegal move during Safety Car laps.

That is correct. Anyway, the problem is that the marshalls issued a penalty according to the article which says you have to pay the penalty within 3 laps from the marshall's notice.

Knowing that a conventional in-stop-out penalty would lose him the race to championship contender Mika Hakkinen, he delayed going into the pit for the penalty the allowed number of laps and only served the penalty at the end of the race, thus avoided the slow out lap from the pit that would have caused him to lose the race.

Since the finish line crosses both the track and the pitlane, he crossed the finish line before stopping in the pits, so he didn't served the penalty. The problem is that he could actually wait to serve the penalty for a number of laps sufficient to finish the race.

However, the FIA ruled this completely legal.

It ruled it legal because it was marshall's fault not to notice the penalty as a "Stop within 3 laps _or_ X seconds added to the final time", but just as "Stop within 3 laps".

So, in this case, it is not a controversy started by some kind of behaviour on Schumacher's side, but by marshall's errors in deciding the penalty.

Also, later the article reports:

The FIA rule book stated that drivers cannot receive any form of aid during a race.

This is true, but the rule book at that time explicitly permitted to be moved by a dangerous position by being pushed by marshalls. If he'd kept the engine running and this permitted him to rejoin the race, it was absolutely legal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinci71 (talk • contribs) (29 June 2006)

• I added a further explanation about Alonso's inability to re-join the 2004 Italian Grand Prix and Schumacher's ability to re-join the 2003 European GP. Here are the sources of my statement. 2003 F1 Sporting Regulations Rule 151 PDF File and 2004 F1 Sporting Regulations Rule 162 PDF File. Patken4 23:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I explained the Silverstone 1998 issue correctly above in the driving skill section. Your change doesn't explain how MSC was allowed rejoin in Aus last year. --Don Speekingleesh 13:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The 2005 rules do not discuss what happens if marshals try to help a driver. It seems it was allowed again in 2005. 2005 Sporting Regs in PDF format Patken4 22:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Seems so. But Webber didn't get any help. Just Schumacher. So it still leaves the favouritism accusations there.--Don Speekingleesh 06:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Which Webber situation are you referring to? What we don't know is what would have happened to Schumacher if he finished in the points at Melbourne. The fact is, the 2005 regulations aren't all that clear what should happen in this situation. The 2003 regs are very clear; everything short of having your engine re-started by a marshal is fine and legal. The 2004 regs are unclear because it doesn't say what is allowed and what isn't. The 2005 rules don't make any mention of what should be done either. So since Schumacher's incident happened at Melbourne (the first race of the season), the FIA could have told all marshals afterwards that they are not to help drivers get back into the race, whether it is a safe location to re-join or not. Patken4 00:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I think Don means Nick Heidfeld, who was involved in the incident with Schumi (Webber's name flashed up on the TV screens at the time, making quite a few people at the race a bit angry until the director fixed it :-) ). – AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 03:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, yes. I meant Heidfeld. I knew it was a Williams! Heidfeld and Schumacher had a comming together at turn 3. Schumacher got a push start, Heidfeld got no help. They were roughly the same distance from the track if memory serves. But there was certainly no reason to push one and not the other.--Don Speekingleesh 16:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My apology

I am sorry for the whole sections being deleted from the article. I am aware it shows it was me, but I was not home when this happened. Family member came over to my place and she was trying to fix something, instead she deleted lots of paragraphs. I am trying to restore them as we speak. My sincerest apologies again.

Norum 14.July.2006

All fixed. – AlbinoMonkey ^(Talk) 02:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the early years. I did the Ferrari years. Again, sorry for all this.

Norum 15.July.2006

Records

I added a little note to some of the records. For instance, the most wins record is added to 2006, but he already took it in 2001. Since basically every race can be a record race for him, I thought this would be good. Can anyone do research for the other records? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JackSparrow Ninja (talk • contribs) (22 July 2006)

Controversial Incidents

I changed around some of the controversial incidents to try and get a more balanced viewpoint. Some of them were quite clearly written by a Schumacher critic. There were also factual errors - the Benetton team were never accused of running active suspension (running this illegaly would be virtually impossible), every team investigated by the FIA in 1994 were found to have driver aids in their software, the penalty sequence at Silverstone was normal penalty (ignored) --> black flag (ignored) --> 2 race ban, there is no proof that Schumacher's car was damaged when he hit the wall at Adelaide 1994, and there is virtually no debate about Jerez 1997. I'm also really suprised about the mention of the 2003 European Grand Prix, since this wasn't very controversial at all. Still, I fixed that instead of eliminating it. There are also other issues with this article, namely the fact that it doesn't even mention Schumacher's signature move (passing during pitsotps). This article needs a lot of work, to say the least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.94.6.28 (talk • contribs) (15 July 2006)

Can't help but notice that the schumcher page is being edited by his fans who are not alowing anything bad to be posted about him. below is a list of a number low point in f1 which are just as valid as good points:-

• Ran into the back of Rubens, then deliberately drove onto the racing line after crashing, to try and get the race stopped (Austria 00 and he possibly tried the same at Monaco 05 as well)
• Running Frentzen completely off the road, and into the gravel trap (Canada 98), then complaining after the race that Hill was trying to kill him
• Ramming DC (Arg 98) although personally I thought that was ok.
• Running into the back of Hill, breaking his own suspension in the process (Suzuka 93)
• Received a 1 race suspended ban for dangerous driving (Spa 95)
• Running into the back of DC (Spa 98)
• Pulled off fantastic pass on Berger, then span into the gravel on the same lap (Hungary 93)
• Span off into the wall at Tamburello whilst trying to keep up with Brundle (Imola 92)
• Span off and wrecked his car (Imola 95)
• Got a brilliant pole and then binned it on the first lap (Monaco 96)
• Survived a first corner crash but wrecked his suspension on the kerbs later in the same lap (Nurb 97)
• 'Wall of champions' Canada 99
• Cutting in front of Fisi leaving him nowhere to go and causing them both to go off at the first corner (Hock 00)
• Doing fine until it rained, then going backwards, spinning twice and getting thrashed by DC (Brazil 01)
• Hitting Truli (Sepang 03)
• Joining the party in the hedge, his own fault by his own admission for leaving the tyre tracks of the car ahead (Brazil 03)
• Losing his front wing on someone....Sato? (Japan 03)
• If I stop to think there's probably loads more btw

list from another website

Michael Schumacher

• Monaco '06 - Parked his car during qualifying to prevent Alonso taking pole.
• Shanghai '05 - Didn't notice a Minardi about to overtake him on the out lap to the grid and pulled in front of him wrecking his car.
• Melbourne '05 - Squeezed Nick Heidfeld and made to apologise by other drivers.
• Monaco '04 - Warming tyres by braking in the tunnel behind the safety car, causing JPM to run into the back of him. 50/50
• Imola '04 - Squeezed JPM onto the grass.
• Suzuka '03 - Tagged Sato early on and lost his front wing threatening his WDC hopes.
• Silverstone '03 - Squeezed FA onto the grass.
• Sepang '03 - Ran into the back of Trulli at turn 2 (breaking his front wing?)
• Brazil '01 - Doing fine until it rained, then going backwards, spinning twice and getting thrashed by DC.
• Monza '00 - Warming brakes behind the safety car caught the drivers behind out and JB went into the wall.
• Hockenheim '00 - Cutting in front of Fisi leaving him nowhere to go and causing them both to go off at the first corner.
• Austria '00 - Ran into the back of Rubens, then deliberately drove onto the racing line after crashing, to try and get the race stopped.
• Argentina '00 - Sideswiped Panis and caused a first corner incident then tagged Barrichello.
• Canada '98 - Came out of pitsand cut across track in front of Frentzen who crashed. 10s S/G
• Jerez '97 - Drove into Jaques Villeneuve in an attempt to win the WDC.
• Monaco '96 - Got a brilliant pole and then binned it on the first lap
• Spa '95 - 1 Race suspended ban for dangerous blocking.
• Imola '95 - Spun out possibly whilst leading.
• Adelaide '94 - Went off and broke his car but came back onto the track and bashed Hill.
• Silverstone '94 - Stop/Go fpr passing Hill on parade lap, compounded it by ignoring the penalty and got black flagged.
• Suzuka '93 - Travelling behind Hill who was deciding whether to overtake somebody, he ran into the back of him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.111.143 (talk • contribs) (28 July 2006)

Many of these incidents can be counted as racing incidents and therefore are not things that need to be included in the article. For most of the things you have listed I can name at least 1-2 other drivers who have made the same mistakes.202.55.154.240 06:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)