Comments on: Schumacher: Back for (no) good

By: Withering slights: time to change the Schumacher record | Who Are You, Anyway?*

Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:52:42 +0000

[...] know how I feel about Michael Schumacher’s comeback; if you don’t, click here (and if you want to know how some other people feel about how I feel about Michael Schumacher’s [...]

By: Stuart C

Stuart C — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 13:20:47 +0000

Greetings fellow scribe. I recall there being an official clarification of the ‘one move’ rule (in that it was written into Appendix L of the International Sporting Code) in 2000 when a controversy blew up about Michael Schumacher’s conduct. I don’t remember when the ‘one move’ edict was first issued and you may be correct in saying that it was a response to Senna’s behaviour.
Interestingly, twenty years ago this month a brouhaha was in full swing when the FIA (under Balestre) refused to grant Senna a superlicence because of the remarks he’d made after the ‘89 Japanese GP.

By: Canehan

Canehan — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:41:06 +0000

The “one only weave” rule was introducted because of Senna, not Schumacher. IIRC It was Senna’s actions at one Hockenheim race that led to it, Senna having been particularly difficult to pass because he weaved back and forth several times on one of the straights. I can see it in my mind but can’t recall which of the straights (on the old track).

By: Schumacher faz 41 anos « F1 Around

Schumacher faz 41 anos « F1 Around — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 14:00:28 +0000

[...] e a sua volta nas últimas semanas, mas a melhor definição de seu caráter vem do jornalista Stuart Codling feita em seu blog: As pessoas muitas vezes me perguntam como Michael Schumacher realmente é. Eu digo que é difícil [...]

By: Pitlane Fanatic » Something For The Weekend - VII

Pitlane Fanatic » Something For The Weekend - VII — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:29:38 +0000

[...] This next post is from another professional writer, Stuart Codling. It’s clear from the title “Schumacher: Back for (no) good” that Stuart is less than enthralled at the prospect of Michael’s return; he’s the only [...]

By: Steven Roy

Steven Roy — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 18:19:37 +0000

Off the top of my head: Portugal 88, Imola 89, Suzuka 89, Suzuka 90. And just like Schumacher, there would probably be more that I can’t remember.

I think Suzuka 1989 was more Prost’s fault although I doubt either of them could have made the corner on the trajectory they entered it on. Prost left the door wide open when there was absolutely no need to. Senna took a flier on heading up the inside and Prost just turned in on him.

Senna like Schumacher had a history of avoidable incidents before he reached F1. Schumacher’s best known example is punting Hakkinen out of the seconf heat at Macau and Senna had several clashes with Brundle in F3 and all of them when Brundle was ahead. Going into the last round of that championship Brundle was ahead on points despite Senna setting a record for the number of wins. I can imagine Senna’s reaction if Brundle had just rammed him.

Senna introduced the concept of deliberately ramming a car off the road but Schumacher was a far worse offender.

I have to say I am more a fan of Senna for a number of reasons. Schumacher always wanted the team wrapped round him and a docile team mate. Senna on the other hand went to McLaren when it was team Prost and blew Prost out the door. Schumacher would never have had the bottle to do that.

Senna was also a better driver. In terms of pace Schumacher is right up there with the best of them but wheel to wheel Senna was in a different league. Both of them were prone to throw it into the barrier under pressure though.

It would be interesting to see how they would have faired if they were both at their peak now going into next season. Schumacher has to find a way to succeed without Ross Brawn’s clever fuel strategies but Senna would have to find a way to carry excess fuel or change his unique throttle technique.

By: Journeyer

Journeyer — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 14:06:50 +0000

Fell free to prove me wrong by listing all Senna’s misdemeanours assuming you actually know any of them. Being a Schumacher fan you will ignore this either because you have no interest in anyone other than blessèd Michael or if you are one of the more inteeligent Schumacher fans you will know that you are wrong.

Off the top of my head: Portugal 88, Imola 89, Suzuka 89, Suzuka 90. And just like Schumacher, there would probably be more that I can’t remember.

That said, Steven, I know you’re no Senna fan either, so it probably doesn’t change your position on this at all.

By: Gavin Brown (RubberGoat)

Gavin Brown (RubberGoat) — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:53:19 +0000

Let’s not get into the business of illegal traction control systems, although there is a story that Juan Pablo Montoya was moved to such fury at the Brazilian GP one year when he heard the Ferrari’s engine stutter (signifying the presence of TC) that he drove into Schumacher’s car.

Yes I remember that now. Ferrari were exploiting a big loophole in the rules that allowed 150ms for a gearchange, which was ludicrous because everyone could make one in less than 30ms due to semi-automatic gearboxes. Therefore they made a system which led to Ferrari being able to use 120ms of TC for each gearchange, which is quite a lot when you consider how many gearchanges there are per lap.

The other teams found out and protested, and the FIA were forced to bring back TC as they had no way to police it until they came up with the idea of a standard ECU.

By: Stuart C

Stuart C — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 11:07:03 +0000

@Aaron james I'm happy to take your word on this. Please accept my apologies for any offence caused. Stop back any time and feel free to disagree with anything written here!

By: Aaron james

Aaron james — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:36:07 +0000

Hmm I must say you are mistaken if you think we are the same person your blog software should let you see the ip address associated with each post I use o2 on my iPhone o2 bb at home and vodafone bb at work so my posts would all come from those addresses. I post under my name as I take responsibility for my words and I’m relatively well known under it. I as you saw am quite happy to be straight up with criticism without the need for a clone.

Drop me an email if you’d like to talk about it. I can only hazard a guess that many ISPs put their users behind proxies which sometimes can give the appearance of people having similar addreses. Do a reverse lookup on the adresses to make sure this isn’t the case here.