Schumi

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

Imagine what couldve happened at the end of 95. Schumi had the options of going to Mclaren, Ferrari, or Williams - the three best teams in F1. He chose Ferrari, but imagine had he gone to Mclaren instead of Coulthard! Coulthard might be a Ferrari man now, and we would indeed have seen the Hakkinen-Schumacher combination everyone had wished for, just to see how they match up in the same car. I wish I could go back in time and make Schumi change his mind...

Or then also what if he had gone to Williams instead of Villeneuve? Im not so sure Hill would be 96 champion now, or would he? And then in 97 when Hill went to Arrows, Villeneuve wouldve come alongside Schumi at Williams, that wouldve been something! And that wouldve maybe sent Heinz-Harald Frentzen to Ferrari because Williams was all booked up, and we might have another German champion! Oh the possibilities!

[jagman 0]

Better yet...what if Jordan's driver (who's name eludes me at this moment) did not beat up a taxi driver and get sacked from Jordan allowing Michael his first race and the beginning of his almighty F1 history...

Also, what if Damon had of taken up McLaren's 1 million pound per win salary instead of going to Arrows, he would have had the car to win the championship again...

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

I cant remember that guys name either, but we might not have had Schumi then! And true, Damon should have gone to Mclaren, I bet he regretted the Arrows choice...

And then also, what if Ayrton Senna hadnt died and free'd up a seat at Williams for David Coulthard?!

[TotalF1 SamB 0]

Bertrand Gachot didn't beat up the driver, he sprayed him with CS gas in a fight.

It's illegal in England, and the incident took place in London.

He went to prison for a short while, and Jordan therefore had no choice but to release him.

As for Schumi - he would have gotten into F1 one way or another - he had been groomed by Mercedes in their sportscars effort...with Sauber...who brought Schumi's former team mate Heinz Harald Frentzen in...

He would have ended up with Sauber, or perhaps McLaren if he hadn't landed a seat by 95.

[Reverend Lastlap 0]

Surely The 'what if' that should be asked about Shuey is the one about 1994 and not 95 after all he did come clean about the Villeneuve affair in 97 but has kept well stumm! about Hill in 94 I'm afraid that matter still gets me in the gut.This was surely the most complete and utter carve up seen in F1 since 89/90 when Senna and Prost both openly addmitted similar outrages against each other. It is with a sense of disbelief that this injustice still stands as a world championship under the belt of Shuey.    The powers that be Bernie and the FIA et al whom dish out all the 'draconian penalties' in F1 all seem to have fudged round the issue (even in 97 the penalty handed out to Shuey for the blatant attack on Villeneuve amounted to nothing more a publicity stunt) so only if and when Shuey finally comes clean and sets the record straight will it be possible to fully judge his outstanding talent let alone the what if's.

[TotalF1 SamB 0]

Don't be absurd - that one incident doesn't make or break his talent!

Why come clean about the one and not the other?

[rotaryboy 0]

well being a little bit younger i think i have only seen photos and read about these incidents. would any care to explain what happened in more detail. i know about the 97 one very well. i also know they were great viewing rivals for a while there.

but if i was there i tell you villeneuve would be off the road as well. do or die.

ive seen pictures with hill and schumie on 2 wheels are these the ones.

but i agree you cant really judge his talent or lack of from these things. he is a champion, or lucky 4 times, come on.

but i understand what you are meaning in my own way. i wonder just how good michael would be against some real drivers. somebody has already said that mikas gone so whos gonna take it to him.

i talked about this a while ago asking if he can really be regarded as a true great, with the lack of rivalry at the moment.

also can anyone put me in the direction of interviews with senna. ive never heard him say anything.

[jagman 0]

Howdy

I gotta agree with the reverend here, what Schuey did was a blatant move to take Hill out of the race and ensure his championship.

Rotarybo, basically it was down to Hill or Schumacher for the title in the last race of the year.  Schumacher had a bit of a lead, but all of a sudden Hill started catching him and really putting on the pressure.  So much so that he forced Schumacher to make a mistake and crash of into the wall in a tight twisty section, his race obviously over. This is where Hill lost concentration, instead of waiting for Schumacher to stop crashing he made a dash down the inside on the next past of the chicane and (this is the part that makes me mad) you can see Schumacher look to his right mirror, see hill is coming through and in a last ditch effort he turns his recked car into Damons breaking his front left suspension mounting among other things....When you see it in slow motion you can really see Schumacher look to his right mirror then yank the steering wheel to hit Hill.  

Schumacher's race was over, but Hill made it to the pits where his race ended...

To many people Hill should have won that years championship but as it was, Schumacher had the points advantage and won it.

In answer to your other question, now that Mika has gone I expect Montoya to be his next rival on the track.

I dont know any good places for Senna interviews, but there are some good videos...

[jagman 0]

just to add to that.

What he has done in the past doesnt take away from his talent as you say Sam, but it sure makes some big blemishes on his career

[TotalF1 SamB 0]

Only if people keep dredging these things up.

F1 is such a fast-evolving sport - you're only as good as your last race.

Ralf Schumacher crashed his way through most of 1997 and 1998. That could be a blemish on his career.

People forget Rubens Barrichello was being threatened even this year when he took several people out over a period of races. That could be a blemish on his career.

But neither of them really are. Why? Because people don't care.

Neither are hugely high-profile, but both are as good as their last race, and not races that may have taken place 4 years ago.

Michael Schumacher is indeed a very high profile case, and there was a lot at stake - the championship. If it was like you said, then I really can't see why he wouldn't have admitted it by now. He owned up to the whole sorry Villeneuve thing, after all.

[TotalF1 Jens 0]

Hill should be a two time champinn, and had Senna not died, Schumi would only be a one or MAYBE two time champ, and Hakkinen a three time. Then again had Senna not died, 94 could have been his, 95 im not real sure, but 2001 was Schumi all the way. 2001 he really got, but 95 Im thinking would have been Senna. 2000 was Hakkinen's year, just think that he had four race victories stripped from him, three of which Schumi went on to win. Had Hakkinen had a reliable car when he needed to, Australia 2k, Brazil 2k, Germany 2k (not caused by the car, but an idiot on the track), and Indianapolis 2k would have all been his victories, easily handing him the title over Schumi. Thinking this way really shows how much of a chance you have for the title, even small things that happen in other teams can make or break your year. Even a person dying four years before you win a title can cost you...