Schumacher Receives Reprimand

[ykickamoocow 0]

(GMM) Michael Schumacher's awkward 2005 finale in Shanghai ended with an official stewards' reprimand.

The FIA-backed troupe in China found Schumacher, Ferrari's 36-year-old deposed champion, to blame for a pre-race collision with Dutch Minardi driver Christijan Albers.

A Ferrari spokesman said no actual penalty, apart from the official reprimand, was imposed.

After the Chinese grand prix, during which Michael also spun the spare car into the gravel in a Safety Car period, he had to stick around for the stewards' enquiry where video evidence showed him swerving hard to the left before the Albers jolt.

''This weird ending pretty much sums up our season,'' Schumacher lamented. ''I assume that I am at least partially at fault for the incident.''

Fellow F1 veteran and GPDA director David Coulthard reckons the incident proves that a concrete rule is required to make drivers go at a 'safe speed' at all times.

''It usually takes an incident to make things happen,'' the Scot told 'ITV'.

Schumacher headed home for Switzerland on Sunday evening and will do well to ignore the British press. The 'Times' newspaper printed a graph of his 'decline' in 2005, while the 'Sun' went with the Monday morning headline 'Schuey goes screwy'.

[Senna 0]

Thanks for that

[monza gorilla 1]

''I assume that I am at least partially at fault for the incident"

You know, I could almost construe that as an admission of culpability. Is M$ mellowing in his advancing years?

I think the blame, if any should be apportioned at all, should be split evenly. Both drivers were asleep at the wheel.

[Shadow 0]

yeah and albers had his foot on the accelarator as well.

and as for MS, mirrors.......

[Senna 0]

yeah and albers had his foot on the accelarator as well.

and as for MS, mirrors.......

It reminds me of Spa 1998 (just forget about the weather)

[Shadow 0]

in a sense yes it does

[Senna 0]

in a sense yes it does

It was a similar situation, the weather and thus visibility levels were markedly different but the principle is identical.