Schumi: 'I Couldn't Work With Dennis'

[Taku 0]

planetf1

Schumi: 'I couldn't work with Dennis'

26/11/2006

Seven-time World Champions Michael Schumacher says he could have joined the McLaren F1 team had it not been for their team boss Ron Dennis.

The German driver had raced for the Mercedes brand during his younger years and a move to McLaren would not have been seen as a surprise move by anyone had it gone through.

"I had several discussions and meetings with McLaren Mercedes, even as early as Monaco in 1995.

"But we didn't really fit each other so nothing came of it," said the now retired German to the Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper.

At Ferrari Schumacher's relationship with both Ross Brawn and Jean Todt were legendary and seen as key to the success they enjoyed. When asked to point out why he thought McLaren was not the team for him Schumacher's answer was simple.

"Ron Dennis. Everything with Mercedes ran very well and we could have found a way but Ron had another view of how an F1 team should function."

_____________________________________________________________

yes, the idea that drivers should be able to race each other!

i never understood the fit when m$ moved to ferrari. he didn't seem to me at all a typical ferrari driver in the gilles villeneuve-mould, and still the association doesn't make complete sense to me. he has always been too calculated, methodical and ruthless and i always assumed he would end up driving for mercedes.

does anybody think he could have been as successful at a mercedes-engined mclaren team?

[ykickamoocow 0]

yes, the idea that drivers should be able to race each other!

To be fair Ron Dennis did favour 1 driver over another several times. Coulthard would have 15 wins if Dennis didnt employ team orders.

[Quiet One 15]

To be fair Ron Dennis did favour 1 driver over another several times. Coulthard would have 15 wins if Dennis didnt employ team orders.

Yes but no one had the number one seat at mc laren guaranteed at the beggining of each season...and thats what MS wanted.

[Taku 0]

yes i did think of that, he has always seemed to favour one over the other and i've no doubt that there were clauses in his contracts which to most would look like team orders. but the point is, with mclaren you at least knew that both drivers had an equal chance of winning the title each year. with ferrari you just knew that there was only ever one driver in the hunt.

ron seemed to lean one way, but if dc ever started a season well and didn't psychologically concede to 2nd driver status, he could have very well won a wdc.

[F1 FANatic 1]

could we plz stop beating the dead horse. or should i start pulling out the senna pictures and vids and documents that show he wasn't the saint all of you say he was. and then we can have ANOTHER pointless argument.

[Jean Todt 4]

To be fair Ron Dennis did favour 1 driver over another several times. Coulthard would have 15 wins if Dennis didnt employ team orders.

dc was given more preference when he was in a better position(2001), just like how mika was given more preference when he was in a better position (for most of the time ).

as for micheal using team orders! phiew! cut it out guys! haven't you had enough of trashing him?

give him little respect please! he built a team literally from scratch! and he deserves a little more respect now that he has retired! there is no use pointing fingers at him...as some one said...its like beating a dead horse!

[Quiet One 15]

dc was given more preference when he was in a better position(2001), just like how mika was given more preference when he was in a better position (for most of the time ).

as for micheal using team orders! phiew! cut it out guys! haven't you had enough of trashing him?

give him little respect please! he built a team literally from scratch! and he deserves a little more respect now that he has retired! there is no use pointing fingers at him...as some one said...its like beating a dead horse!

We are not beating a dead horse nor are we accusing him of anything. Personally, i think that number one drivers with so much difference regarding their team mates are a bad thing, but that is a matter of opinion, of course. Yet, all we are doing is interpreting what MS (the dead horse himself) said. No MS bashing so far in this thread, no need to get so defensive!

[Shane2 0]

The fact a man will not race in a team because they refuse to give him number 1 status is pretty sad whether you like MS or not. He only went to ferrari because they always made others defer to him.

[dribbler 6]

It's an interesting discussion. Completely pointless of course because we'll never know either way but my suspicion is that no, Michael wouldn't have been statistically as successful at Woking but i bet Mclaren as a whole would have done better with him. He would have been good enough to command a number one status if that's what he wanted too, in my opinion.

[tifosi too! 0]

The fact a man will not race in a team because they refuse to give him number 1 status is pretty sad whether you like MS or not. He only went to ferrari because they always made others defer to him.

Wow, you guys give the word "speculation" a new meaning here!!Now it means putting words in someone's mouth and then argue about it as if he said it, without even implying it

[tifosi too! 0]

yes, the idea that drivers should be able to race each other!

does anybody think he could have been as successful at a mercedes-engined mclaren team?

So you believe RD is actually a very nice person to work with and MS is lying again, huh!Yes that's it!

How do you know RD wouldn't give MS preferential treatment?You know better about how to run an F1 team?Look at Ferrari and the "golden years" now written in the history books with MS as a driver!RD would kill by himself his 2nd driver in order to achieve that.

MS could have been as successful in Mclaren,maybe more,maybe less, maybe not at all!We 'll never know!But you can bet he would have achieved the maximum for the team.

[Max Mosley 2]

It's an interesting discussion. Completely pointless of course because we'll never know either way but my suspicion is that no, Michael wouldn't have been statistically as successful at Woking but i bet Mclaren as a whole would have done better with him. He would have been good enough to command a number one status if that's what he wanted too, in my opinion.

Agreed. Ron said in the past that he's seriously talked to Michael about working together many times and that MS never mentioned a preferential status in the team.

[Taku 0]

could we plz stop beating the dead horse. or should i start pulling out the senna pictures and vids and documents that show he wasn't the saint all of you say he was. and then we can have ANOTHER pointless argument.

dude, you need to relax. i have no idea why you're ranting about senna in here. it's the offseason, you'll find a lot of "pointless" arguments in here so i suggest you stay away until the season restarts if you don't like what you see. i've never seen this topic posted in here before so i think it's an interesting discussion. part of the post-mortem of m$' career and where it could have gone.

So you believe RD is actually a very nice person to work with and MS is lying again, huh!Yes that's it!

How do you know RD wouldn't give MS preferential treatment?You know better about how to run an F1 team?Look at Ferrari and the "golden years" now written in the history books with MS as a driver!RD would kill by himself his 2nd driver in order to achieve that.

MS could have been as successful in Mclaren,maybe more,maybe less, maybe not at all!We 'll never know!But you can bet he would have achieved the maximum for the team.

woh no i never said m$ was lying again. in fact i never said m$ lied at all...

i also never said that ron would be a nice person to work with either... you should get into the habit of reading the posts you reply to. are you suggesting that m$ wouldn't go to mclaren because he thinks ron isn't a nice guy? do you think ron would have allowed austria 02 to happen?

obviously we'll never know, but i like to contemplate the hypotheticals in the offseason. particularly since m$ has clearly said that ron was the dealbreaker. what do you suggest it was about ron that killed the deal?

Agreed. Ron said in the past that he's seriously talked to Michael about working together many times and that MS never mentioned a preferential status in the team.

i find that hard to believe. do you believe the broadly accepted theory that m$ was left without a position at ferrari in '07 because kimi would not accept anything but equal status and that m$ wasn't prepared to accept such a teammate? if so, then i think it goes without saying that m$ would have no doubt required such status at mclaren.

the only other sticking point that makes sense is that m$ would have wanted to bring in his own people around him, at the very least his engineers. i can't imagine him being opposed to working with a great tech director/designer such as adrian newey. or maybe he wanted rory byrne there instead?

[Max Mosley 2]

Personally, no I don't go along with the theory you mention. I don't think Michael was guaranteed no 1 status at Ferrari. Rather I think it was simply accepted that the better driver would receive support from the other. Michael of course did have an advantage in that the team fully expected him to be better and inevitably they would thus behave slightly differently around him. I suspect he retired mainly because he's old. Maybe he didn't feel he could match Kimi now and didn't want to play second fiddle, or maybe he just couldn't be bothered any more. Who knows... As to what michael was referring above I don't know either tbh. It could be the fact that he wanted the drivers to work together more (rather than guaranteed no 1 status) or it could be someting different altogether. But I don't think MS would be so stupid as to refer to team orders in the way it might appear above.

Welcome back btw. You haven't posted so much recently.

[Taku 0]

interesting.. i think it's pretty clear that m$ always had number 1 status at ferrari, but your theory has some merit in that m$ did play support to eddie irvine, but it would have been ridiculous had he not.

m$ being nudged into retirement does make sense though, esp given his performance at the end of the year. he looked like a driver clearly not ready for retirement. but alas, who knows... i think m$ at mercedes would have been just as golden, if not better than m$ at ferrari, only mercedes would have had to buy out ron and his partner for it to happen!

thanks, yes it's been a while and long time between posts. i'm now living in tokyo where work demands mean not a lot of free time... i did make it to suzuka though for m$' last race in japan. it was very disappointing when he failed to come around the corner due to that engine failure.

[Max Mosley 2]

What do you do in Tokyo? Yeah MS' last races were quite sad in a way I think, especially suzuka.

[tifosi too! 0]

woh no i never said m$ was lying again. in fact i never said m$ lied at all...

i also never said that ron would be a nice person to work with either... you should get into the habit of reading the posts you reply to. are you suggesting that m$ wouldn't go to mclaren because he thinks ron isn't a nice guy? do you think ron would have allowed austria 02 to happen?

Maybe you are the one who is rather confused!Aren't you suggesting that MS didn't go to Mclaren because RD wouldn't have him as the No1 driver and that's why he didn't go there?That's what i replied at and the 'nice guy' part was ironic...!I was simply stating that any speculation is as good as yours and having in mind that F1 is a multibillion sport with intense politics and behind the scenes negotiations, the idea of MS being afraid to go there because he wanted a team that he would use as puppets and so he chose Ferrari, is not that valid!

[pabloh20 1]

interesting.. i think it's pretty clear that m$ always had number 1 status at ferrari, but your theory has some merit in that m$ did play support to eddie irvine, but it would have been ridiculous had he not.

m$ being nudged into retirement does make sense though, esp given his performance at the end of the year. he looked like a driver clearly not ready for retirement. but alas, who knows... i think m$ at mercedes would have been just as golden, if not better than m$ at ferrari, only mercedes would have had to buy out ron and his partner for it to happen!

I agree with Murray on this - I think if any team mate had been able to build up a lead on him in the first few races of a season, then Ferrari would have concentrated on them.

As for retirement - I think I have to believe what MS says about the motivational aspects with regards to the effort that goes into being at the top of his game. Personally, I don't think MS has it in his 'make up', even at this stage of his life, to be frightened of other drivers ability. It would have been a battle royale between Kimi and MS, I think.

[Shane2 0]

Personally, no I don't go along with the theory you mention. I don't think Michael was guaranteed no 1 status at Ferrari. Rather I think it was simply accepted that the better driver would receive support from the other. Michael of course did have an advantage in that the team fully expected him to be better and inevitably they would thus behave slightly differently around him. I suspect he retired mainly because he's old. Maybe he didn't feel he could match Kimi now and didn't want to play second fiddle, or maybe he just couldn't be bothered any more. Who knows... As to what michael was referring above I don't know either tbh. It could be the fact that he wanted the drivers to work together more (rather than guaranteed no 1 status) or it could be someting different altogether. But I don't think MS would be so stupid as to refer to team orders in the way it might appear above.

Welcome back btw. You haven't posted so much recently.

Not really true. Eddie Ervine for a start had a clause written into his contract that he had to move over for him.

[pabloh20 1]

Not really true. Eddie Ervine for a start had a clause written into his contract that he had to move over for him.

Has this ever been proved, other than perhaps Irvine saying it? I've had a mufties about and I can't find anything about it.

[Shane2 0]

It was a widely known fact, what "proof" do you want.

If you go along those lines there is no "proof" that button payed off frank williams, there is no "proof" that Alonso signed for McLaren before the start of 2006, there is no "proof" of a lot of things in F1, and short of seeing the teams contract sheets we are unlikely to ever get the "proof" you want.

The commentators knew it, the paddock knew it, and it was blatantly obvious when the pair drove in their cars.

[pabloh20 1]

It was a widely known fact, what "proof" do you want.

If you go along those lines there is no "proof" that button payed off frank williams, there is no "proof" that Alonso signed for McLaren before the start of 2006, there is no "proof" of a lot of things in F1, and short of seeing the teams contract sheets we are unlikely to ever get the "proof" you want.

The commentators knew it, the paddock knew it, and it was blatantly obvious when the pair drove in their cars.

Calm down, calm down, sunshine!!

I was only asking as you seemed adamant, in fact you put the 'had' in bold, so I thought there was some evidence that had come to light that I hadn't seen - as in Eddie saying something or equivalent. Just because drivers mover over for their team mates doesn't mean it's written into their contract. MS was probably faster than Eddie 90% of the time and was nearly always in a position of fighting for the title. I personally don't think Ferrari would have such a thing written into a contract - it doesn't make business sense.

[tifosi too! 0]

Irvine or Rubens never said anything like this was written in their contracts!Perhaps because there wasn't anything...

[Shane2 0]

It is very obvious that there was. There where several occasions where rubens was faster and had to move, and the same thing happened to massa as well. Like it or lump it, Schumacher was an arrogant glory hog that would not drive for a team in which his team mate would be a threat to him. Just ask yourself why he refused to drive alongside Raikkonen next year (and trust me its nothing to do with motivation).

[pabloh20 1]

It is very obvious that there was. There where several occasions where rubens was faster and had to move, and the same thing happened to massa as well. Like it or lump it, Schumacher was an arrogant glory hog that would not drive for a team in which his team mate would be a threat to him. Just ask yourself why he refused to drive alongside Raikkonen next year (and trust me its nothing to do with motivation).

Well, I guess that's where our opinions differ. I don't believe anybody who has been as good as MS in F1 would fear other drivers, I don't imagine it would even enter his head. However, each to their own beliefs.