Sir Stirling Moss retires at last

**Robinho** · 17th Jun 11, 08:41

I've done a bit of a search on google and it seems what Sir Stirling actually said was:

"I think he was lucky to get all those titles, frankly. He (Schumacher) got them because he was in the right car."

Which IMO is prety accurate, no-one is doubting that he had to drive the car to victory, something he did a huge number of times, but it could easily seen as lucky that Schumacher was in a car good enough to win a championship in at least 7 seasons, not to mention the years he nearly won against JV, Mika and Alonso, so you could argue that for 10 seasons Schumacher had a car capable of wining the title.

Thats not to say he is lucky to actually win, but its pretty fortunate to be in that position for that length of time during his career. He would not have won 7 titles if he'd ended up in a Williams or a MacLaren at the wrong time, but other than a couple of dodgy Ferraris in his early time there he nealry always had a car capable and rarely a teamate as good to challenge him.

It might have been a bit of a controversial statement for Moss to make, but its hardly inaccurate either

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 08:56

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Yes you can. There are lucky wins, and then there are wins that aren't down to luck. It can also be said that Schumacher was, perhaps, fortunate that in his era of domination the opposition he was up against wasn't as strong as the current crop.

Beyond that, you seem to have an undue problem with everyone whose every comment about your favourite driver isn't an undiluted paean of praise. Your attitude betrays a complete (and, if I may say so, rather juvenile) lack of knowledge and appreciation of history.

Oh, and your accusations of senility are offensive. There is no other way of describing them.

I've no issues with people fairly criticising another driver or Schumacher. I myself have criticised him in the past for moves he has done and I don't agree with everything he has done either. I have issues with a driver, especially one that has never even won a championship, devaluing the achievements another driver worked so hard to achieve.

Schumacher broke his balls to achieve 7 world championships. The only person I see with a lack of appreciation is Stirling Moss. Schumacher has given a lot to F1 and has earned the right to some respect. He has earned it far more than Moss has as far as I'm concerned.

Regards the drivers of Schumacher's generation, that's an insult to drivers such as Alonso, Hakkinen, Raikkonen, Massa etc who all competed against Schumacher in his prime. I also see no evidence to suggest that the current generation of drivers is any better than those in F1 ten years ago. Schumacher simply blew them away in his Ferrari days. F1 always has the best drivers available in the world at all times and unless you can give me some evidence that the level of world talent can somehow vary over the course of a ten year period I’ll stick to what I said, there was no difference in driver talent between Schumaher’s generation and the current one, Schumacher was simply the best driver throughout the course of his first F1 career.

I'm also well aware of Moss's history and how good he was, but the point remains, he never won a world championship and couldn't do so against a guy 18 years his senior. Even after Fangio retired he still didn't become world champion. He came third in 59, 60 and 61. I'd also like to point out that only a few years ago Moss ranked Schumacher as 4th in the pantheon of greatest drivers - yet he still believes that he was lucky to win 7 WDC's. Contradiction? I think so.

Schumacher earned those wins by hard work and determination and doesn't deserve to have those championships devalued and belittled by a guy that couldn't even win one.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 09:03

Originally Posted by Robinho

I've done a bit of a search on google and it seems what Sir Stirling actually said was:
"I think he was lucky to get all those titles, frankly. He (Schumacher) got them because he was in the right car."
Which IMO is prety accurate, no-one is doubting that he had to drive the car to victory, something he did a huge number of times, but it could easily seen as lucky that Schumacher was in a car good enough to win a championship in at least 7 seasons, not to mention the years he nearly won against JV, Mika and Alonso, so you could argue that for 10 seasons Schumacher had a car capable of wining the title.
Thats not to say he is lucky to actually win, but its pretty fortunate to be in that position for that length of time during his career. He would not have won 7 titles if he'd ended up in a Williams or a MacLaren at the wrong time, but other than a couple of dodgy Ferraris in his early time there he nealry always had a car capable and rarely a teamate as good to challenge him.
It might have been a bit of a controversial statement for Moss to make, but its hardly inaccurate either

Well, I disagree with that completely. Schumacher made his own luck by working with the Ferrari engineers to develop a car that could win WDC’s. It was his ability to pay attention to all technical details and to scrupulously inspect every single aspect of the car that won him his 7 WDC’s and ensured he had a brilliant car throughout those years. That’s part of what made him better than the rest. F1 is just as much about what you do off the track as what you do on it

I'll admit there was some luck, a little, involved to be able to get and attract the right people around him for to develop the Ferrari as they did but it was not luck that won him the 7 WDC's. It was his hard work and skill.

**Mark** · 17th Jun 11, 09:42

And you're entitled to that opinion as it's a completely valid one. However the point is that what Moss said is also a valid opinion and is not indicative of mental illness. I dare say Sir Stirling knows a damn sight more about Formula 1 than anybody on this forum, including myself.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 10:27

Originally Posted by Mark

And you're entitled to that opinion as it's a completely valid one. However the point is that what Moss said is also a valid opinion and is not indicative of mental illness. I dare say Sir Stirling knows a damn sight more about Formula 1 than anybody on this forum, including myself.

How would Stirling know more about F1 than any of us exactly? He hasn't raced in F1 for 50 years. For sure he has contacts still but I doubt Stirling knows anymore about Schumacher and Ferrari than anyone that watched the TV Coverage.

**BDunnell** · 17th Jun 11, 10:40

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

How would Stirling know more about F1 than any of us exactly? He hasn't raced in F1 for 50 years. For sure he has contacts still but I doubt Stirling knows anymore about Schumacher and Ferrari than anyone that watched the TV Coverage.

A statement typical of the generation who believe that because they are given the forum for their opinion on websites such as this, those opinions must be as valid as those whose involvement in the subject in question has run rather deeper than just watching and commenting.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 10:50

Originally Posted by BDunnell

A statement typical of the generation who believe that because they are given the forum for their opinion on websites such as this, those opinions must be as valid as those whose involvement in the subject in question has run rather deeper than just watching and commenting.

A statement typical of a man from a generation that makes assumptions about others involvement in a sport when he knows nothing about them

**BDunnell** · 17th Jun 11, 11:08

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

A statement typical of a man from a generation that makes assumptions about others involvement in a sport when he knows nothing about them

I think we know quite a lot about Stirling Moss, do we not? Mark's statement above is entirely accurate.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 11:25

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I think we know quite a lot about Stirling Moss, do we not? Mark's statement above is entirely accurate.

Indeed and I think we know quite enough about Schumacher to know that Stirling's statment about him being luck to win 7 WDC's is completely inaccurate. I've met Sir Stirling twice myself. While it may not seem obvious from my posts I do respect Sir Stirling and, lucid as he may seem, he genuinely has lost perspective on Schumacher. I don't know is it that he is jealous or what, but he certainly has a brain fade when it comes to the 7 time WDC. He also isn't consistent in his evaluation of him either.

**BDunnell** · 17th Jun 11, 12:17

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Indeed and I think we know quite enough about Schumacher to know that Stirling's statment about him being luck to win 7 WDC's is completely inaccurate. I've met Sir Stirling twice myself. While it may not seem obvious from my posts I do respect Sir Stirling and, lucid as he may seem, he genuinely has lost perspective on Schumacher. I don't know is it that he is jealous or what, but he certainly has a brain fade when it comes to the 7 time WDC. He also isn't consistent in his evaluation of him either.

I still think your assessment is typical of the more blinkered aspects of the 'fanboy' approach to F1 enthusiasm, sadly.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 12:25

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I still think your assessment is typical of the more blinkered aspects of the 'fanboy' approach to F1 enthusiasm, sadly.

I could say the same about your assessment of Stirling given that you don't agree with my opinion

**Bob Riebe** · 17th Jun 11, 17:22

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

Well, I disagree with that completely. Schumacher made his own luck by working with the Ferrari engineers to develop a car that could win WDC’s. It was his ability to pay attention to all technical details and to scrupulously inspect every single aspect of the car that won him his 7 WDC’s and ensured he had a brilliant car throughout those years. That’s part of what made him better than the rest. F1 is just as much about what you do off the track as what you do on it

I'll admit there was some luck, a little, involved to be able to get and attract the right people around him for to develop the Ferrari as they did but it was not luck that won him the 7 WDC's. It was his hard work and skill.

I agree here, there IS NO such thing as luck. Shumacher was fortunate, but you make your own fortune.
At time one is has the benefit, or suffers the consequences of a twist of fate, but on the whole how fortunate one is, is the result of the one's drive and determination.

Shumacher's talent may have been not really as a driver, but as a business man whose business was being sure he was in the best car, at the correct time.

**Bob Riebe** · 17th Jun 11, 17:27

Originally Posted by BDunnell

A statement typical of the generation who believe that because they are given the forum for their opinion on websites such as this, those opinions must be as valid as those whose involvement in the subject in question has run rather deeper than just watching and commenting.

To be fair, over the decades, and this was decades ago, I heard(TV) read several times, drivers of the day saying "when was the last time he actually drove a F-1 (or has he ever driven an Indy) car?"

They were grumbling a bit that he did seem to be a bit of a legend in his own mind.

Makes one wonder, had he not crashed himself out of competition and gone on to a championship, and let's say, won Indy, what would hes ego have been like?

**steveaki13** · 17th Jun 11, 17:57

Originally Posted by BDunnell

A statement typical of the generation who believe that because they are given the forum for their opinion on websites such as this, those opinions must be as valid as those whose involvement in the subject in question has run rather deeper than just watching and commenting.

Agree.

I am from this generation, but until I have driven in, attended and spoken to people involved in as many Grand Prix as Stirling has then I wont be declaring I now more about F1 than him despite almost 20 years of solid viewing.

This whole debate about the mental state of Moss, is bizzare.

**steveaki13** · 17th Jun 11, 18:06

Originally Posted by The Black Knight

He also isn't consistent in his evaluation of him either.

Surely opinion can change though and doesn't have to be consistent.

For example Hakkinen was extremely lucky to get his first win in Jerez 97, he didn't really earn or deserve the victory as much as a straight race win. So my opinion is he was lucky to achieve that win, however that doesn't mean my opinion is that Hakkinen was lucky to win 2 world titles.

The 98 and 99 titles were won through brilliant skill and driving against one Michael Schumacher and so my opinion of those events are not consistant.

The same as Stirling thought Schumachers win was awesome in Spain 96, he maybe felt Schumacher got a slice of luck in winning 7 titles rather than say 5.

Now I am not saying I agree, as I feel Schumi deserved and earned all of those titles through years of hard work and graft, but my point is that peoples opinions of different events and careers vary and are not always consistent.

And are valid!!

To say because he praised Schumi for Spain 96 he then can't question two world titles later is a bit foolish.

**BDunnell** · 17th Jun 11, 18:16

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

To be fair, over the decades, and this was decades ago, I heard(TV) read several times, drivers of the day saying "when was the last time he actually drove a F-1 (or has he ever driven an Indy) car?"

Somewhat different from some person on an internet forum believing they know better.

**BDunnell** · 17th Jun 11, 18:17

Originally Posted by aki13

I am from this generation, but until I have driven in, attended and spoken to people involved in as many Grand Prix as Stirling has then I wont be declaring I now more about F1 than him despite almost 20 years of solid viewing.

Nor me.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 19:46

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Somewhat different from some person on an internet forum believing they know better.

Oh I don't believe I know better. I know I do. I've met plenty of people from the paddock and I attend quite a lot of F1 races myself. I'm lucky that way that through my karting career I made a lot of friends that are now in F1 circles, all before an accident forced me to end my racing.

Stirling Moss, as someone said above, has a big ego on him. I would love to see a driver of this generation tear into him and take him down a peg or two. Unfortunately, too many people believe he is a legend despite never even winning a title and losing to a man 18 years his senior and I doubt any driver would take that "legend" on. This infatuation that people have with him has always baffled me, honestly.

**The Black Knight** · 17th Jun 11, 19:51

Originally Posted by aki13

Surely opinion can change though and doesn't have to be consistent.

For example Hakkinen was extremely lucky to get his first win in Jerez 97, he didn't really earn or deserve the victory as much as a straight race win. So my opinion is he was lucky to achieve that win, however that doesn't mean my opinion is that Hakkinen was lucky to win 2 world titles.

The 98 and 99 titles were won through brilliant skill and driving against one Michael Schumacher and so my opinion of those events are not consistant.

The same as Stirling thought Schumachers win was awesome in Spain 96, he maybe felt Schumacher got a slice of luck in winning 7 titles rather than say 5.

Now I am not saying I agree, as I feel Schumi deserved and earned all of those titles through years of hard work and graft, but my point is that peoples opinions of different events and careers vary and are not always consistent.

And are valid!!

To say because he praised Schumi for Spain 96 he then can't question two world titles later is a bit foolish.

Well, between the time that Moss rated Schumacher 4th best ever and then said he was lucky to win his World Titles, Schumacher was after 3 years off and only competed in a few grand prix.

Explain to me how his mind could have changed so much?