Team orders how many how many championships were handed to Schumacher ?

[CNR]

if ralf thinks like this michael must have been given a few more wins than we know about
http://www.itv-f1.com/Feature.aspx?Type=Gravel_Trap&id=46393



Former F1 racer Ralf Schumacher reckons that Red Bull ‘allowing’ Mark Webber to win the German Grand Prix was a mistake and that his fellow countryman Sebastian Vettel should have been given the victory as he is a better bet for the title.
You can say what you like about the Germans, but at least they stick together.
Ralf said in an interview with Bild: “There are no team orders at Red Bull and that is actually an error.
“Sebastian is the stronger driver and he should be collecting every point he can.”

[Tazio]

Please expound!
I don't see any logic in your asertion!
But I'm open to any salacious info you might have!
Please share it with the group.

[Sonic]

First let me say; NOT A SCHUMACHER FAN. But IMO he did not have a single championship handed to him. I believe it was the eddie irvine era that he received the most help (I'm thinking suzuka here). I say this because he generally didn't have the best car and needed to "manipulate" the races to keep his rivals off balance, but I don't think that gave him any championships. Whilst the Rubens era had more ovious team orders (A1 ring) in those years the car was more dominant and so the extra few points gained did not make the difference in the championship battle.

[BeansBeansBeans]

Michael Schumacher did not invent team orders. Throughout history, many top drivers have benefited from having clear No.1 status. Trying to denigrate Schumacher's achievements in this way is pointless and foolhardy.

[ShiftingGears]

Well, it's pretty obvious that it's too early to call team orders at Red Bull. Except to Ralf.

[markabilly]

not enough if u ask schui

[jens]

If we had that "most wins" rule, Red Bull would have most probably used team orders. Win ratio of 6-3-0 (JB-SV-MW) leaves more chances than 6-2-1.

[ioan]

Well, it's pretty obvious that it's too early to call team orders at Red Bull. Except to Ralf.

You can't say that for sure until the whole drama is over.
Brawn already used it several times this year. You know what the wise men say: 'Better be sure than sorry'!

[ioan]

See you are good at pearls too! :laugh: :rotflmao:

That's called saying the truth.
I think it would be worse if I saw it and said it didn't happen, like someone we both know! :p :

[driveace]

The two unhappy guys here are Vettel and Barichelo,who have both shown extreme disapproval in post race interviews,after their teams mates getting too much help from their teams

[ioan]

I don't think Michael Schumacher would back you up there... :p

Why not?!
I remember him giving the top position back in Austria when team orders were used. You shouldn't believe that he didn't feel bad or he didn't realized that it was not the right thing to ask Rubens to let him by.
He didn't hesitate giving Rubens back that win later in the season when he didn't need to win anymore.

Anyway Ferrari used team orders a couple of times with Rubens in 6 years.
Brawn did it as many times in just half a season.

[christophulus]

Schumacher won all of his titles fairly, Barrichello was rarely on the same level and there was no question over who was the lead driver. It was helped massively by the fact the Ferrari was far superior to the rest but he didn't need team orders.

That said, I was not impressed by the way they fixed the result in Austria. As I recall Barrichello was the better driver on the day and had to give up the win. That was a mistake, and it certainly bothered me at the time, but it wasn't illegal so it's all irrelevant.. Certainly didn't affect who won the title in the end.

[wedge]

Team orders how many how many championships were handed to Schumacher ?

Ironically, the ones that he didn't win.

1999 - Irvine's gimp

2006 - Massa looked faster in USGP would never know how quick he could've been and could've lapped Schumi in Brazil if he wanted to.

[ShiftingGears]

You can't say that for sure until the whole drama is over.
Brawn already used it several times this year. You know what the wise men say: 'Better be sure than sorry'!

Button has clearly been the better Brawn driver, and Barrichello is significantly behind in points. Not the case for Red Bull, so it would be a mistake to force team orders.

[Big Ben]

Schumacher? Who's that?

Q - How many titles did Schumacher win due to team orders?

A - One less than Hamilton.

[555-04Q2]

MS was handed all 7 WDC titles on a platter :s tareup:

Can we move along now :?:

[ioan]

Q - How many titles did Schumacher win due to team orders?

A - One less than Hamilton.

:D :up:

Henners, stupid threads deserve flippant responses.

[V12]

How many championships were handed to Schumacher? Zero, IMO.

Race wins, on the other hand...

The frustrating thing about, say, Austria 2002, is that even without the use of hindsight you knew damn well Schuey wasn't going to need those extra 4 points to win the title.

I was surprised how long this thread has remained civil...
Its the same people everytime :rolleyes:

Oh yes, sorry, I forgot.

Mclaren employed "Team Strategy", which, as we all know, is nothing like "Team Orders", no, not one bit.

How many championships were handed to Schumacher? Zero, IMO.

Race wins, on the other hand

Malaysia 1999, US GP 2002.....oh, hold on, he handed those to his team-mate.

He gave as many "wins" as he was given.

[V12]

Malaysia 1999, US GP 2002.....oh, hold on, he handed those to his team-mate.

He gave as many "wins" as he was given.

I never said he didn't. Indy 2002 took the yellow stuff as well, was that the one where they tried to stage an exact dead heat and (naturally, with F1's high precision timing system) failed? Rubens should have won in Austria and Schuey should have won Indy...if only life was that simple!

[jens]

Malaysia 1999, US GP 2002.....oh, hold on, he handed those to his team-mate.

He gave as many "wins" as he was given.

He gave even more wins, driving deliberately slowly behind Rubens in Hungary & Italy in 2002. Schumacher tried to help RB also in 2001, giving up his hopes for a race win in the US Grand Prix and driving behind Rubens, whose car alas let him down a few laps before the end. In Italy'01 MS didn't put up much of a fight either, leaving RB to try and fight it out for the win.

Michael was not only an excellent #1, but also an excellent #2. :)

[Roamy]

MS was handed all 7 WDC titles on a platter :s tareup:

Can we move along now :?:

Thank you - It is about time you came to your senses. Be sure and read Tad's book when it hits the stands.

Ferrari are not the only guilty party here, thats not the point being made. Remember the Mclaren, Coulthard, Hakkinen incident... I was as appalled then as I was watching in Austria 2002..

I wasn't.

Team Orders have been a part of motorsport since the first time somebody entered two cars in a race.

Anyone who got upset about Melbourne 98 or Austria 02 was watching the wrong sport.

[D-Type]

I wasn't.

Team Orders have been a part of motorsport since the first time somebody entered two cars in a race.

Anyone who got upset about Melbourne 98 or Austria 02 was watching the wrong sport.
Very well put. I totally agree.

[Saint Devote]

Lets just say that along came Fernando Alonso and in a competitive car, Schumacher never had an answer for him.

He beat Schumacher from the day he had the competitive Renault and Michael retired.

Point is that if there had been more competition compared to the 1980's or if Senna had lived, probably Schumi would not have won as many grands prix or championships.

Did he deserve them - except for a handful of wins? Yes, because he was a driver that always gave his all and had the ability to make the best, always. He is not responsible for the f1 environment.

[Tazio]

Lets just say that along came Fernando Alonso and in a competitive car, Schumacher never had an answer for him.
I have to disagree. There is one race that stands out in my mind.
Now mind you I'm a huge Alonso fan, although a Ferrari fan first.
I myself have argued on this forum that Fred sent Mike into retirement. But it's not really true.
Plus Fred would be a very special talent in any era.
Fred championship in 2005 had nothing to do with beating Mike, as that Ferrari was not competitive.
In 2006 that WDC could have gone either way. I know the F2004 was a seriously strong car for obvious reasons.
However If you watch France 2004 Fred had Mike beaten dead nuts.
So Brawn brings Mike in and short fills him puts him on a four stopper and only asks Mike to make up 25 seconds in 13 laps.
You cannot watch that race and say that Renault was not competitive on that track that day.
And Tazio "Il Mantovano Volante" Nuvolari is the only other pilot that could have pulled those lap times out of his @$$
The expression on Alonso's face during the post race interview was priceless :)

[Ari]

Lol at Little Schumy telling us how much better Vettel is than Webber. Last I checked there's 1.5 points between the next wunderkid and an old bloke with a dodgey shoulder and knee.

[Saint Devote]

I have to disagree. There is one race that stands out in my mind.
Now mind you I'm a huge Alonso fan, although a Ferrari fan first.
I myself have argued on this forum that Fred sent Mike into retirement. But it's not really true.
Plus Fred would be a very special talent in any era.
Fred championship in 2005 had nothing to do with beating Mike, as that Ferrari was not competitive.
In 2006 that WDC could have gone either way. I know the F2004 was a seriously strong car for obvious reasons.
However If you watch France 2004 Fred had Mike beaten dead nuts.
So Brawn brings Mike in and short fills him puts him on a four stopper and only asks Mike to make up 25 seconds in 13 laps.
You cannot watch that race and say that Renault was not competitive on that track that day.
And Tazio "Il Mantovano Volante" Nuvolari is the only other pilot that could have pulled those lap times out of his @$$
The expression on Alonso's face during the post race interview was priceless :)

Your comment is fair enough but consideration must be given that Schumi was already an experienced multi-champion where Alonso was just entering his "champion zone".

I think that in 2006 Schumi saw just how strong Alonso was becoming.

He is I would say the natural successor to Schumi at Ferrari and the sooner they sign him the better.

[Saint Devote]

Well put and this is a point I have made in the past, but it doesn't seem to go down well on this forum.

Schumacher was a fantastic pilot and in my opinion apart from 1994, every other championship he got, he deserved. Every team mate he had, he out classed so apart from a few races where team orders came into play, I don't think he was handed any championships that he wouldn't have won anyway. Of course the calibre of competition was alot different to previous generations, and it could have been alot different. None of this should take anything away from MS though, as he is not the greatest but the best there has been until now IMO.

Thank you and I concur.

I think that in 2006 Schumi saw just how strong Alonso was becoming.


And the fact that Michael was 37 had something to do with it to.



He is I would say the natural successor to Schumi at Ferrari and the sooner they sign him the better.

Agree with that.

[Tazio]

And the fact that Michael was 37 had something to do with it to.



Agree with that.
Me three :p :

[Saint Devote]

And the fact that Michael was 37 had something to do with it to.

Maybe, but if he had been winning as had Nigel Mansell at the age of 39, I do not think retirement would have been on the agenda.

I do think that he did not have an answer because Alonso was too much of a force for him.

[Ranger]

Maybe, but if he had been winning as had Nigel Mansell at the age of 39, I do not think retirement would have been on the agenda.

I do think that he did not have an answer because Alonso was too much of a force for him.

Not at all.

The facts were that he was in his late thirties, had been a Formula 1 driver for 17 years, was already by far the most successful driver of all time, and had a young family.

All of those mattered much more in his decision to retire than paddock perceptions that could be argued tenuously.

[ioan]

Maybe, but if he had been winning as had Nigel Mansell at the age of 39, I do not think retirement would have been on the agenda.

Nice try, but last time I checked he did win races during the 2006 season. He even won the race where he announced his retirement.

[Tazio]

Back on topic:

Maybe, but if he had been winning as had Nigel Mansell Are you referring to Nigel Riccardo would you mind pulling over for me? Mansell :mark:

I do think that he did not have an answer because Alonso was too much of a force for him.

Erm, didn't the Ferrari engine blow up when Michael was beating Fernando in Japan whilst leading the championship?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Japanese_Grand_Prix

Fernando won the 2006 due to two rare mechanical failures....nothing to do with him being too much of a force.

[ioan]

Or maybe the mechanical failure occurred due to the pressure Alonso was applying and the car being pushed beyond its limits?

Not really.
If you look back to the end of the 2006 season, the manufacturers had to race the engines that were submitted to the FIA for homologation for the coming years.

I think that Ferrari thought more about the future than the present and pushed a bit to far ahead in order to homologate a more performant engine that they would be allowed to modify for reliability reasons, and that bit them back.

Another thing is that those engines were rev limited engines that you would be hard pressed to blow up just because your opponent is 'pushing' you (while being slower) with another rev limited engine! :\
Do not forget that Japan was the 1st race for that engine, it wasn't after having already ran a full race week end.

IMO it was most probably the new engine configuration put forward by Ferrari or a rare manufacturing error (like it happened last season too).

[555-04Q2]

Maybe, but if he had been winning as had Nigel Mansell at the age of 39, I do not think retirement would have been on the agenda.

I do think that he did not have an answer because Alonso was too much of a force for him.

You neglect to mention that the 92 Williams Mansel drove was streets ahead of the rest of the field and made Mansell look better than he actually was at 39.

Schumacher on the other hand had a car that was about equal to the Renault of Alonso who was also more than a decade his junior.

Mallen is also correct. he had been in F1 for so long already, had other priorities to take care of. I think Schumacher was one of the few drivers to leave at the right time in their F1 careers, unlike people like Reubens and Coulthard to overstayed their usefullness.

[ioan]

Fair point ioan...

If I remember right weren't the teams allowed to use higher rev's in Brazil that year too? I seem to remember Brundle saying that the Ferrari's were running at 19,000rpm seeing as it was the last race of the season.. I could be wrong though...

It might be, I really don't know.
Anyway, the engine in Japan went to soon and in Brazil it was something with the fuel pressure and than Fisi cut MS' tire, so not engine related.

[jens]

Considering that Mansell won in a machinery that was certainly one of the most dominant F1 cars of all times, and that also he had a team-mate, who wasn't much younger than himself, then the age factor, which is constantly reminded by some (oh look, Nigel won at the age of 39, clearly an indication old men are in top form!!!) doesn't really count much. And as 1993 showed even more convincingly, Patrese was probably pretty much past his prime by that time (92-93) as well, getting often lapped by his team-mate MS. So many drivers would have been able to be a top challenger in that 1992's FW14B even at the age of 39.

[ArrowsFA1]

When comparing Patrese and Mansell in 1991 and 1992 the difference was the active FW14B, not the driver. That and a few other things you can read about here (http://riccardopatrese.net/weblog/?page_id=727) ;)

When comparing the 1993 Benetton drivers the difference was the driver. Michael Schumacher. No argument from Riccardo there.

[jens]

When comparing Patrese and Mansell in 1991 and 1992 the difference was the active FW14B, not the driver. That and a few other things you can read about here (http://riccardopatrese.net/weblog/?page_id=727) ;)


But isn't it up to the driver to adapt to changes? ;) Patrese was definetely more impressive in 1991, but part of being a top driver is to being able to accustomize with all kinds of challenges. Throughout years it has often been possible to hear various excuses and reasonings for underperforming from numerous drivers - in the end it means driver simply didn't perform well enough.