Originally Posted by D-Type
The word "luck" or "lucky" does not appear anywhere in that article. I agree totally with you that a driver should not normally be considered "lucky" to be in the right car at the right time. Team owners aren't stupid - they want the best drivers they can get. Likewise drivers aren't stupid - they know how good they are and where they fit in the pecking order. The result is that generally the best drivers appear in the best cars. Luck doesn't come into it.
But to dismiss Sir Stirling's whole career as you are doing on the strength of his comments that Schumacher's statistics are misleading and possibly flattering is, shall we say, a rather extreme response.
Off the top of my head I can think of many competitive team pairings: Caracciola and Lang, Ascari and Farina, Fangio and Moss, Clark and Hill, Stewart and Cevert, Andretti and Peterson, Regazzoni and Lauda, Lauda and Prost, Mansell and Piquet, Prost and Mansell, Prost and Rosberg, Prost and Senna, Hamilton and Button, etc. But you won't find "Schumacher and ....." anywhere.
Had Moss said that Schumacher was lucky not to be disqualified for some of his on-track actions, I think there would be a grain of truth.
As to your assertion that as he never won a championship his opinions don't merit consideration - it does not even merit a response.