FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

Discuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans

Formula One related discussion.
#197843
There may be more opinion here than fact and if there's a person qualified to comment it's Moss. I disagree with some of the viewpoints here. The thing with the achievement of winning 7 championships is that there are so many factors involved in winning, one of which is just luck that to win 7 championships you need to be capable of executing, not just have the best car under you but also have the constitution and consistency to be able to win, over and over again. You might now like someone's style or personality but it's hard to argue that 7 world championships does not mean he's the greatest ever.

In the long run what happens in 2010 can only serve to add to his career if he wins, and if he performs the way his season has gone so far, then he'll get back out of the sport and re-assume his winningest driver status role. But his achievements will always remain.

Got this over on GPUpdate:

Schumacher is probably past it, says Moss
28 April 2010

Sir Stirling Moss fears that Michael Schumacher may have passed his prime and that the German is now damaging his reputation. The 7-time World Champion has suffered a bruising start to his comeback season and lies joint ninth in the Drivers' Championship after the first foursome of races.

Although, arguably, most of Schumacher's downfalls in the early 'flyaway' races have been out of his hands, many have written off the Mercedes GP driver and claim that returning from a 3-year sabbatical was not the correct move - a sentiment echoed by Moss, who won 16 of the 66 Grands Prix he entered between 1951 and 1961.

"In a word, no," replied Moss when asked by Metro if he could understand Schumacher's decision to return to full-time racing. "He's a highly intelligent bloke, and I really can't see…all he's going to do is damage his achievements. People are going to say he's past it now, which he probably is."

In addition, Sir Stirling believes that the pace of Nico Rosberg will not help the cause of his team-mate and fellow countryman. "We've never seen Michael with a number two who's been comparable," Moss continued. "He had Rubens Barrichello, who no doubt is an extremely good driver, but not necessarily a winner.

"Michael's greatest contribution was bringing English engineers to Ferrari. Ross Brawn and those chaps brought Ferrari from being has-beens back to the front. Because he didn't have a comparable team-mate, it was very difficult to know how much of it was down Michael and how much was the car."

Moss also worries that Schumacher's fantastic F1 statistics are now under fire. "People say he's the best because he has seven world titles, but that doesn't mean anything really," the Englishman began to conclude. "Well, it does mean something - it's a hell of an achievement - but it doesn't mean he's the greatest ever."
#197846
What Moss means is that Moss has made his money out of not winning a championship, he can not see why someone who is a competative animal wants to compete. Maybe if Moss was more of a competative animal he might of had an F1 crown of his own!
#197889
Im with Moss-Schumacher is no way the greatest, and im not just talking about his current performances.
Don't dis Moss!
He preferred to race British cars stating "Better to lose honorably in a British car than win in a foreign one". The British cars were often uncompetitive and this was considered the reason he never won the drivers' championship. But what was it? 5 2nd WDC places? Thats not bad in an uncompetative car
#197899
Im with Moss-Schumacher is no way the greatest, and im not just talking about his current performances.
Don't dis Moss!
He preferred to race British cars stating "Better to lose honorably in a British car than win in a foreign one". The British cars were often uncompetitive and this was considered the reason he never won the drivers' championship. But what was it? 5 2nd WDC places? Thats not bad in an uncompetative car


Greatest or not greatest, find someone to beat Schumacher's records and then we'll talk. Objectively. The only way to talk objectively is through results... everything else is just opinion and wishful thinking. Schumacher may not be thre greatest but he managed the greatest results. Anything else is bullscheisse.

Dishonorably? oh my god. Because he didnt get them in a German or British car? oh my god :rolleyes:
He can go claim his prize with queen elisabeth.

Lots of great drivers didnt manage better results because they were in uncompetitive cars... but in any case their greatness is only assumed. Prove it and then we'll talk.

That doesn't mean Striling doesn't know what he's talking about. That doesn't mean he was not good... even great. But categorically... there's no way anyone can tell me some other driver is better than Schumacher. There's simply no way to prove it.

Moss is just stirring... and trying to get a reaction :hehe:
#197918
Of course he's past his prime! But surely everyone can admit that his prime was at such a high standard, you cannot say that it is the sole reason for his relative underperformance so far. I'll give Schumacher a couple more races, but if there's no improvement it doesn't look good for him...
#197919
Of course he's past his prime! But surely everyone can admit that his prime was at such a high standard, you cannot say that it is the sole reason for his relative underperformance so far. I'll give Schumacher a couple more races, but if there's no improvement it doesn't look good for him...


The Schumacher myth?
#197925
Of course he's past his prime! But surely everyone can admit that his prime was at such a high standard, you cannot say that it is the sole reason for his relative underperformance so far. I'll give Schumacher a couple more races, but if there's no improvement it doesn't look good for him...


The Schumacher myth?


What, the whole thing about it being all the car and such? I don't *completely* subscribe to it myself. He drove too many good races, i think.

It did help him a lot though, obviously. 1994, 2002 and 2004...
#197926
Of course he's past his prime! But surely everyone can admit that his prime was at such a high standard, you cannot say that it is the sole reason for his relative underperformance so far. I'll give Schumacher a couple more races, but if there's no improvement it doesn't look good for him...


The Schumacher myth?


What, the whole thing about it being all the car and such? I don't *completely* subscribe to it myself. He drove too many good races, i think.

It did help him a lot though, obviously. 1994, 2002 and 2004...


More than the car as a simple entity. And yes I have always rated Schumacher highly, but in his dominant years there were many external and internal factors which contributed to his success.

See our F1 related articles too!