Michael Schumacher is not Apologising for Jacques Villeneuve Collision from 1997
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- At the start of the 1998 Formula 1 season, James Allen conducted an in-depth interview with Michael Schumacher to discuss the incident. Despite the bad press he received as a result of the collision, Schumacher seemed quite defiant and certainly wasn't looking to make an apology.
I love the honesty and objectiveness of Michael. Nowadays i only hear b*lls*t like he turned into me the whole time...
I saw another interview with Schumacher once about the Jerez & the Adelaide incident where he says that Senna set the precedence as to what is acceptable driving in formula one. The difference is both of Michael's championship collisions were at low speed & desperation moves where he would otherwise lose the championship. Senna's collision at suzuka 1990 was premeditated & at high speed yet history hasn't judged Ayrton as harshly as Michael Schumacher. Both legends though.
As Tony Jardine pointed out at the end, there was nothing subtle about Schumacher's attempt to take someone out, whereas Senna's controversial moves were perceived as being 50/50 most of the time (apart from the championship decider in 1990). I think that's why Schumacher has been judged more harshly.
1990 Prost opened the door then closed it again, that was erratic driving behaviour. 89 Prost turned in 2 1/2 car lengths early. He turned in to collide on purpose 89, just as Schumacher did , 97 at least Schumacher admitted and apologised for the Villeneuve collision. I'm yet to hear Prost apologize
And Damon hill took Schumacher out Adelaide, Schumacher took a standard line to the apex. Hill was to impatient. And then hill took Schumacher out twice when he was leading 95. Schumacher and senna to me were the best I've ever seen.
A coward dies a thousand times but the brave they die just once
I've always pointed this out, I get so annoyed when an ignorant fan labels Michael Schumacher as a cheat when the Jerez incident was no where near as dangerous or bad as Senna did to Prost in Suzuka 90. Yes Michael was wrong to go in like that but he never wanted to harm anyone he's a winner a racer and you do anything to protect that,. otherwise your no longer a racer. What Senna did, yes he had vengeance after 89 and FISA moving the 1st place slot on the dirty side at Suzuka in 90. but he stooped so low to their (FISA) level he could of been the better person it was so not necessarily but fans will class Senna as God and fans will class Schumacher as a cheat because he's German and that's why I hate it when ignorant fans just call out stupid things without thinking.
@@claudioschumi87Schumacher is a cheat!
Problem is the entire media was quite anti Michael, and the teams literally allied against Ferrari in 97.
Michael was at fault and reckless but the other drivers (Jacques, Damon) were quite offside as well in their comments.
The penalty was deserved, but regardless, MSC was the best driver by a margin.
The irony is that Schumacher fans/ apologists are extremely gullible, impressionable people. This has *nothing* to do with his talent, which was immense. He broke the rules, it is absolutely clear as day. His abundance of self-confidence made him a champion, but it was bordering into narcissism, an attitude which he hid well but let slip here. Perhaps that is necessary to be one of the goats. But like Senna, he could not handle the possibility of being beaten by someone inferior, and was willing to destroy everything to prevent it.
Yet he'd soon start throwing his weight around if he thought he'd been wronged, total ignorance.
Villeneuve is a gossip. he always was.
just the claim that he saw Michael getting tired, such nonsense.
nobody was as fit as Michael, certainly not him.
Michael wasn't even sweating at the end of the races.
The fact is, Villeneuve had the worlds better car and should have been world champion long before Jerez.
The fact that Schumacher almost became world champion with this Ferrari shows how incredibly much better he was than everyone else.
Add to that it was Michael's turn, he was ahead when turning.
Villeneuve would never have got the curve without the touch
...and Villeneuve is still gossiping today! 😁
If Michael was such a brilliant driver, he would not need to cheat.
Ramming Damon Hill
Ramming Jacques Villeneuve.
Deliberately crashing his car at Monaco during qualifying. So no one could beat his time.
Ignoring a black flag at Silverstone.
Using illegal software, launch control whilst at Benneton.
Michaels whole career was based on questionable behavior. Even his team mates were contracted not to win, only on his say-so.
Racing should be pure and decisive. Man and machine doing their best to win.
Politics, ill gotten gain tactics and downright cheating means everyone looses out.
@@martinhambleton5076 F1 is all about cheating within the rules
@@martinhambleton5076Aberration, BS. Let me guess.Oh surprise you're an english man. I don't need to destroy your very smart comment.
@@martinhambleton5076 You cant ram someone who is behind.
He didnt crush his car and Alonso himself said after years that Ferrari didnt affect his time but they did noise about it at that time because they had a chance to gain something.
He didnt ignore anything,his team told him to stay into the race because they were talking with the stewards about a penalty.
He didnt use any illegal software and there are plenty videos from inside the Benneton at that year.
His teammates were having the same treatment as him.Its logical for a driver who is ahead in drivers championship to be treated different as season comes to the end.In 1999 Schumacher helped as much as he could Eddie Irvine to win the title because Eddie was the one with the more points and chances for the title.
Michaels behavior was very polite compared to what he had to deal against.
Politics were always against Schumacher.They tried to steal the 1994 title from him,they collaborated all together at the end of the 1997 when they saw that Schumacher was going to challenge for the title,something that noone expected.They changed the point system in 2002 so they can give other drivers more chances to win.They changed completely again the rules in 2004 trying to end Schumachers domination because they knew that with just racing it wasnt fair for the other drivers.
SCHUMACHER THE KING!!
Cheat.
The greatest cheat in F1 history.
Greatest ever mate made shit cars look amazing hill was a bottler 94 fia did everything to stop Michael he even pushed of the track 94 as well
@andrewwright4195 You have never seen the greatest ever, race.
I can guarantee you are not old enough.
@martinhambleton5076 33 my guy watched f1 since 94
@martinhambleton5076 Williams had best car 94 95 96 97 hill won 1 title lol Michael won 2 with fia giving all the help to hill and Williams in 97 embarrassing
@andrewwright4195 I disagree, Andrew.
Please feel free to think whatever you like.
However, I will never be convinced otherwise.
Toby Jardine talking a load bollocks towards the end there, how he was comparing Senna's blatant and dangerous ramming to Prost at Suzuka 90 with Michael's silly judgment to take Villenueve off is hilarious! I mean the British media back then actually even today always wanted to be the victims in all this! Let's not forget Williams and McLaren agreement to fix the race if such a scenario had happen during the race and the FIA did f all for that, yet if that was Ferrari there would of been protests the sport would he out cried by British fans it would be the end of the world for them!
More than just silly judgement
@danielainger8666 Michael came from an old school of racing, to which Senna and many other drivers had the same type of background in racing, nevertheless I never said Michael in Jerez was correct, in fact it was silly of him to attempt that which came to nothing. So, for you to say more than a silly judgement, it's clear you're too young to even remember this incident or dam right ignorant.
@@claudioschumi87 Ahh the age old excuse of “old school racing” let me drive someone off the track and just say it’s hard racing. Your fanboyism is showing Michael clearly had immense talent, he didn’t have to resort to these kind of tactics. So yeah the media was going to have a field day with it.
@@danielainger are you a bit stupid or can you read? Me being a fan of Michael Schumacher doesn't make me think he's in the right all the time lol. I just said that in this scenario he was wrong to do what he did, and yes he did come from a time when racing was different. If you know anything about race craft which clearly you don't Jacques was never going to make through Michael he knew Michael was was going to defend a nit aggressive, and like I said Michael did half arsed job not closing the door properly. Jacques had him where he wanted. So your reply is only making you like you haven't an idea how racing works.
@danielainger8666 so it was ok for Senna to ram off drivers in the past? Yeah, sure, that's logical in so many ways. It's a good thing we have people like you who understand the sport. 🤣🙏
If Schumacher wasn't there, Villeneuve would not have made the corner.?
You can't dive and expect the other driver to let you by?
Passing in desperation always requires a willing partner to give you space?
Reverse the situation, would Villeneuve have let Schumacher by?
I don't think so!!!!
Like in 1994,Michael KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING. And like 1994,will never forgive him for it
Hill divebombed into him lmao
do you hold Senna and Prost to the same standard Mark? Prost took out Senna in 1989 nearly identically to Schumacher, and Senna much more dangerously took out Prost to win the 1990 title. No one questions the validity of those world titles. But suddenly it's a problem that Schumacher did it
@@harrycop7944Thats not a divebomb otherwise every overtake in F1 would be a divebomb
Damon kicked off Michael twice in Silverstone 95 and Monza 95.
So don't pretent other drivers being that innocent.
Offcourse he knew,he defended his position against dirty dive bombs.I blame him for 1997 because he first tried to avoid Villeneuve,he should have defended like he did against hill.
I agree 200%. I'm tired of reading all theses same comment about this all over the years. The Canadian was going to finished straight into the gravel trap without Michael..
No he wasn't, he would have gone far wide but stayed on the track. Regardless, there is no excuse for Schumacher trying to take Villeneuve out ramming him. Had Schumacher bid his time he would have stayed ahead of Villeneuve who goes off, but instead he chose to try and take him out because he felt he was Villeneuve was quicker on the track and would drive into the sunset in the following laps. I watched the whole thing live on TV and I remember the following bs stories that floated around after the race that Schumacher had an engine problem that would end his race prematurely, which would presumably sort of force him to take out Villeneuve and excuse his actions somehow. I was rooting for Schumacher because he was the underdog that season with a worse car but, man, that last race was bullshit and Schumacher's cheating attempt was atrocious.
@RedPhroggz Michael Schumacher was never going to win that race because, that Williams was just a rocketship. Michael Schumacher had only made a last-minute bad judgement call by turning in on Villenueve. It wasn't as if Michael or Ferrari pre planned this to happen. The incident itself was silly because Michael didn't hit him hard enough to force Villenueve out. In fact, even Jacques himself said multiple times that the move on the inside was ambitious and risky and could result in himself out of the race. It was pure luck that Michael made half arsed turn in on Jacques, like a football player attempting to foul the opponent, but halfway through the process of tackling, the player regrets it and causes the player to foul the other player resulting him to get sent off, it was the same thing with Michael on Jacques. The Adelaide incident in 94, if you think about roles we're reversed, Hill went for the move, realising that it wasn't going to stick hitting Michael, Michael as he's allowed to do so defended his line, goy hit by Hill which meant he was out of the race along with Hill. That's what Michael should have done in'97. That's why Senna was never branded the way Michael unfairly gets branded for.
@@RedPhroggz The only thing that Schumacher did wrong is that the first thing that he did was to try to avoid Villeneuve when he did his dive bomb.He did that because the media and Villeneuve comments prior the race got into his head.When someone makes a dirty move to you you answer accordingly.He should have defend the corner aggressively because Villeneuve didnt try to overtake him,he just tried to block him and at that corner the gravel was the only option for Schumacher if he let Villeneuve and this is what happened.Villeneuve rewarded with a title and the media portrait Schumi as the bad guy.Show me one time where Schumacher did a dive bomb like that.He was aggressive but he was clean.Villeneuve was dirty but his moves against Button and other teammates didnt got attention from the media.Their problem was Schumacher because he was winning against the british superpwers at that time williams and mclaren.
You may watch it again in slow motion. In the moment they crashed, Villeneuve was inside, ahead and with his front wheels very close to the inside curbs. Schumacher had a lot of space left outside.
Only after the contact Villeneuve streightened. That would the first time a collision helped someone turning into a corner.
This was brilliant overtaking by Villeneuve at a track where overtaking was nearly Impossible. This day Villeneuve really earned his championship!
@@villy27 You must watch it again because as it seems you dont see very well.Villeneuve car kept going straight in a way opposite from the direction of the corner and away from the apex of the corner.the collision with schumacher was the reason that villeneuve car turned right.schumcaher car was in a line according to the racing line.villeneuve was not.
there is a video called Jerez 1997- the collision.at the end there is footage from inside from both drivers.there is no space from schumacher to go anywhere.villeneuve car got past the corner,went to the left side of the track and turned right after the collision.schumacher went out on the gravel.there was no space for schumacher.villeneuve goal was to block him,he manage to do it,schumacher understood that and he hit him out of frustration.
Villeneuve driving a championship winning car - Schumacher in a car that shouldn't even be winning races. Villeneuve was so deluded he thought he was in Schumacher's league.
Jacques did talk some nonsense. Michael had no business taking that championship to the last race.. shows his talent really.
You can see Schumacher's head looking in his mirror at before the turn and he knew where Villeneuve was. He RAMed the car deliberately and I feel the FIA did the correct thing. Perhaps they should have suspended him for the following season too in order to emphasize that this is not racing, that was either rage or fear of loosing and not what we need to see in F1.
I do agree. Senna should have been suspended too, after Suzuka 1990 at least.
Ferrari wouldnt fight enough for their rights dont know why.
See the race and tell me who has the racing lime and who is in a place that he shouldnt be.
Should have been banned from the sport.
It’s all over blown, if it was his fault then he to take the brunt of it, because he lost the championship through it. I think everybody was watching them after using a mistake as a positive in the 1994 Adelaide race