| Readers' Comments | |
|
| |
| Updated: 2 November 1997 | European Issue |
|
Dear Atlas,
With reference to the coment by Mark Gledhill, the FIA does have a backup timing system. In fact, there are two! One of these systems kicked in when Michael Schumacher's Ferrari failed to register at the end of one of his flying laps in qualifying for the Belgian GP. He was subsequently credited with the lap and laptime. I was also interested to read in one of your recent news articles that Jean Alesi will displace Johnny Herbert as number one at Sauber-Petronas. I think that Peter Sauber would be unlikely to demote the driver who has driver superbly for him this year with one who so often finds it difficult to keep his car on the road! Hopefully Johnny wil do to Alesi what he has done to Hakkinen, Zanardi, Lamy, Adams, Panis, Larini, Morbidelli, and Fontana - outpace him. Here's to some wins for Herbie in 1998!
David Myers
So, '97 ends with a bit of a bump. All the media and PC pundits scream bloody murder, demand apologies, pout for penalties, rave off into logic limbo and generally miss a great event. Case in point: Being absent a dish or ESPN2 on lame cable, I asked main potter at our little shop to tape Jerez so I wouldn't have to wait until Mon. PM. The auto racing skeptic did and, with stunning Ms, became competely fascinated by the sport, people, competition and the 'incident'. Questions never ended on Mon. AM as new batch of lighthouses were crafted for firing. Questions of technical, logistics, etiquette and generally world of F1. Grass roots education at its finest. Point, of course, is that the event had nearly all of what racing could and should be about. Only shame was missing a little more engrossing circuit. Risk, speed, color, sound, tactics, effort, miscue, and even bewildering politeness. Plenty to talk about. Novice chums were completely taken with Wattie and Bell. No apologies, fines, suspensions necessary here. To celebrate, I donned the old drivers' kit of Nomex, Simpson, etc for Halloween work day. More questions and excitement. Thanks JW, DB, JV, MS, MH & DC. All hope for '98.
Dan Hyde
Dear Atlas: If FIA intends to ban Schumacher for a couple of races in the beginning of the next season as there are some rumors, they will kill the 1998 Championship at the birth. In this case, when Schumacher will join, the Williams' driver would be 20 or 30 points ahead, which might turn the 1998 Championship into a tedious, predetermined conclusion. Mainly considering that traditionally Williams produces the best car and that the Ferrari one is generally only mediocre. And that such kind of punishment will certainly carry away the dash and enthusiasm not only from Schumacher himself but from Ferrari's engineers, technicians and mechanics also, thus burying the chances of a Ferrari championship again. The fact is: love him or hate him, Formula One needs Schumacher in its field to add salt and pepper to the races, which otherwise would be only a boring succession of Williams'drivers victories. Since his entree he never drove the best car, but fortunately he is ( the only one today ) capable of being competitive in any car - some say he would be competitive in a pram. So I hope FIA will adopt a different kind of punishment (a huge monetary penalty or a suspended ban, for example) but will let him free to dispute the championship from the beginning. For the behalf of the show.
Nuno Becker
Dear Sirs, I'd love to comment on the race but I don't have a leg to stand on. I havn't seen it - yet. Our local cable carrier, in Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA, opted to not show the final and championship deciding race of the season. Probably in favor of some totally superfluous football commentary or worse yet, golf. Would the nearest enthusiast with a VHS copy of the race please come to my aid? I'll gladly cover the cost of a video cassette, postage, and of course, a six pack. Please respond to nfgram@lanl.gov if you can provide a copy of the race complete with pre-race hooplah and post-race interview. Thank you,
Nils F. J. Gram
Dear Atlas, Being a great fan of F-1 for the past 20-25 years (since I was 5-6), I clearly remember Senna taking Prost out a few years ago, and have to say that what Schumacher did was NOT the same! Many people are comparing the two incidents, but they don't have much in common; Senna did not have any problem with the car at the time. Schumacher did loose 5 seconds during the lap when the accident happened. And, for the best driver in recent history, 5 seconds means something is wrong with the car. He was clearly trying to compensate for the problem by braking late and therefore "opened the door" for Villeneuve. I don't think that what Schumacher did was perfectly correct, but am sure he doesn't deserve the kind of criticism he gets. In a split second he was trying to control the car, turn and make sure that Villeneuve didn't pass him. Villeneuve on the other hand, saw Michael having problems and decided to take a chance. He was very well aware of the fact that it is VERY hard to pass at the spot like that without causing trouble for both drivers. He could have just waited a bit and passed him anywhere else. For some reason Schumacher gets more then his fare share of criticism; first when he finished in points for Jordan many said he was lucky. Then, he moved to Beneton and late James Hunt criticised him for trying to advance too early in his career. Then, he was disqualified in Belgium for having ran off track and causing the wooden plank on the bottom to loose it's thickness. And I still remember him being proclaimed a "dangerous driver" for staying on slicks in rain (can't remember if he was disqualified then as well). On the other hand, when Villeneuve did compete in Japan under appeal, nobody mentioned that he did it only to make Michael's job harder, and if the two of them colided at the start, which they did not thanks to Michael not taking chances, nobody said anything. I think that both Villeneuve and Schumacher are great drivers. Michael is clearly one of the greatest drivers ever, and one little mistake should not make us forget his contribution to the F-1 sport. I would certainly hate to see him punished when it was not clear that his intentions were as bad as they seemed. If he really wanted to take Jacques out, he would do it just like Senna did it with Prost a few years ago. There are so many more efficient "dirty" ways to take someone out, and Michael did not do that. Good thing both of them are my favourite drivers, so I can enjoy Villeneuve's victory. However, I have a feeling that next year will be Schumacher's. In hope that F-1 doesn't become "politically correct". Yours truly,
Peter Bakic
Dear Atlas F1: I'm going to say right off the bat that I'm a die-hard Schumi fan (always have always will). And let me also say that his action during the European Grand Prix left a bitter taste in my mouth for a couple of reasons. But before I get to the negative points about this race, let's all take a DEEP breath and look objectively at this. The ONLY person alive who can truly comment on "the incident" in Jerez is Alain Prost. He is the only driver in recent years who has been in an identical pressure cooker spot as Schumi was in Jerez (fighting for the Championship leading by 1 point). And to all F1 fans it is common knowledge that Alain did the EXACT same thing to Senna in 1989 (Suzuka). Although this does not condone Schumi's action it shows that "irrational" actions happens to the best in these infrequent and unique situations. Secondly, anyone who compares this incident to Adelaide 1994 is absolutely clueless (pardon my French). In Australia, everything happenend in a fraction of a second. The only thing Schumi thought about shortly after leaving the track and shortly before the collision was how he was going to set-up his car for the next corner. Add to that the fact that Hill was AT BEST 1/2 way along side and any driver WORTH HIS BEANS would have turned into the corner. Therefore using this incident in order to draw a parallel on Schumi's mental make-up is ridiculous ! So how does a true Schumi fan see the incident in Jerez. Well, without a doubt, almost all of the blame falls squarely on Schumi's shoulders. First off, I can not understand why he did not close the door earlier on Villeneuve. Although he did start pulling in early into the corner, he should have done it much more pronounced. I believe the reason he did not do it more drastically is that he honestly thought that Villeneuve could not AND would not attempt an overtaking manouver from as far back as he was (this is actually what Schumi said in his post race interview). Looking at the replay again and studying ONLY Villeneuve's approach angle and speed it becomes VERY clear that there was NO WAY he could have turned his car for the upcoming corner (this was Villeneuve's portion of the blame). Given this point, one has to concede Schumi's second mistake and that is that when he saw Villeneuve FLYING along side him (which he said caught him by surprise), why did he not just let the Canadian fly into the gravel trap ?! When Schumi turned into Villeneuve, I was shocked and slightly outraged. Not only was in unsportsmanlike but it was also completely unneccessary. However, to conclude that this incident was a PREMEDITATED act in order to take both driver's out of the race is not only overly judgemental but also insensitive to the complex situation at that given MOMENT. The more and more I look at this incident (and having listened to Schumi himself) I conclude that he was STARTLED by the sight of the blue and white machine beside him. The actual "TURNING IN" manouver, I put down to a reflex reaction which I don't think evern Schumacher can explain. It was clearly a MISTAKE, it was clearly WRONG JUDGEMENT and it has certainly tarnished his IMAGE. However, given Schumi's character towards his team the past two years (incredible patience, character and support) as well as for his outstanding Judgement and driving in the past, we must not all jump on the bandwagon and knock this outstanding driver. All of us arm chair racers don't have the right to viciously comment on such actions unless we have been in similar circumstances. Schumi has already apologized for his actions by admitting his mistake. And personally, I think he should get a one race ban at the beginning of next season in order to set a precedent on similar actions in the future. If only he would have left the door OPEN for Villeneuve to take himself out of the race with his ill-timed overtaking manouver then Schumi would have been able to cruise to victory (even with his SLOWING machine). Bring on 1998! Sincerely,
Mike Blessing
It is interesting to see the sudden pounding of Michael Schumacher's character. Since 1994, when he was in process of passing Senna as the World's best driver, and the incident at Adelaide with Damon Hill, there have been legions of Schumacher bashers out there. And it seems as though they are getting full mileage out of Jerez. Having seen the incident I will agree that if blame is to be given in the collision, it should go to Schumacher. He did try to, rather optimistically, close the door on Villeneuve when Villeneuve was clearly ahead. (However, I must say that I think neither guy would have made the corner had they not touched.) Now, as Senna had shown a few times, taking out annother driver is not a very difficult thing to do. And even most of Schumacher's biggest detractors will admit, the guy is a hell of a driver. Now, given those two facts, I have only one question. If Schumacher deliberately tried to take Villeneuve off, how did Villeneuve finish the race?
Tim Crumlish
Everyone wants to talk about the incident between Schumacher and Villeneuve. But, the real controversy of the race has nothing to do with it. The real problem with the whole race was that there wasn't a race! At the post-race conference, Hakkinen declared that he could have passed Villeneuve, but didn't want to take a chance at affecting the championship. Coulthard said the same later.Here are two drivers admitting they didn't drive their best. They backed off and let Villeneuve go. You might, at first glance, call this sportsmanship. What a pair of nice guys. And so they would be, except for a few things. First of all, head to head at the very beginning of the race, Schumacher clearly and decisively beat Villeneuve on the start and started pulling away. Advantage Schumacher. Even though everyone acknowledges that the Williams' car has the best performance of all the cars this year, including Ferrari, Villeneuve, even unimpeded, could not gain on Schumacher. In his press interview after the race, he said it began to frustrate him. Again, advantage Schumacher. Everyone made a big deal this year of the fact that brother Ralf took out Michael when he and Villeneuve were in the heat of the championship hunt. No one wants to see a racer get in an accident, but it is a part of racing. If Villenueve is forced to race, not merely pursue Schumacher, maybe he makes a mistake or someone else does. The point is, Schumacher took the lead by being the best driver at the start. The McLaren team negated his superior performance by not racing to their potential, thereby giving Villeneuve, with a superior car, a better chance at winning, a chance he did not earn of his own accord. Were the McLaren duo simply nice guys? Or, did they strip away the advantages that the best driver in the world worked for. And, one must ask, if so, Why?
Mark Fillion
As my first attendance at a Grand Prix and with the drama of this year's final race there was plenty of excitement at Jerez. The atmosphere was tremendous and the mix of fans in our stand at the end of the first straight had a great time - the Finns especially! However, the track facilities did not impress in the slightest. There was no TV screen in our line of sight and the feeble loudspeakers could not be heard above the engine noise. Consequently, nobody in our area (a prime vantage point for the first corner) had a clue how the qualifying times were going (we had to phone home to find out) and on race day the only way of following the race was by our own lap charts of the leaders. The results board was blank. Consequently, although we saw Schumacher's car being taken back to the garage we had no idea how he had crashed on the other side of the circuit and only found out the final placings several hours after the race. When the race finished the traffic management was non existent and rather than wait the predicted 3 hours for a taxi to the station (there were no buses laid on) we walked part of the 6 miles to Jerez until we found a taxi. They had been prevented from approaching the circuit. The driver said that he had never experienced anything like it, even with the typical crowds of 200,000 for the motorcycling events - a modest 65,000 attended the Grand Prix. So, despite the millions of pounds in Formula 1 and the 350 million worldwide audience the fans attending the race seem to get a poor deal. An Australian we met told us that at Melbourne everybody gets a complementary pocket radio with earphones, tuned to the Murray Walker. Surely, that's the solution for all Grand Prix! You pay hundreds of pound to attend so what's a fiver for a radio? Also, while Seville and Jerez are typically atmospheric Spanish venues, dont expect to find you're way around easily unless you are fluent in the language and resourceful.
Allan MacLeod
Over here in football (American) and basketball land, certain sports journalists will try to get some attention by asserting that motor racing is not a sport. By that stratagem this small collection of ball junkies attempts to render trivial something it neither understands nor cares for. The way I see it there are three possible rebuttals: 1) Motor racing (or at least some forms of it) does indeed reside on a plane higher than that of mere sport. 2) Hemingway once stated that bull fighting, boxing and motor racing are the only sports; everything else is a game (others have added mountaineering and hunting dangerous animals to the list of true sports). 3) Who cares? Motor racing exists. How it is categorized by small minds is of no consequence. Don Capps in his commentary treads faithfully in the footsteps of these controversy mongers when he tries to demean contemporary F1 by saying that it is not Grand Prix anymore. What is a Grand Prix? The first one was held in 1906 at Le Mans. No one possessing any knowledge of racing would say that the race at Jerez was or should have been anything like Le Mans in 1906. Things happen in 91 years. Put Schumacher and Villeneuve up against each other in 1906 cars and you might have a decent TV audience for maybe half the race. Was Jerez not a Grand Prix because time has passed and the world has changed? Would Jerez have been less interesting if it had not been called a Grand Prix? Is it because it was called a Grand Prix that it will be talked about years from now? Does it really matter? Does Mr. Capps want to see front engines? No harnesses? Carburetors, maybe? Perhaps the odd tree along a course to collect out of control cars? Fangio, Nuvolari and Clark were great drivers but they're all dead. Not only can Michael and Jaques drive better then they can today, but so can Nakano and Verstappen and you and I. So Mr. Capps didn't like Senna. Neither, I take it, did Alain Prost; but the impression I got was that Prost was objective enough to recognize Senna's talent none-the-less. Was Moss a nicer guy than Senna? If so was he thus a better driver? If, in 1994, you could have put Senna in a time machine, sent him to 1937, and stuck him in an Auto Union you'd have seen Senna finish at the back of the field. If you had then sent Caracciola back to today in the time machine and stuck him in, say, a McLaren you'd see him not get off the grid for the warm-up lap. What would that say about anything? A 1954 W196 Mercedes wouldn't stand a chance on any course against a 1997 Minardi. If you apply one standard across the decades then that makes the Mercedes a pretty sorry excuse for a race car. There is Grand Prix and there is GRAND PRIX. One of Bernie's few over sites, I think, was failing to snatch the world-wide rights to the term "Grand Prix" as applied to motor racing. Today everything is a Grand Prix. In the U.S. one can find CART Grands Prix and Trans-Am Grands Prix and probably pinewood derby Grands Prix as well. Because of this profligate usage nothing is a GRAND PRIX. But the 1990s Williams touches the 1980s McLaren which touches the 1960s Lotus which touches the 1950s Mercedes...; and Schumacher touches Senna who touches Stewart who touches Fangio...;all just as surly as if you wait long enough 1906 becomes 1997. A rose by any other name is descended from roses. Having been around for exactly half a century I am delighted to find that so far I have staved off codgerism by understanding that in general what is modern is neither worse nor better than what was modern when I was young or before I was young. It is mostly just different. Racing is carried on today as well as, though not the same as, it was when I was young and before I was young. The day that I no longer understand this will be the day I grow old.
Robert W Butsch
I have cheered for Michael Schumacher since he meteorically entered Formula 1. I considered him to be the best driver of his generation. In 1994 when he and Damon Hill collided in the last race I sided with Schumacher and faulted Hill for trying to pass while not having his car far enough forward for Schumacher to be able to see him. When Canadian Jaques Villeneuve entered Formula 1 I cheered for him as my compatriot, but continued also to cheer for Schumacher. Now I no longer need to feel split loyalties. The European Grand Prix has proven for me that, great though he is as a driver, Schumacher is not a sportsman and will try to win outside the rules if he can not win honestly. Through the technological marvels of on-board cameras which put 500 million fans in the cockpit with him it is crystal clear that Schumacher tried to take Villeneuve off the track when the latter passed him. One can see that Villeneuve, unlike Hill, was definitely ahead of Schumacher and proof that the latter he saw Villeneuve is provided when the camera shows him initially steering to the left to avoid Villeneuve's Williams. He obviously has plenty of room to the left as the is on the outside of the racing line in this corner. In the next second the camera also clearly shows that Schumacher correctly concludes that he could not win the championship if he ever let Villeneuve past and he thus deliberately steers right again to contact the Williams in a attempt to make Villeneuve crash. Schumacher is very devious in how he tries to do so, however. Instead of a crude bashing, he guides his front wheel between those of the Williams, obviously with the intent of catapulting Villeneuve into the air as the latter pulled forward and his rear tire contacted that of Schumacher. This type of contact would pose the greatest threat to Villeneuve and the least to Schumacher's own car. It is of course also the way in which Villeneuve's father Gilles was killed at Spa, albeit at much higher speeds. Fortunately, justice did prevail on this day, and the perpetrator was the one who wound up off the track while the victim drove on to win a championship he now deserved. The way in which Schumacher thus deliberately endangered Villeneuve in a desperate effort to become champion again has lost me all respect for the German. FIA postured obstreperously before the race about dire consequences if anyone were to try to take either Schumacher or Villeneuve off the track during the race. If they had the courage of their convictions, they should clearly issue a suspension to Schumacher for this dangerous action. But I am not surprised that they did not. I have long thought that FIA did not want Villeneuve to become champion because they nourish the thought that the CART league is inferior to Formula 1 in the quality of its cars and drivers. Thus it was a joy to them to see Mansell move to CART and become champion as it reinforced this belief. For Villeneuve to move to Formula 1 and to become champion, however, challenges this idea and suggests there may be more parity between the two racing circuits than FIA would like to admit. But the championship is all history now; as is my admiration for Michael Schumacher.
Leo deGroot
Jacques Villeneuve's successful passing manoeuvre on Michael Schumacher at Jerez last weekend will not be remembered for the sportsmanship involved. Schumacher's sharp, right swerve was an obvious attempt to foul Villeneuve's chances of finishing the race in front of Schumacher. If Schumacher had been successful in fatally damaging Villeneuve's car, the Driver's Championship title may have been Schumacher's. "So what, we know that!" I can hear you say. True, it is almost as obvious as the influence the Petronas (read Ferrari) engine deal had on Norberto Fontana's driving style at the precise time that Villeneuve was trying to pass! The question I wish to raise about the entire passing incident is, how did Villeneuve come out of it smelling so squeaky clean? I challenge anyone to view Schumacher's in-car footage of the incident, and then tell me that Villenueve had a realistic chance of making the corner whilst leaving enough room for Schumacher to stay on the outside line. Villeneuve is only just able to stay on the track on the exit of the corner even though Schumacher has provided extra stopping power to the Williams by way of feeding it a Ferrari front wheel. This doesn't sound like a sportsmanlike passing attempt. Did Villeneuve display any regard for Schumacher's prior commitment to the corner when he stuffed the Williams in the gap? I don't think so; a collision or off-track excursion was inevitable. It would have been very interesting to see the outcome if Schumacher had refrained from feeding the wheel to the hungry Williams. It is only speculation, but I believe that Villeneuve would have run wide, forcing Schumacher off the track. The Ferrari would probably have still ended up in the sand trap, however, this may have ended the championship in a completely different way. Schumacher would have been the squeaky clean guy. Villeneuve may have had his points for the race revoked, thus handing the championship to the German. As a Schumacher fan (as if you wouldn't have guessed by now!) I can only keep dreaming. All of the above happened in a mere fraction of a second. It is testimony to the skill required in todays formula one cars that such small change of decision in a fraction of a second could turn a Jacque Attack into a 'mach Attack. Maybe it is not just the timing gear for qualifying that needs a resolution of one ten-thousandth of a second, maybe the drivers do, too. I just hope that the weird rules for next year somehow allow the drivers to pass other cars cleanly using skill, without the need to resort to desperates as is the case now. Roll on the 1998 season!
Chris Becker
Dear Sirs: I am somewhat surprised by the stewards' decision in the Schumacher matter. The obvious was seen by millions of people, and this decision is so biased, it does not make any sense. When Villeneuve did not slow down on a yellow during FREE PRACTICE, when hardly anyone is on the track, his points for the next race were taken away. If the FIA, in its infinite wisdom, does not take strong action against Schumacher, it will lose the little credibility it has left. I heard that Schumacher might be called to explain his unacceptable behaviour to the committee. I certainly hope this is true. Shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Lastly, I would like to know where I can find the regulations pertaining to F1, from FIA to FOCA, etc. If you would have an address available, I would greatly appreciate it. I really think it is about time that the sanctions given to the pilots be imposed taken consideration of the timing (in a race or a free session) and gravity of the offence. I congratulate you on a superb job this year, and cannot wait until next season. Hope to hear from you soon! Thanks again.
Lyne Claveau
The tragedy is not just that Ferrari saw their world championship hopes being bundled off the track. Schumacher's skill and talent are plain to see from the way he leaves Eddie Irvine way behind in a similar car when its dry, and the way he leaves the entire field struggling in his wake when it's a wet race. Clearly, his F1 skills are to be admired, the way Pete Sampras' tennis exploits and Tiger Woods' golf skills are so dominantly displayed when they are at the top of their game. Those at the top of their sports are role models to aspiring fans all round the world. Tennis and golf fans get role models that are great ambassadors for their sport, with good sportsmanship and confident within themselves to be able to lose gracefully. When Schumacher turned his front right wheel into the side-pods of Villeneuve's Williams at the 1997 European GP, F1 fans world-wide watched live, a blatant statement that if you're going to lose, its alright to take all your opponents down with you. The tragedy is that F1 as a sport is the loser, when aspiring young drivers all over the world follow their role model and believe that driving other competitors off the track is the way the game is to be played. It's a sad state of affairs when such a talented and gifted driver does not have the confidence within himself to lose gracefully. If Schumacher had finished second in a fair and square race to Villeneuve, no one would have doubted Schumacher's skills. Instead, the Wiliams Villeneuve was in would have been recognised as the better car. Instead of role models that fans can warm to and cheer from their hearts, F1 has a role model that shows selfishness and the idea of "sport" / "sporting" rather cynical. In the end F1 is the loser. It seems like Schumacher is biting the hand that feeds him.
Sunny Choong
Is Michael Schumacher going to get away without punishment again? After all the bluster from Bernie and Max before the race, about 'draconian measures' and being 'severly dealt with', is that blatant attempt to take Villeneuve off going to be over-looked? This can not be forgotten as a 'racing incident', Schumacher deserves a severe penalty for his actions. The stewards may not have wanted to take that on, but the FIA must act, or this 'competition' becomes a farce.
Paul Adams
Dear Atlas, At the start of the season I didn't want Villenuve to win the championship because of the way Hill had been treated by Williams. So, as the season progressed, and the various title contendors fell by the way side, I found myself actually wanting Schumacher to win. Okay, he had taken Hill off in 1994, but I guess from his perspective you can understand why he did that. If he hadn't been banned for 3 or 4 races then Hill wouldn't have been that 1 point behind. I mean, I dare say the fact that his early victories in 1994 relied on the fact that the Bennetton was illegal, and as such Hill deserved the championship more than Schumacher didn't cross Schumacher's mind as he saw Hill about to go through for what would probably have been victory. So, begrudgingly I forgave Schumacher. However, I admired the way Villenuve refused to take Schumacher off in Japan, even though he might well have fealt agreived about his ban. From what Schumacher had been saying, I thought maybe he wouldn't resort to such underhand tatics again. So, I was really looking forward to a fair fight. For the first half of the race at Jerez that's what happened, but as in 1994, when Schumacher came under pressure he cracked, and deliberately attempted to take Villenuve off. What really galls me is that Schumacher is trying to lay the blame for it at Villenuve's door, saying that Villenuve wouldn't have made the corner because he braked too late!! I hope Williams release the telemtry to show this to be a lie. Quite how Villenuve is supposed to have slid into Schumacher when the accident occured towards the apex of the corner, rather than away from the apex would defy all laws of physics. I would like to see Schumacher banned for the whole of next season (Tyson's been banned for a year in boxing, and so was Cantona in football). I also think the FIA should bring in a rule to strip a driver off all his points for a given season. This would ensure that the number two drivers also do not get involved in the championship in such a manner, and might make the constructors think twice about employing such tatics. Unfortunatley, yet again Schumacher seems to have got away with it. What the race stewards don't seem to realsie is that sooner or later someone is going to get seriously injured or maybe even killed in one of these 'racing incidents'. I dare say that there will be Schumacher fans who insist that Schumacher was justified because Senna had done the same thing. What such misguided people don't seem to reaslise is that Senna shouldn't have been allowed to get away with it either. Formula one is supposed to be a motorSPORT. It is clear that Schumacher is not a sportsman, or for that matter a good a driver as people make out. The Ferrari is just a good a car now as the Williams, but Villenuve beat him fair and square. Congratulations to the Williams team and to Villenuve, as for Schumacher, he should take up Stock car racing, there his driving tatics would be more appreciated. What many people had seen as being the best driver in the world is in my opinion the most despicable and blatant cheat, and any respect I had for him has evaporated.
Gary Paul Slegg
A fan of the sport for more than 25 years, I was watching the European G.P. as I thought: like him or not, Schumacher does deserve another title this year. His superb driving in this race and in most of the others along the season, his consistency, speed and intelligence make him way superior to any other contemporary driver, surely one among the best ever. That was right before Villeneuve closes in, makes that aggressive but perfect move to pass the Ferrari and Schummy responds in that unthinkable manner, especially given his repeated outcries on fair play throughout the week. His attempt to take the Canadian off was much more obvious than the previous Prost-Senna, Senna-Prost, Schummy-Hill occurences. It was simply scandalous. I do not think even German and Ferrari fans could possibly overlook it. Had he acted correctly at that point, his chances for the championship would have still been sizeable. He could have overtaken Jacques back, the latter could have made a mistake or simply retired. In any event the '97 season would have gone to the books as the one in which the best player almost made it, despite technical inferiority. Now it will be best remembered for Great Michael's lack of sportsmanship. He got his due and was the only one to retire. Now, what if Villeneuve had been the one to stop or if both went away after the crash? FIA could have suspended and fined him, but could not have awarded Villeneuve any points and this would have been a black-stained title to say the least. I wonder whether any penalty will be at all effective. The most important thing is that Schumacher, being the ace he is, has learned a lesson today, for the good of the sport and for his own. I just few sorry for so many fans, especially for the disappointed passionate crowds in Italy.
Guilherme F. Mattar
I would not contest that Schumacher is a great driver and most likely the best in the world at this point. Unfortunately he showed his true colors at Jerez. When things got tough he tried to take out Villeneuve. And I don't want to hear from the apologists about a "racing incident." Watch Schumacher's hands on the in-car replay. There is no doubt he deliberately turned in on Villeneuve. Thank the racing fates that we don't face the spectre of a Schumacher championship under such dubious circumstances.
Dear Atlas F1: Was is really possible for three drivers to post identical quailfying times? Earlier in the session there were two major problems with the timing system and so the computer may have decided that no-one could go faster than the fastest time and, if they do, it will give them an identical time. Earlier in the season we have seen occasions where the whole timing system has stopped working, or failed to record a driver crossing the line (Schumacher, but I can't remember which race) or giving a driver a split time 5 seconds faster than anyone else (Trulli, but again I can't remember which race). So it is not impossible that there may have been a bug in the timing system - especailly as it looked as though Frentzen was on for a 1:20.9 lap time. If Damon had gone just 0.06 seconds faster then we would know for sure. Does the FIA have a back-up timing system in operation? Yours faithfully,
Mark Gledhill
|