Schumacher gets a little testy in Toronto

[icemachine]

http://en.autos.sympatico.msn.ca/gui...mentid=7319476

How do you annoy the greatest Formula 1 driver ever? Just ask multiple record holder Michael Schumacher about his Villeneuve “mistake”
Ex-Formula One driver Michael Schumacher may have retired from racing at the end of the 2006 season, with more records and championships than any driver to come before him, but he is still a key member of Ferrari's race efforts and development program.

Q: Back to 1997, last race of the season, you're battling with Jacques Villeneuve for the driver's title, and he tries passing you on the inside. You go in to the corner, go out - presumably because you see him -then move back in on [and hit] Villeneuve. Why?

A: What, am I on trial here? [Said with a smile, but a questioning glance to the PR manager sitting next to us.]

Q: No, but from a driver's perspective, is there something you saw, were his wheels not at a certain point, that made you think he might back out of the pass?

A: [after a brief pause] I didn't feel I had to give up the corner. It ended up that that was a mistake, obviously.

Would've loved to have been in that room

[Aysedasi]

But why bother to ask that question - again - now? Why ask a question that can only have been meant to annoy him? I'm not saying he should be free from annoyance, but it's verging on ancient history, isn't it?

[icemachine]

Probably because this is one of the few times he's been made available to the Canadian Press

[ralf fan]

Who the hell are Jacques Villenueve and Michael Schumacher?

[Knowlesy]

Journalism at the cutting edge, only the finest questions hand picked.

[Sodemo]

Its quite clear that he turns in, then turns out when he see's JV coming, then turns in again to try and end both of their races.

[Adam43]

What a weak and pointless question.

[Ralf's Girl]

Originally Posted by ralf fan

Who the hell are Jacques Villenueve and Michael Schumacher?

People we don't talk about round these parts.

[Pingguest]

What point tried that journalist to make? Why don't people stop talking about that stupid incident? Schumacher was punished and that's it.

[MGDavid]

sounds like good sport to me... it can be interesting to see if people change their views or perspective over time, especially after retirement

[Mekola]

This question is as useless as if any journo, in the 1960s, asked Jim Clark about the position of his Lotus wheels on the accident he protagonized with the Ferrari of Wolfgang von Trips during the second lap of the 1961 Italian GP.

And can't find a most similar situation to this, on this special case. Let get Schumi in peace, he's retired from F1 race driving now...

[Adam43]

Schumacher drove into Villeneuve to try and win the championship. Why does the journalist need to ask that question eleven years after to find that out?

[NAC]

This is what the Noddy that asked the question looks like (and I call him a Noddy because who in their right mind would ask such a question and expect a positive interview).



I just love this quote from him

"When a fresh concept hits the right buttons, it's simply magic," says Bettencourt. "Hit the wrong ones, of course, and it's more disastrous than amateur standup comedy."

It was from the "2003 North American Concept Vehicle of the Year Awards Jury Biographies" but still made me laugh reading the "fresh concept" bit

http://www.southeastautomedia.org/concept/jury02.htm


Some of his other stuff isnt bad though, must have been a momentary lap of reason

[Super Hans]

Everyone knows what happened, Schumacher was punished, and has since admitted that he was at fault. Why bother asking again?

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

What a weak and pointless question.

I'm quoting you Adam, just to make sure the next readers don't miss it...

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

What a weak and pointless question.

[Teretonga]

I am surprised that he was sensitive to the issue, taken aback by the question.

I would have thought he would have resolved the matter in his mind by now but it seems that is not the case.
It was a needless question but his response surprises me.

[Bononi]

It depends on the moment, the place... the circunstances. If you are in Canada, being interviewed by a canadian, who brings up an issue you had with a canadian, how would one react ??

[Super Hans]

Originally Posted by Bononi

It depends on the moment, the place... the circunstances. If you are in Canada, being interviewed by a canadian, who brings up an issue you had with a canadian, how would one react ??

I'd stand up and perform a rousing rendition of Blame Canada, from the South Park movie.

[JeremySmith]

The question is complete crap I think...

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by NAC

.....must have been a momentary lap of reason

Not taking the Mickey NAC, but that's a wonderful pun..........

[EERO]

I beg to differ with many of the comments pillorying the journalist for asking the question of That German Fellow.

The event in question was a pivotal moment in Schumacher's career, saying as much about his character as the obvious regard with which he was held and continues to be held by his teammates. He is a complex and interesting man-flaws and genius and generosity and arrogance all in one.

He is, quite simply, human.

History can always be rewritten and will continue to be for all time. At a remove of more that ten years from the event in question; no longer being an active participant in the sport; and having in his recent retirement, time to reflect upon his careeer AND his persona, it is a legitimate question for Schumacher and will continue to be for the rest of his life.

He has apologised for the action and was punished, but has never explained what he felt, what he was thinking what his perception of the incident was.

To declare that that it is "water under the bridge" and not worthy of resurection is not a particularly rigorous positon to take. If we were collectively to believe this, historians would be out of work, for there would be no need to examine our pasts.

"Truth" can always be reexamined, we should not avoid it because it raises unpleasent memories or because we have already made up our minds based upon partial truths.

[Aysedasi]

Do you think the question was posed for those admittedly honourable reasons?

[EERO]

Perhaps I am naive enough to believe that journalists dig to get closer to the truth, not for the sole purpose of rankling the subjects of their interviews.

[Aysedasi]

Ah well, I guess it's as well to aspire to the former - although you'll gather I'm far from convinced in this instance!

[EERO]

Point taken.