Schu criticised by fellow GPDA members

[pD F1]

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=33438

Trulli saying he hasn't been totally honest and has shown signs of inbalance. Fisi and Alonso also questioning Schumacher TGF.

[Logrence]

I can see that Ferrari wouldn't want him to get involved with this sort of politics - they have, after all, made a special deal with the FIA for post-2008 F1.

It does put his position as President of the GPDA in jeopardy, though.

[John Turner]

Michael is a great driver, an intelligent man and generally a nice guy but this year he has displayed signs of being out of touch. I suspect that, not surprisingly, he may have acquired the Jean Todt syndrome which fails to understand why certain decisions or stances fail to impress others. There is no doubt that MS is his own man, but his position in the GPDA, as current WDC, as well as one of the elder statesman in driving terms imposes upon him leadership responsibilities which he seems unwilling to accept.

[richard_sykes]

Not his year is it.

He doesnt get all the respect he should.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Logrence

I can see that Ferrari wouldn't want him to get involved with this sort of politics - they have, after all, made a special deal with the FIA for post-2008 F1.

It does put his position as President of the GPDA in jeopardy, though.

Logrence what is that special deal do you think? Michael is being somewhat non committal this year, I agree sometimes he sounds like a politician and does not say anything at all.

[Valve Bounce]

Originally Posted by richard_sykes

Not his year is it.

He doesnt get all the respect he should.

Yeah!! Just like Collingwood when they played the Brisbane Lions last night.

[Nicholosophy]

Originally Posted by richard_sykes

Not his year is it.

He doesnt get all the respect he should.

A person is only respected when it is earned AND they maintain their "status" that earned them the respect.

For example, I respect Paul Stoddart. My reason is that he tells it how it is, gets straight to the point and is good for the sport in my eyes. I respect that.

I have in the past respected MSchu. He would stand up for driver's issues, safety and so on. He is loosing my respect because he is no longer doing that - he is playing the political game of Ferarri.

[Logrence]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Logrence what is that special deal do you think? Michael is being somewhat non committal this year, I agree sometimes he sounds like a politician and does not say anything at all.

I imagine their special deal revolves around things like what the regulations are going to be and whether F1 changes so that things can get passed with a majority vote rather than the unanimous vote the Concorde Agreement requires at the moment. I suspect this won't change. I know for a fact that Ferrari get extra money already from the deal.

Ferrari, remember, are the only team signed up for post-2008 F1.

[John Turner]

It was a pretty subdued and uncommunicative Michael that Jim Rosenthal interviewed
wasn't it? However, I am sure I heard him say that what happened at Indy was a 'safety issue' whereas I thought he was widely quoted as saying it was solely a technical issue. Of course it was both, since one led to the other.

[Don K]

What's the point in having that many drivers in the GPDA, if each of them seems to know exactly what the correct decission would be for the other ones?


I would think that the number of members indicates that there are bound to be different opinions within the group.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Logrence

I can see that Ferrari wouldn't want him to get involved with this sort of politics - they have, after all, made a special deal with the FIA for post-2008 F1.

.

I was thinking the same, but you beat me to it. I presume Rubens has signed something then? (If he has, i also presume that he knows he's not staying with Ferrari?)

[Red Baron]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Michael is being somewhat non committal this year, I agree sometimes he sounds like a politician and does not say anything at all.

Probably because he knows whatever he says will be disliked by some people. I really think the poor bloke just can't win.

Maybe, just maybe he isn't being the German ***** so many of you like to think he is. Perhaps he just doesn't agree with the other drivers in this instance. I'm sure its not unheard of for one person out of 20 to have a different opinion to the others!

I really can't believe that Michael is not concerned with the safety issues that the GPDA deals with. In fact, you often hear that Michael does more for GP and road safety than any of the other drivers. I also fail to see how this makes him unsuitable for his position within the GPDA.

If the interview referred to above (with Jim Ropsenthal) was after the British GP (I didn't see it on TV, was at Silverstone) then I'm not surprised Michael was subdued. He'd just been well and truly trounced (again) by Renault and McLaren and not surprisingly he was probably pretty disappointed because he likes to win!

Shame there's not more people like him I say!!!!

Rosie

(and as for Paul Stoddart....I wish he'd stop trying to be everyones best friend!!)

[Liz]

"Showing signs of imbalance" - I thought Trulli was saying that TGF was losing his mind.

But I'm not surprised that finally people within F1 are beginning to notice what some of us noticed in 1994.

[f1_carzy]

I think Michael is his own man; and as far as driver safety, he has done a lot than most of the other drivers. i am sure, he must have his reasons for not signing the letter sent to the FIA.

I still am not sure what is all the fuss about that letter. He did not sign it because he believes that the tyre issue at Indy was a technical one, and has got nothing to do with circuit safety which is what is the primary objective of the GPDA, of course running with 'unsafe' tyres compromises the safety of the drivers, but that is a different point altogether; but what is the need for the drivers to send a letter to the FIA, I mean what is the point they are trying to make? Sorry, if my question is bit naive

[ttc]

MS simply can't win.

Remember the time he requested that no one overtakes in the first corner of Monza?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/moto...ne/1548068.stm

Few in the pit lane at Monza would disagree. The 2001 Italian Grand Prix was a strange, eerie mix of pent up emotion, grim-faced determination and repressed celebration.

The horrific injuries suffered by a former F1 favourite, Alex Zanardi, in Germany only compounded the sense of unease and discomfort.


For various reasons, his heart wasn't in it at this track
Ferrari 's Jean Todt on Michael Schumacher

Remarkably for a man whose reputation has been built on ice cool detachment bordering on arrogance, Michael Schumacher was the walking embodiment of the worldwide anguish triggered by the destruction in America.

As the team's sporting director, Jean Todt, put it, "For various reasons, his heart wasn't in it at this track."

Just 15 minutes before the race, the champion was still striding about the grid, talking to fellow drivers about the need for care and consideration through the first two bottleneck chicanes.

Michael Schumacher talks to Pedro de La Rosa before the start
Schumacher tried to urge caution

On any other race day, he would have been utterly absorbed in his personal bubble of concentration.

But this weekend was different. Very different.

He seemed to take it upon himself to be his colleagues' moral guardian, as if suddenly aware of his own mortality: championship, children, wealth and fulfilment but for how much longer in such a crazy world?

Mindful of the death of a marshal at Monza last year, he'd spent the drivers parade urging them not to overtake off the startline to avoid a repeat statistic at such a safety conscious time.

But he was defied by Jacques Villeneuve and then overruled by Bernie Ecclestone who heard him out in a meeting at the Ferrari motorhome before ordering business as usual.

Remember the ridicules and abuses hurled in his direction?

And now he's being criticized for not SIGNING a paper AFTER the event is OVER?!!!!!

[John Turner]

Originally Posted by Red Baron

Maybe, just maybe he isn't being the German ***** so many of you like to think he is.

I really can't believe that Michael is not concerned with the safety issues that the GPDA deals with.

If the interview referred to above (with Jim Ropsenthal) was after the British GP

1) I don't detect too much on this thread that warrants that comment. I agree however that Liz has extreme views on MS with which I certainly do not agree.

2) Of course he is concerned with driver safety; I just drew attention to what appeared to be a contradiction in what had been reported

3) No, it was before the race, possibly even the day before.

[Gt_R]

People say Michael didn't sign because of Ferrari... well, look at it another way, the other drivers are merely backing their own team and with good political reasons as well...

Michael is as right or as wrong as the next fella. All the talk the likes of Trulli want us to hear out... let's face it, his team is the one in trouble afterall.

It's funny that one incident makes people wonder how some guys treat safety. And considering that some of the names we hear being criticised, are generally the people who did more than anyone else in the push for improved safety being the scene.

[Snrub]

IMO the 2001 Monza incident merely adds fuel to the criticisms leveled post Indy. "I don't want to race because it might be dangerous." vs. "It doesn't matter if I get all the points, THEY should race." I thought the sentiments of DC, JPM, Kimi and JV (and probably others that I'm missing) were correct. They wanted more than anything to race and would have regardless of the dangers, but on the same token realized that it was unsafe to do so.

The only thing working in MS's favor this time is that back at Monza JV stood alone in opposition to MS's silly Monza position. Just because JV was the sole voice of opposition doesn't mean he was wrong. (in fact I argue he was right)

[JeremySmith]

I am sure that Michael's reasons for not signing are logical ones. He is a very lateral thinker and a nice human being.

[aj_308]

I dont think everyone would like him regardless of whether he said some thing, said nothing, said the right thing etc. etc.
His driving speed should be respected.
Anything else is opinion really.

[Dutton]

Originally Posted by Snrub

IMO the 2001 Monza incident merely adds fuel to the criticisms leveled post Indy. "I don't want to race because it might be dangerous." vs. "It doesn't matter if I get all the points, THEY should race." I thought the sentiments of DC, JPM, Kimi and JV (and probably others that I'm missing) were correct. They wanted more than anything to race and would have regardless of the dangers, but on the same token realized that it was unsafe to do so.

The only thing working in MS's favor this time is that back at Monza JV stood alone in opposition to MS's silly Monza position. Just because JV was the sole voice of opposition doesn't mean he was wrong. (in fact I argue he was right)

There seems to be contradictory messages coming out of this post. Could you clarify what you are meaning, please?

[f1atic]

I agree with those who have said he has his reasons and that his silence regarding them are likely due to them being unpopular.

I seriously doubt there is another driver among the GPDA who can say they have done anything near the accomplishments of Michael in the arena of safety and changes brought about because of his statements and actions.

I also believe that he was correct about the problem at Indy being a techincal one, having reviewed the many options given the teams on Michelins.

Many drivers would like to see Michael out of racing by whatever means they can get to that. Some of it is political and some is because they haven't the backbone to stand up for something as he has - they just go with the flow and rally 'round any group in opposition to Michael and Ferrari.

He will be gone soon, of that I am fairly certain.
Who will they pick on then?