Damon Hill 2 X WDC / Schumacher truths (merged). - Page 8

Gt_R · 20 Nov 2003, 09:07 (Ref:789196)

You know, i have sometimes asked myself. Is it by coincidence or not that Ferrari are blamed for not going by the rules or that Michael recieves preferential treatment. i have asked myself, could the critics be right and just?

But this season, along with some others, have enlightened me. After seeing the debacle of Michelin-gate (and it's response from so-called fair people) and that how NOBODY who blasted Ferrari for team-orders and unfair treatment said anything about the way DC was made to give up his car for Kimi at Japan made me more sure than ever that it is more of an attack at Michael/Ferrari more than a defence on moral and justice.

Smokey 6 litre · 20 Nov 2003, 10:17 (Ref:789227)

Quote:

Originally posted by Gt_R
and that how NOBODY who blasted Ferrari for team-orders and unfair treatment said anything about the way DC was made to give up his car for Kimi at Japan made me more sure than ever that it is more of an attack at Michael/Ferrari more than a defence on moral and justice.

There is a HUGE difference in morality/justice between demanding Ruebens to concede postition/win/any chance of winning anything ever and giving prefernce of a car to a driver who has a chance of the title at the last race of the season!

ljakse · 20 Nov 2003, 11:30 (Ref:789275)

Quote:

Originally posted by Gt_R

After seeing the debacle of Michelin-gate (and it's response from so-called fair people) and that how NOBODY who blasted Ferrari for team-orders and unfair treatment said anything about the way DC was made to give up his car for Kimi at Japan made me more sure than ever that it is more of an attack at Michael/Ferrari more than a defence on moral and justice.

First to remind you that I'm not against team orders at all, but to compare team orders Ferrari used (for second place in race 6 out of 17) to team orders McLaren used (before the final race of the season where one of the drivers can win WDC in that race)???

How are those comparable?

**Adam43** · 20 Nov 2003, 11:39 (Ref:789289)

and what about 1994?

Gt_R · 20 Nov 2003, 12:36 (Ref:789394)

Of course its not comparable. It's the matter of Michael.

But honestly tell me that Michael isn't a factor of all the accusations.

frostblade · 20 Nov 2003, 16:28 (Ref:789708)

Gt_R, stop taking the apologist line that it's all an anti-Michael/German conspiracy and look at the facts. I'm not interested in how Michael is viewed by history (although if you look I have already said I consider his other 5 WDC well deserved). I'm interested in the action of the guy in the lead Benetton in the 1994 season. The guy who broke the rules in the 94 British GP & Australian GP, driving the car made by the team who cheated in nearly all the GPs of that year. These are the facts. That year, Damon should have been WDC.

Speed · 20 Nov 2003, 16:36 (Ref:789716)

:confused:
1994 MS' WDC was well deserved ?
Or Damon should have been WDC (1994) ?

frostblade · 21 Nov 2003, 11:17 (Ref:790439)

No, I said his other 5 were well deserved, as in '95, '00, '01, '02 & '03. Damon should have been champion in '94.

Gt_R · 21 Nov 2003, 13:27 (Ref:790584)

Fine, and just let me tell you what i think. Michael Schumacher is by far a better driver that year and wholly deserves his WDC that year too.

And i believe that having ONE WDC to Damon's name is just fitting for Hill. He had a tough life in F1, and it would be a pity if he left empty handed. Thankfully for him, at his last year at Williams, he grabbed that opportunity, knowing that he won't have a chance after that. And yes, i'm pleased to see he rose to the challenge of JV.

By the way, please remember that i'm not against Hill winning. It's not that he doesn't deserve the WDC. Yes, he should win. But so should Alesi or Berger or Herbert...but they din't. It just happens that there is someone who managed to complete the job just that bit better. If i could, i'd have given both the WDC.

And don't be silly about a German-conspiracy. That's ridiculous. And i'm not denying that some dubious incidents occurred in 1994, not accusing anyone of cooking up stories. I'm just saying, can anybody honestly say that their dislike for Michael (which is acceptable) is not one of the "motivations" to such a heated and passionate argument about how Michael doesn't deserve 1994 WDC?

We have gone 10 years since then. That's one decade. Bringing the same topic back to this forum every off season (timed nicely just right after Michael achieves another milestone) won't do anything to erase Michael's achievements nor magically award Damon with the 1994 WDC.

Yoong Montoya · 22 Nov 2003, 01:00 (Ref:791158)

Quote:

Originally posted by Gt_R
After seeing the debacle of Michelin-gate

The reason for that is that McLaren and Williams fans just couldn't accept that Michelin had been caught cheating and tried to defend it by saying it was an "interpretation of the rules".

johnw · 22 Nov 2003, 01:38 (Ref:791163)

This is very boring guys.
It's a poll and Damon is the winner.
Move on.

Shoe-maker · 23 Nov 2003, 12:11 (Ref:792095)

Michael Schumacher is the 1994 WDC. It is a fact. Would you Hill lot stop deluding yourself? The season was over almost ten years go. Would you give it a rest please and find something else to whinge about?

Damon · 23 Nov 2003, 12:13 (Ref:792097)

Ok...about that Jerez '97 thing...

Wrex · 23 Nov 2003, 12:44 (Ref:792112)

I think we are done here.

**Adam43** · 23 Nov 2003, 13:16 (Ref:792126)

I agree.

View Poll Results: Who is the 94 WDC?
Michael Schumacher	48	45.71%
Damon Hill	57	54.29%
Voters: 105. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Damon Hill in BTCC?	racer69	Touring Car Racing	11	18 Jul 2018 10:28
Why was Damon Hill so under-rated?	Knowlesy	Formula One	66	21 Jul 2004 22:32
Damon Hill tests the Spyker	Adam43	Sportscar & GT Racing	12	2 Nov 2002 13:49
Damon Hill and the Conrods	Adam43	Cool Sites	1	11 Oct 2002 15:15