1:00 Didn't they always say that Schumi can't admit mistakes? This interview proves the exact opposite. He is telling the truth in the interview. In the past, such actions as in Jerez were quite normal. But at some point, the FIA changed its thinking. As a result, Michael was made an example of. But he accepts that he made a mistake.
We miss you Micheal. I think any f1 fan would love to have you on tv every race doing the commentary because that's what you would have been doing for us today If you had the chance. Keep strong buddy !
It is actually remarkable how present Michael is. He is 100% listening and 100% committed to Martin in this interview. 0:55 Body language is very interesting too. He is literally open and not hiding anything.
Murray Walker said the same thing and that he respected Michael for it. Said that while he was not a barrel of laughs, he was always courteous and friendly, and always forthright and said what he thought. Never resorted to PR speak either.
Anyone other than Senna and that 1990 crash you lose your license. Wild to me that he was allowed to race in 91. Especially after admitting intent. Yet 6 years later MSC is DSQ’d from the entire 97 season for Jerez, which was more sloppy in the moment intent, than Senna who’d made his mind up 24 hours before. Crazy how things change isn’t it. FIA have never been consistent, even 30+ years ago
Looking back, he was probably right about Jerez being the only time he pushed things WAY too far. Back in the '90s, I seriously hated his stunts. But now I think a lot of those things were at least somewhat within the limits. I mean, just because someone isn't squeaky clean, it doesn't mean he is an EXTREME bastard. He was just tougher than most. But that is understandable, looking at the bigger picture.
Totally, I feel also him stating the generation he grew up watching and then competing with (Mansell, Senna, Prost) where the attitude of win at the cost of your opponent was accepted. Like Senna-Prost in 89-90 was acceptable (Senna/Prost kept their titles), so I can't blame Michael for what he did to Hill in 94 or for feeling Jerez 97 was acceptable in the heat of the moment
I have been a Schumey fan since the beginning , I have always been his biggest critic for the mistakes he made like Jerez, I never heard him own that previously , this and his deliberate crash at Monaco qualifying are among his darkest clouds - still an awesome driver and much missed.
Is there any proof the 2006 Rascasse incident was intentional? I watched the 2006 review again and honestly looks like he just pushed and outbraked himself...
I like that Michael referenced those old school guys, and their mentality, which is what he watched as a young driver learning to race. You can't fault the guy for being a competitor, being aggressive, that's his JOB. He knew that, and so did Senna. It didn't mean they didn't care about overall safety, but a race by its definition is a competition, which is inherently dangerous, and aggressive, especially if you are doing it at the highest levels
First time I’ve seen this. Great to hear him explain that the rules, or what is acceptable, was very clear and goes a long way to provide context to his style!
Senna kept his title, Schumi lost his 97 points. As a fan of both, clearly Senna's death and his entertainment on track made us kinda overlook he got away with something for his own personal justice.
Michael's way of driving is no different from Senna or Verstappen (Max). They have this natural aggression to win at all cost and it shows because they've won a lot by getting the elbows out and not making any friends on track. But whenever Michael did something he was immediate scrutinised and called a dirty cheat because of 94 and 97. One thing though whenever he made aggressive moves I trusted him he was still very much in control and knew what he was doing. I don't ever recall Michael making a very aggressive move and ending in a crash he was very precise and accurate with his driving. He will always be my GOAT.
At least, Michael know where the line is admits that he push the line. Max just plays he is just innocent and he don't know why people point figures at him.
In my book two most dangerous things he did were a) blocking move on Häkkinen in Spa 2000, one lap before that famous overtaking move b) squeezing Barrichello Hungaroring 2010. The other stuff he was in control, like you said. He pushed Frentzen out of the race in Canada 1998 but I believe he didn't quite see him.
@@bojandolinar1535 I think Schumi knew it was Hakkinen and that Hakkinen was good enough to be able to cope with that block. What he did to Barrichello was nothing to do with Barrichello ability as a driver and purely cos I think he thought Barrichello would yield forgetting he wasn't his team mate. It was downright dangerous and is legit his most disgusting move.
@@TheWPhilosopher I watched it again and it seems Schumacher changed direction quite early and Häkkinen had enough time to compensate yet he just kept pushing. So this one is partly on Mika, too.
No one in the entire history of sport spoke more truth than the great Michael Schumacher and no one has or ever will be as great as him, keep fighting Michael I miss you more than you could ever imagine 🇩🇪🇩🇪🇩🇪🏎️🏎️🏎️🐐🐐🐐👑👑👑🥇🥇🥇🏆🏆🏆⚫️🔴🟡
I dont think so there’s many greats in sports, and in formula 1 there’s many greats perhaps Schumacher can be one of them but not the greatest, senna easily can be considered the greatest in formula 1
There is a difference: Shumy was always a very considerate and sophisticated driver, while Veratappen is typically quite dirty and reckless. They embody two starkly different types of aggressiveness
@@davybennett3659Monaco 2005 pole, Crash in to Hill, Same thing to Villnauve, Austria 2004 took a win away from Barrichello on the last corner of the last lap.
@@leifcron8054 Meanwhile, as a lifelong Schumacher fan, I also like Damon a lot. I think his views on F1 are usually very good. He has also reflected on his time with Schumacher over the years and never says a bad word about him. He also drove the '94 Benetton at Goodwood for Michael's 50th birthday.
Michael and Aryton were cut from the same cloth...I miss the days when you could fight for corner. With the DRS and the rules nowadays it's like overtaking on the motorway.
@@dcfc2379 1985 His determination to take pole at the Monaco Grand Prix had infuriated Alboreto and Niki Lauda; Senna had set a fast time early and was accused of deliberately baulking the other drivers by running more laps than necessary, a charge he rejected, though the accusations would continue in Canada when drivers accused him of running on the racing line when on his slow down lap forcing others on qualifiers to move off line and lose time. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tbNLHGJUGTQ.html 1986 De Angelis was replaced at Lotus by Scotland's Johnny Dumfries after Senna vetoed Derek Warwick from joining the team, saying that Lotus could not run competitive cars for two top drivers at the same time. Senna allegedly pushed for his former flatmate and fellow Brazilian Maurício Gugelmin to join the team as a pure number two driver, but the team's major sponsor John Player & Sons (JPS) insisted on a British driver which led to the signing of Dumfries. 1987 The team guaranteed Senna contractually preferential treatment over Nakajima in the allocation of equipment.Lotus used new secret helping electronics to win in 1987It was the "invention of the year" and the newest F1 thing in 1987 (computer controlled technique). It was designed for automatic acceleration and computerized traction control. Also an automatic, hydraulic wheel control was installed and many more like breaking control .. controlled by a black-box. It was a very big advantage, f.e. in the rain. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eDJX6LX8Iz8.html Adelaide 1987 Senna finished second but was later disqualified when post race scrutineering revealed oversized brake ducts on his Lotus. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ALMYI3vUiZg.html 1988 Brasil - Senna's first race for McLaren got off to a bad start when the cars gear selector broke on the grid, causing a restart. The Brazilian was eventually disqualified for switching to the spare car after the green flag had been waved following the warm-up lap. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-q-4qD9clvL4.html Portugal - Prost made a slightly faster start than Senna, but the Brazilian dived into the first corner ahead. Prost responded and went to pass Senna at the end of the first lap. Senna swerved to block Prost, forcing the Frenchman to nearly run into the pit wall at 290 km/h (180 mph). Prost kept his foot down and soon edged Senna into the first corner and started pulling away. Though Prost was angered by Senna's manoeuvre, the Brazilian got away with a warning from the FIA. At the postrace team debrief, Prost voiced his anger at the move which prompted Senna to apologize to Prost for the incident. 1990 Suzuka - Senna secured the pole, but was unhappy with the side of the track it was situated on, claiming that pole should always be on the racing line. He and Gerhard Berger then went to the Japanese stewards, to request a change of position of pole to the cleaner left side of the track. The stewards initially agreed but an injunction by FISA president Jean Marie Balestre later that night rejected the decision and the original pole position remained on the dirtier, less grippy right side of the track. In addition, as revealed by F1 journalist, Maurice Hamilton,[2] the FIA had warned that crossing the yellow line of the pit exit on the right to better position oneself at the first corner would have not been appropriate, further infuriating Senna.Some in the F1 paddock found Senna's complaints as strange given that the pole was actually on the same side of the track (the inside next to the pit wall) as it had been since the first Japanese Grand Prix held there in 1987. Many also noted that Senna had not complained about the position of the pole in either 1988 or 1989, both races he had started on pole and both races he was fighting Prost (who qualified 2nd in both years) for the World Championship.After this, Senna vowed that if Prost (starting second) got the advantage into the first corner, which most were sure he would, Senna would attempt to take the lead into the first corner, regardless of the consequences. At the beginning of the race, Prost pulled ahead of Senna, who immediately tried to repass Prost at the first corner. While Prost turned in, Senna kept his foot on the accelerator and the cars collided at 270 km/h (170 mph) and spun out of the race, making Senna world champion. 1992 At a test session for the German Grand Prix, Senna and Schumacher had a confrontation in the pits, with Senna grabbing Schumacher by the collar and accusing him of endangering him by blocking him on the track. But apparently it was ok when Senna gave Schumacher a "brake test" on the straights. 15 year old girl Senna then courted Adriane Yamin, daughter of an entrepreneur from São Paulo, who was 15 years old when they began the relationship in 1985 and often chaperoned by her mother during meetings with Senna. They were briefly engaged, but the relationship was broken off by Senna in late 1988.Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayrton_Senna
When Michael parked his car at Rascasse in 2006 he almost certainly lost the championship with that manoeuvre. If you consider his final finishing position from a pit lane start, he could have won that race. Psychologically it could have made a difference and won him the championship in the end
I certainly respect the opinion, but the championship was lost earlier. I think after the first three races heading in Imola he was down 20 odd points. Alternatively you can say he was too aggressive in Hungary where he knew that Alonso was out of the race and any points would have been crucial. Unfortunately the championship just didn't go our way that year.
not only in Monaco. While he could potentially finished second or perhaps even win the race, he also lost at least 5 points in Australia when he crashed in the last corner. And yep, Hungary too, another 5 points wasted. Even with the blown engine in Japan Michael should have had an advantage going to Brazil, about 3 or 4 points. With that in mind, he could have taken that race more easily, maybe avoiding that puncture with Fisichella and finishing in the podium But unfortunatelly we´ll never know, an Michael sadly never won his 8th championship
Interesting to note that a marshall died at Monza later in the year 2000, and another died at the opening race in 2001. Both as a result of cars crashing and causing debris to fly.
Yap! Brundle is a bit bitter towards Schumacher, thats plain obvious to see when people pay attention to his commentary towards Ferrari in general and Schumacher especially. It's not helping that he is a manager for David Coulthard which is on McLaren, Ferrari main rival. He quickly judged Schumacher when he's done something slightly wrong or make mistakes, but reserved judgment for british driver (especially Coulthard). For example, on Argentina GP 1998 Coulthard goes wide, and Schumacher made a passing move capitalize on Coulthard mistake, Coulthard then closed the door not giving enough room for Schumi. This is clearly a clean manouvre and was Coulthard mistake, but he defend Coulthard by saying... "David must not seeing him coming and dont realize how much time he lost by going wide on that corner" That is simply dont make sense since Michael already tailing Coulthard for a full lap, and Coulthard were obviouly pushing hard trying to make a gap because he know Michael is coming hard on him, that is the reason Couthard gone wide anyway... If Coulthard really didn't know Michael is there, than he is a really bad driver. Again on infamous Spa '98. Coulthard is lapped down on wet and minimal visibility. He then lift off on the racing line just after exiting corner. Clearly not a wise thing to do! Coulthard is being lapped and should give room and let Michael pass as soon as possible, yet he is holding Michael for several corner while he can easily ease off the throttle and let him pass before on a more convinient place for passing. Coulthard himself admitted later on that it was indeed his fault. You just simply dont lift off on a racing line with minimal visibility, especially on a corner, a bad idea... I wonder if this is a Ron Dennis idea, because Coulthard is quite fair driver. But Martin didn''t want the audience to know that his driver doing a mistake, and potentially (as it is proven) affect the championship results. He indirectly (shamelesly) point the finger to Schumacher by saying : "Michael must not seeing him...." Hmmm.... Hello Martin!!! Of course Michael didn't see and expect Coulthard to suddenly lift off in a corner like that! Shame on you Martin. ---- Again. Another interview that he do previously with Michael also pointing out the Adelaide '94 incident and trying to make point that Schumacher is bad boy. Totally intentional. I get it that british media is trying to paint Schumacher as a villain and dirty driver, but it really is blown out of proportion. They make a real and big cryout with the infamous team order of Austria 2002, while in fact team order is pretty much a normal business in F1. Hakkinen first 2 win is by team order. Hell.. Even Mansell had undisputed #1 driver in his contract for Williams on 1991. Anyone with half a brain will plain see that Patrese don't even bother to chase Mansell, and on some race he wave to Mansell and allow him to pass, but british media just put a blind eye and (Murray Walker) always shouting.... "There is no team order on Williams...." Heh... Well, at least James Hunt call it bullshit. Schumacher on the other hand never had #1 driver in contract. Yes there is team order, but to whom benefit will remain to be seen by races and who have the best chance to win the championship on overall season. As is proven on 1999 season when Schumacher ass get dragged by Montezemolo to help Irvine bid the championship for Ferrari. But the british media always say (to make better his english driver, and put somber for the villain german)... "Who... don't have much testing time... Who always have to defer to Schumacher..." How the hell one can defer, if he is not in a position to do so? For majority of the season and race, the Ferrari second driver of Irvine and Barrichello is even struggling battle with main rival (Williams and McLaren), let alone battle for win and give it to Michael. Only on 2002 season when Ferrari has a very dominant car Barrichello able to close the gap, and having a couple of close race that it can be argued that there is team order. Before that on 2000 and 2001 when Ferrari not necessarily having the best car or dominant... Barrichello is nowehere on pace to Schumacher. --- Of the F1 comentator i follow, i like Jonathan Palmer the best. He praised the british driver if they make a good job and worthy of a praise. But at the same time dont back off to critisize them and not seeing them in rose tinted when they made a (silly) mistake, such when Hill ram into the back of Schumacher on Monza '95 or spin off at Nurbugring and Suzuka. James Allen is the worst... Constantly screaming like a histeric cheerleader, then relied and comment on gossip and bombastic view... He even has the gut to ridicule and bashing driver while he himself was not an ex F1 racer.
That comment by Martin wasn't even that bad to be honest. There were other people in the international media (even in Germany) who absolutely crucified him. But he was always a professional and he knew he would meet him all the time, so there was no point in carrying a grudge against Martin. And he even explained and admitted what happened, so he was clearly fine with talking about it
One recipe to be great is to have a certain level of ruthlessness in them. Michael Jordan, Michael Schumacher, Kobe Bryant, Muhammad Ali, etc. If their style isn't acceptable to others, that means they don't have any choice but to see the great become greater. And THAT'S why others can't achieve what the greats have achieved.
It reminded me of Hamilton saying "what i'm supposed to do? let the guy win the championship?" When he back off to get Rosberg to dispute with Verstappen and Vettel.
Nothing wrong with what LH did. Iirc Mercedes had won the title already so no foul to the team and if Rosberg was good enough he could have just tried taking the lead instead of whining....
@@TheWPhilosopher Not saying that LH did something wrong. Just saying that you need to be willing to play by the edge of the rules, like schumi said, to be champion. Also Rosberg was more than good enough, as a championship is not decided only in one race and was compiting with one of the greatest drivers in the sports history
@@4d4nful woah I wasn't saying you did say he did anything wrong, just anyone criticising him is being silly as he didn't do anything wrong. Also my comment on Rosberg was not re the title he won but that race in particular. If LH is slowing you down cos he's backing you up then quit whining to your team and overtake him. You are in the same team. If you know the car can go faster feint and drop the accelerator and overtake. There is your title done. That's all I meant.
Problem is 1994 and rascasse 2006 which both kind of cloud what he did in 1997 as not some sort of one off. The monaco one showed such an unsportsmanlike side, I remember being so disappointed from such a champion otherwise. These incidents will always be remembered.
I was disappointed in Monaco 06 as a Ferrari fan. He cost us a win at that race the car was mega that weekend. P2 was guaranteed and pole was likely unless Alonso improved. Any other track could’ve driven through the pack on Sunday, but Monaco, what a waste.
Yap! Brundle is a bit bitter towards Schumacher, thats plain obvious to see when people pay attention to his commentary towards Ferrari in general and Schumacher especially. It's not helping that he is a manager for David Coulthard which is on McLaren, Ferrari main rival. He quickly judged Schumacher when he's done something slightly wrong or make mistakes, but reserved judgment for british driver (especially Coulthard). For example, on Argentina GP 1998 Coulthard goes wide, and Schumacher made a passing move capitalize on Coulthard mistake, Coulthard then closed the door not giving enough room for Schumi. This is clearly a clean manouvre and was Coulthard mistake, but he defend Coulthard by saying... "David must not seeing him coming and dont realize how much time he lost by going wide on that corner" That is simply dont make sense since Michael already tailing Coulthard for a full lap, and Coulthard were obviouly pushing hard trying to make a gap because he know Michael is coming hard on him, that is the reason Couthard gone wide anyway... If Coulthard really didn't know Michael is there, than he is a really bad driver. Again on infamous Spa '98. Coulthard is lapped down on wet and minimal visibility. He then lift off on the racing line just after exiting corner. Clearly not a wise thing to do! Coulthard is being lapped and should give room and let Michael pass as soon as possible, yet he is holding Michael for several corner while he can easily ease off the throttle and let him pass before on a more convinient place for passing. Coulthard himself admitted later on that it was indeed his fault. You just simply dont lift off on a racing line with minimal visibility, especially on a corner, a bad idea... I wonder if this is a Ron Dennis idea, because Coulthard is quite fair driver. But Martin didn''t want the audience to know that his driver doing a mistake, and potentially (as it is proven) affect the championship results. He indirectly (shamelesly) point the finger to Schumacher by saying : "Michael must not seeing him...." Hmmm.... Hello Martin!!! Of course Michael didn't see and expect Coulthard to suddenly lift off in a corner like that! Shame on you Martin for trying put the finger on Michael in that accident. ---- Again. Another interview that he do previously with Michael also pointing out the Adelaide '94 incident and trying to make point that Schumacher is bad boy. Totally intentional. I get it that british media is trying to paint Schumacher as a villain and dirty driver, but it really is blown out of proportion. They make a real and big cryout with the infamous team order of Austria 2002, while in fact team order is pretty much a normal business in F1. Hakkinen first 2 win is by team order. Hell.. Even Mansell had undisputed #1 driver in his contract for Williams on 1991. Anyone with half a brain will plain see that Patrese don't even bother to chase Mansell, and on some race he wave to Mansell and allow him to pass, but british media just put a blind eye and (Murray Walker) always shouting.... "There is no team order on Williams...." Heh... Well, at least James Hunt call it bullshit. Schumacher on the other hand never had #1 driver in contract. Yes there is team order, but to whom benefit will remain to be seen by races and who have the best chance to win the championship on overall season. As is proven on 1999 season when Schumacher ass get dragged by Montezemolo to help Irvine bid the championship for Ferrari. But the british media always say (to make better light on his english driver, and put somber for certain villain german)... "Who... don't have much testing time... Who always have to defer to Schumacher..." How the hell one can defer, if he is not in a position to do so? For majority of the season and race, the Ferrari second driver of Irvine and Barrichello is even struggling battle with main rival (Williams and McLaren), let alone battle for win and give it to Michael. Only on 2002 season when Ferrari has a very dominant car Barrichello able to close the gap, and having a couple of close race that it can be argued that there is team order. Before that on 2000 and 2001 when Ferrari not necessarily having the best car or dominant... Barrichello is nowehere on pace to Schumacher. --- Of the F1 comentator i follow, i like Jonathan Palmer the best. He praised the british driver if they make a good job and worthy of a praise. But at the same time dont back off to critisize them and not seeing them in rose tinted when they made a (silly) mistake, such when Hill ram into the back of Schumacher on Monza '95 or spin off at Nurbugring and Suzuka. James Allen is the worst... Constantly screaming like a histeric cheerleader, then relied and comment on gossip and bombastic view... He even has the gut to ridicule and bashing driver while he himself was not an ex F1 racer.
James Allen is a better commentator than David Croft or Jonathan Legard. At least he came off as genuinely passionate, and let Martin Brundle speak whenever there was anything insightful to be said.
Brundle had a conflict of interests there being DC's manager and I always held that against him in his commentary at the start. A thoroughly good commentator but he clearly compromised himself in the early days with DC. Having them commentate together was like watching a comedy duo that you don't really enjoy. (I still hanker for a return of Ben Edwards and John Watson in a way - what a duo - second to Murray and James Hunt) Adelaide '94 was a pretty dodgy incident, Schumi's nerves were on edge because of potentially winning his first title but he skirted the line there and his reactions in the immediate aftermath left a sour taste. I do not blame the British public for feeling the way that they did even if I considered myself a huge Schumacher fan. The British press and team orders are the same as Arsene Wenger when his player commits a foul "Well I did not see it," but will cry foul if anyone else uses the same tactic. People have wised up now so they know it's going to come into play at some point. And teams have to be careful not to be too blatant (unless otherwise stated) in doing Irvine was always "the Ulsterman," an adroit way of keeping Northern Ireland at arms length. I'm Irish and the fact that Irvine drove under the British flag because his racing licence was British really infuriated my dad. Me I couldn't care less, you do what's easier. (Inventing stories to placate my dad's twisted nationalism was a chore though - also wondering why Irvine too). I never took to Jonathan Palmer, I thought his analysis was inept at the best of times and he too seemed to spare Coulthard from anything when it was clearly Coulthard's fault. Although I agree with you on James Allen, FUCK that was bad. I know he's passionate and can rattle off a good stat but it always made me think it was the wrong kind of passion and then his crowning moment will always be "IS THAT GLOCK?"
@m4rcd27 Crofty is the only man I can imagine that manages to outdo James Allen. I didn't think that was possible. I try to listen to F1 on Canal+ if I can.
Ironic that his broken leg in 99 set him up for 5 titles after. Best driver ever IMO, but Ferrari had a half season headstart for the 2000 car development and it showed.
The 99 ferrari car was an absolute beast, he would have taken the title that year, hell Eddie was able to fend off 2 Mclarens and actually had a chance for the title
@@steviegbcool that’s debatable for the simple reason that; of the 10/16 races Schumacher completed in 1999, Hakkinen out-scored the then 30yr old by 54-44. Of this, MSC could have won in Malaysia when he gave Irvine the Gold, but even that would have meant Hakkinen out-scored the German icon 54-48. I think the Flying Finn would have won the 99 title regardless.
@@DarrenMoynagh well also debatable as Irvine was in contention until the season closer and no offence to Irvine but that was Irvine. If Schumi doesn't break his leg he has six races to make up a six point deficit and under the older system of points it's doable. I think if Schumi isn't out he'd win narrowly. Close but he'd edge it. Imho. However ifs what's maybes we shall never truly know.
Martin Brundle doesn't like Michael much, one losses credibility as a professional coming in with a bias. Aside from Michael being the best F1 driver of all time, he's very clever too. Look how he set the tone of this interview, he's a PR legend.
That's not true. Martin Brundle has huge respect for Michael Schumacher. He has said many complimentary things about him. You can't confuse Brundle doing his job and asking tough questions with what his personal opinion is.
I think because he knew his car was the best and Schumacher was beating him up. So he had to attack his driving style. 94 for example he was only catching him through disqualifications, even once the b spec car was introduced at Germany. At races they both participated, Schumacher still had the upper hand. 100 less HP then Williams, Schumacher's team mate's scored 11 points for the season. I think its safe to say benneton wasn't a easy car to drive. Schumacher demolished them all then repeated it 95. And was unlucky to only finish with 102 points 95 hill took Schumacher out twice when he was leading. Both wins inherited by Herbert
I remember Lauda being absolutely furious and saying on German TV that after that race that the way Hill was weaving on the back straight at speeds in excess of 320km/h was one of the dumbest things he'd ever seen, as if you get it wrong at those speeds, you will have fatalities.
@@Nathan-bd6cq ive got to do another updated one and include things like when schumacher was weighed after a race and it didnt match up to his pre weekend weight then the nazi fetishist max mosely hinted he was cheating everybody loses weight during a race but schumacher is not allowed, also there was a story that rosberg told about wanting to go to the toilet but schumacher was in there, with no evidence rosberg accuses schumacher of intentionally holding up the toilet to inconvenience him, schumacher cant ever go to the toilet without someone accusing him of cheating
@@MrRodzilla Again, you saying that Rosberg was accusing Schumacher of cheating for waiting in the toilet is another reach. I’ve heard him tell that story he didn’t accuse him of cheating, he told it in a very light hearted manner talking about how competitive Schumacher was.
Barrichello did not have to go to the inside, Schumacher made his move early in the straight and made his 1 move towards the inside. Only 1 driver made that move more dangerous than it had to be and it was Rubens, if Rubens goes to the outside he still passes Schumacher and he doesn't come close to the wall.
What he did to barachello in turkey almost putting him in the wall reminded me how narachello almost died in Imola on the weekend senna AND ratzenberger BOTH DIED.
It looks like he made the corner tho? And he probably wouldve crashed into schumi anyways since he divebombed. Dont see how schumi is the bad guy when villeneuve divebombed him
@MalcolmTann0 lol, Barrichello's car doesn't have brakes? What are the brakes for? Barrichello pushed it to the limit and then screamed like a little b!tch 😂😂😂 how pathetic.
No he tried to give him a very bad line for next corner and didn't expect that Barichello will already pass him on the straight, yes it was very wrong what he did but he didn't try to push him into the wall.
@@r26ba85 When exactly has Verstappen cheated? You lot go on and on about Abu Dhabi and the Cost cap, what exactly does that have to do with Verstappen? That's the FIA and Red Bull, not him, compared to whinging Hamilton to tried to spin a story that Mercedes were holding him back just so a German could win with Mercedes
