NewsOnF1 - Why Schumacher or Coulthard ?

Main Page

Why Schumacher or Coulthard ?

Two questions that have been seen in the press a lot lately are: “Who needs Schuey?” and “When will McLaren get rid of Coulthard?”

Well, I think Hungary has just answered both questions.

Ferrari have been lucky to get ahead in the constructors points since Michael’s accident. Ron Dennis admitted this when he said that Ferrari have not won the last races, it was McLaren who lost them.
Similarly Irvine has gained from Hakkinen’s bad luck, or bad management.

Although I do not intend to criticise Irvine, he is still not in Michael Schumacher’s class. Irvine has improved a lot in the last year and has earned the right to be considered one of the better drivers on the circuit but he is still anything up to a second slower than Michael on all but very few race tracks.
I am not suggesting that Michael would have stormed away from the McLarens, but he would have qualified better than Irvine by anything up to ½ second and his lap times in the race would have been consistently better than Irvine by, say another ½ second. Over 77 laps that would have put him 38.5 seconds ahead of Irvine or 10 seconds ahead of Hakkinen.

Now, of course, the race would not have panned out that way. I am sure that Hakkinen could have found another ½ second per lap in the last 20 laps, when he was really not under pressure and almost cruising. But it could have been a close finish, and when they are close Schumacher (or Ferrari) always manages to do what it takes. On the other hand Schumacher may have started from pole (1/2 second faster than Irvine would have done it easily) from where a win would be almost predictable at Hungary. Schumacher is hard to pass, Hungaroring is known as a track where overtaking is hard and passing Schumacher/Ferrari in the pits is just about impossible.

Coulthard screwed up the start and had to spend the first part of the race in traffic, but after that he drove exceptionally well. He was very fast for pretty much the second half of the race, did not seem to be plagued by his normal reluctance to overtake back markers and certainly proved too good for Irvine.

Coulthard appears to be very emotional and gets demoralised easily and when that happens everything turns to custard for him.

When Coulthard feels that he has achieved a good result he is objective and forgets to complain. His whole attitude changes. For example after Hungary, when asked how he felt about losing two places at the start and consequently being stuck behind slower cars he replied that it was fair. “If you want to avoid that situation you have to start better.”

A very different person and attitude compared to when he gave us his “It was a nightmare” speech we had not so long ago.

In summary: I don’t think Coulthard is good. He has the ability to be very fast sometimes, but as soon as something goes wrong somewhere in his life it all just gets too hard and he is dragged down by self pity and doubt. At Hungaroring he confidently drove an inspiring race, which is obviously what Ron Dennis sees and admires in him, but will he do it again this season? If so, when and how often?

McLaren have done well to come 1st and 2nd on a racetrack that does not suit their chassis. Hakkinen drove as only Hakkinen can: professionally, consistently fast – a well deserved win.

Ferrari have just handed their chance of winning both Constructors and Drivers championship to McLaren. It was crucial that they win in Hungary where they had the chassis to do it with. Their set up was pathetic compared with what they achieved in Monaco. They should have done better. From here onwards it is going to become harder to win because most of the tracks favour the McLaren design.

Don’t underestimate Irvine’s achievement in coming third. He was sawing at that wheel for the entire race to keep it somewhere on the island – the Ferrari was not set up right.

I can’t help but point out that Irvine, in a recent press interview admitted that although Michael Schumacher was faster, he made too many mistakes. Well, Eddie, why did you lose your car when Coulthard was not close enough to be a threat? That gave 2nd place to him.

Salo? Pedestrian, comes to mind. I just hope for his sake that he accepted one of those many offers he had after Germany (and got it signed so they can’t withdraw it) before he did his Postman Pat impression. Maybe there was something wrong with his car. I hope there was something wrong, because I am finding it hard to understand how he goes from hero to zero in one race. Who knows he may be brilliant at Belgium again, which will then threaten Coulthard’s reputation as the most inconsistent driver.

Jordan did well. Frentzen still gets stuck behind cars. He was a little better at overtaking but I still get the feeling that overtaking is not what he does best. Hill, got into the points which surprised me as I was quite prepared to see him retire in disgust again.

Stewart did well taking into account that they are still a young team. Barrichello again proved how good he is by being six places in front of his team mate.

I felt sorry for Fisichella who retired with engine trouble after doing so well. I find it hard to understand why he signed with Benetton again for next year as they are keeping the Supertec motor. Surely, with his reputation he could have gone to a team with a chance?

I did expect Benetton to do well at Hungary as they have developed a car with excellent mechanical grip, it is just that Supertec elastic band that is getting a little slack.

And Zonta finishes in a BAR and the whole team probably went off to a bar to celebrate the fact that the car made 75 laps. If he was on the pace and had to complete all 77 laps (being 2 laps down at race finish) that may have been the final straw. Villeneuve did not spoil his record, though: 11 starts, 11 retirements.

Agree or disagree ?
Send any comments you have on this commentary to
The Heretic