Michael Schumacher collides with Jacques Villeneuve

Mercedes used Schumacher 1997 controversy as lesson to Hamilton and Rosberg

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Mercedes realised before the 2014 season began that their drivers would dominate the championship and decided to impose “rules of engagement” on the pair of them.

The team’s former strategist James Vowles has revealed how they impressed upon Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg the importance of co-operating as team mates while fighting for the title.

Vowles described how they used one of the most controversial episodes from Michael Schumacher’s career as an example of how drivers can spoil their legacies through unsporting incidents. Schumacher collided with rival Jacques Villeneuve while the pair fought for the title in the final round of the 1997 season, and was disqualified from the championship as a result.

Mercedes knew before the season began they would be the team to beat by a wide margin, said Vowles. Therefore they urged Hamilton and Rosberg to race each other fairly and not risk compromising the team.

“Both Nico and Lewis knew that it was one of those two winning the year,” Vowles told High Performance. “And they knew, by the way, before we turned a wheel at the first race.”

Vowles wrote an internal document which laid out “really clear boundaries” on how the pair behaved off the track and interacted with each other on it.

“It starts with an ethos I believe in today,” explained Vowles, who is now Williams’ team principal. “That whole first page was about being a sportsman. To explain it, you can win a world championship, but if you’ve done so in a way that is not fair and sportsmanlike, you will have regrets for the rest of your life.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“You have a championship to your name, but it’ll be sullied. It’ll be muddied. It won’t be pure.

Lewis Hamilton, Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Spa-Francorchamps, 2014
Hamilton and Rosberg ‘knew they’d win before the first race’
“We, at the time there, wanted to win things by doing things just better than everyone else. Not because we’ve found other mechanisms, we just want to be better than everyone else. And that applies to the drivers, as it does to the engineers within the team, as it does the designers.”

The team wanted to make the drivers understand “you can become the best sportsman in the world, which will create a legacy for many, many years, or you can win a race by doing something that is perhaps forced or hurt or damaged your team mate. Which [way] do you want to go?”

“It’s a very simple choice when you present it to sportsmen,” he said. “Ultimately they want the one that creates a legacy in many years to come.

“Michael – an incredible man, but still marred by 1997 in many regards. It stands out in everyone’s mind. We created the mindset that ‘that’s not how I want to be remembered, I want to be remembered that we were a dominant force working together’.”

Mercedes gave the drivers assurances that “between the two of you, within these rules, the fastest driver across 20 races will win,” he said.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“Not the fastest driver on a [single] weekend, not the one that’s done something that’s maybe benefitted them in the short term: The fastest driver on 20 races.

“We’ll construct it and make sure it’s built that way, and we’ll give you each equal opportunity. And they bought into it and it created a good environment.”

Despite Mercedes’ efforts, “breakdowns” occured in the relationship between Hamilton and Rosberg at times, most notably when the pair collided and retired while fighting for the lead on the first lap of the 2016 Spanish Grand Prix.

“It still sticks in my mind today because you’re taking two of these sportsmen that were constrained within their boxes and just got frustrated,” he said. “But actually what you do at the time is you don’t back off, you double down and [tell them]: This is how it’s going to be.”

Schumacher drove for Mercedes between 2010 and 2012, before he was replaced by Hamilton. Vowles said Rosberg’s 2016 championship win showed what he had gained from observing the seven-times champion.

“Michael taught Nico how to work really hard,” he said. “Michael wasn’t the most skilful in the car – that was Lewis. But he knew how to extract every millisecond out of himself and every millisecond out of the team.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“He was a leader that absolutely would say ‘I’m going to go this way’. The team would follow in there. So much so that both sides of the garage wanted him to do well, so much so that one of my regrets in my career is we didn’t get a win for him. That that still hurts me today. He deserved to win.”

Nico Rosberg, Michael Schumacher, Mercedes, 2010
Rosberg learned from Schumacher, said Vowles
Schumacher’s behaviour with the rest of the team, and focus on extracting the maximum from himself, made an impression on Rosberg, Vowles believes.

“He had a genuine interest in who you were and your life. I went motorbiking on-track with him […] in Paul Ricard and we had the time of our lives. We both still laughed about it so many years after that.

“He knew at the time my partner’s birthday, flowers arrived at home and embarrassed me because I didn’t do that much. He would take a genuine interest in who you are, who your family is, what drives you, every single person on the team. That’s hard to do.

“And [he wasn’t] doing it because he wanted to gain an advantage. He does it because he really cares. That’s Michael. The Michael you had facing the media is a very different Michael to what was behind the scenes.

“That’s how he did it, fundamentally. He would bring everyone on the journey and lead them on the journey. He would squeeze himself, every millisecond he had, he would work as late as he needed to, every hour he needed to. That was how he operated.

“Nico learned a tremendous amount from him. It formed the Nico that then became a world champion ultimately, which is to squeeze everything out of you [that] you can at the cost of everything else.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Miss nothing from RaceFans

Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

42 comments on “Mercedes used Schumacher 1997 controversy as lesson to Hamilton and Rosberg”

  1. El Pollo Loco
    3rd March 2025, 18:42

    A kind of unnecessary, low blow comment out of nowhere (Albon and Sainz are hardly the same as Nico and Lewis let alone in the same position). Next, Vowles will be bragging about how he got Nico to stop skiing because he wouldn’t want to mar or end his life like Schumacher or Sonny Bono.

    1. El Pollo Loco
      3rd March 2025, 18:47

      PS – This is also the type of statement I don’t believe even merits a story (a Round Up mention at most), but I know…it’ll be good for clicks and comments. Got me after all.

      1. Did you read the article, the whole article? Maybe because I’m not a biography reader, I found some of the behind the scenes anecdotes interesting and absolutely worthy of an article.

        1. Me too, Vowles is always worth listening to.

          Crazy chicken often tells the world the article isnt worth writing whilst commenting on it several times. I

          1. Indeed, I thought it was an interesting bit about where the Mercedes team was at when their years of dominance were about to start. And it also reminds us of why Michael Schumacher was such a force for the teams he was part of, including Mercedes from 2010-2012, the way he got the whole team to support him by working hard and getting results, but also by getting to know the people and what mattered to them, which might not be unknown, but is still good to have recalled every once in a while too.

        2. El Pollo Loco
          6th March 2025, 4:39

          @gDog

          The article was interesting. I admit I made the mistake of assuming the article just revolved around the quote and how the relationship was managed between the two (something that happens often – a quote is turned into a short article) rather than a more expansive look back.

  2. The same could be said about Senna or Mansell but somehow the unsportsmanship never sticked to them as it did with Schumacher.

    1. The difference is the motive behind the incidents, with Mansell and Senna their actions always seemed emotional and in the moment while Schumacher had a fair few moments that felt calculated and deliberate acts to cheat the system (one of which he got away with). Ultimately it doesn’t really affect his legacy for most though and that’s fair enough. Ultimately you could argue that Schumacher evolved what Senna started and that’s why it’s important to have context behind what is happening in the sport.

      I didn’t really like Schumacher for his actions in 94 and 97 in particular but then I got to witness his performances 98-2004 which were stellar at times. He’s definitely one of the all times greats and very few will remember 2 silly accidents in years to come. I think it’s already been largely reframed as his ultra competitiveness rather than being unsportsmanlike.

      1. I have never been a Schumacher fan not because of the unsportsmanship but because of his dominant years with the Ferrari and especially the Austria 2002 controversy. Still he is one of the goats and looking back I believe he was treated unfair in the media if you compare his actions to other drivers.

    2. CAre to share any Mansell incidents? He was certainly on the receiving end and did more damage to himself than anyone else as i remember it

      1. Timothy Minaker
        4th March 2025, 13:13

        Totally agree!

      2. F1 Engineering
        4th March 2025, 15:17

        Crashed into senna a couple of laps after receiving a black flag

      3. Mansell/Senna 1989 Portugal GP.
        Mansell already received a black flag multiple laps before he decided to hit Senna from behind. Was banned for one race.

        1. lol he wasn’t behind but he was to blame. He should’ve known senna would turn in even though Mansell had the inside line. But if you no longer go for gap. .

          Watch it again and say it was from behind

          1. In normal circumstances I would say racing incident Mansell can go for a gap and make a mistake. But he ignored the black flags and claimed the radio didn’t work and eliminated Senna. That is unsportsmanship out of frustration. No hard feelings I think all drivers have their moments just like Schumacher.

    3. F1 Engineering
      4th March 2025, 15:19

      Senna never crashed into an opponent on purpose, Prost caused both 89 and 90 Suzuka crashes

      1. hahaha, stop me please, no you are right, all Senna said was, you move out the way or we crash

      2. Grapmg- agreed. the black flag was a little harsh but it was one and he was effectively out of the race. I dont know if you can argue a black flag but im sure the team tried, maybe thats why he stayed out?

      3. Senna crashed into the backend of Mansell’s Williams Adelaide 1992, final corner taking them both out. Definitely on purpose. Stopping Mansell from taking the win

  3. And it made a big impression on them as they didn’t have any incidents between them that season

    1. I’m assuming there’s an “/s” missing in your comment…

      1. Yeah, or perhaps we should just consider how long it took (from Monaco onward I suppose, when Nico got the pole by being, charitably, cheeky, with where he parked his car, but really a bit longer for it to get nasty) before the gloves came off.

  4. Yeah, but what would have Schumacher done, if he was in the lead on the last lap in Abu Dhabi in 2021?

    1. Defending the inside, like any proper racer driving the fastest car.

      1. “Defending the inside, like any proper racer driving the fastest car.”
        Do you actually watch races or are you just into hating?
        And the “fastest” car, if before the restart, one lap before the end of the race
        was on used hard tires, and the other on fresh soft ones?
        You wouldn’t embarrass yourself with your judgments.

      2. Robbie

        Seriously what has happened to you?

        No one can justify that race under any circumstances

        We used to have reasonably good discussions

        I am wondering if your account has been hacked

  5. Yeah well, Lewis already had tarnished his reputation beyond repair when Niki said this:

    “What Hamilton did there goes beyond all boundaries,” Lauda told RTL television.
    “He is completely mad. If the FIA does not punish him, I do not understand the world any more.
    “At some point there has to be an end to all the jokes. You cannot drive like this – as it will result in someone getting killed.”

    And when he send he send Max to the hospital with one of the dirtiest moves in F1 history, gave us the most gut wrenching display of toxic unsportmanship behaviour and, to this day, refused to apoligize, he claimed his seat on top of the dirtiest driver in F1 history ranking.

    Worse than Schumacher.

    1. 2 robbie1
      What Rosberg said is the opinion of Rosberg, who drove Hamilton into the wall.
      Hamilton Rosberg couldn’t stand the wall.
      So your verdict on Hamilton is just an indicator of your level of objectivity.

    2. Lewis bit back and its not OK, in summary. Max gets everything he deserves. You drive like he does then you cry when someone does it back. CLASSIC bulll y

      1. Yes.
        You’re right.

      2. Lewis didnt it back, he ran out of skill and understeerd max off and celebrated it afterwards. With that fantastic crowd.

        1. Yep i was there and we did celebrate, loud and hard. He overtook Max and ran Max wide, Max turned in expecting him to disappear. Thats it. Lewis got a pen, probably correctly, thencame through the pack on a glorious afternoon in the sun to win. Why are you still crying 4 years later?

          1. El Pollo Loco
            6th March 2025, 4:54

            One could ask the same thing about anything. Why are people still “crying” about “AD21?” Because something happened to their favorite driver they didn’t like and thought was unfair. There’s no planet Lewis’ “passing” attempt at Silverstone succeeds. If we use the logic of “he should have given him more space” and therefore Lewis’ attempt was clean you could basically excuse almost any incident where the driver on the inside made a move/took a line that was never going to come off.

            Unlike Max fans, I don’t blame Lewis for using the tactic though. Only repeatedly showing Max you’ll crash him out will earn you any modicum of realistic racing from him. And when it doesn’t you’re still doing the right thing as you’re equalizing the result (if you won’t race fair, then we’ll both end with the same result – out of the race). Besides, it’s not like Max wouldn’t do the same exact thing.

        2. ‘Ran out of skill’ – as when Verstappen slammed into Hamilton last season? Yes, it’s an intense sport and miscalculations happen. But MV chose to turn in after he saw Hamilton there. Hence LH was judged ‘mostly’ to blame, not entirely. Verstappen’s desperation to cede nothingwas at least partly to blame. Given that’s part of his MO to intimidate rivals, really that approach is down to him to reassess.

          1. You can drivel on all day about a perfectly legitimate move at serious speed.

            I do not know you but perhaps you have hopefully seen how fast things happen on a real track rather than a games console?

            The fact of the matter remains. They fought all year. Max under any previous rules would have a race ban post Brazil.

            And he absolutely did not deserve to win Abu Dhabi

            And therefore 2001

            Do you not just love the years of gas lighting?

          2. Drg ?
            Maybe read again! You can make a legitimate move (there was an opportunity to pass) but still be to blame for a collision (the execution wasn’t good enough) which is essentially what the stewards decided at Abu Dhabi 2021. The rest I agree.

          3. Sorry David Br

            Not aimed at your comment but came out under it.

            Wondering if Robbi1 has been hacked frankly..

    3. Wow, it’s endless. And totally hypocritical. Verstappen got his payback parking his car on top of Hamilton’s at Monza, his car inches from taking off his head, and showed complete disregard and contempt for his rival (while Hamilton asked how Verstappen was after the Silverstone incident and was told he was fine). Hamilton’s move into Copse was hard but legitimate racing, as the stewards ruled. Verstappen’s move was deliberate payback – not that he intended to fly over the top of Hamilton’s head, of course, only that he he didn’t care less what happened. He just wanted to stop Hamilton’s race, Senna-style. Which was worse?

    4. You have to massively re-write what actually happened to come to those conclusions, which seems to be the norm to those attacking Hamilton.

    5. Thought in our discussions over the years you were much better than this @#£& robbi?

      Has someone hijacked your non account?

      1. I’ve asked too. If it’s the same person, I miss discussions with the previous Robbie. Not sure what happened but it stems from the 2021 season and it doesn’t seem they can move on, ever.

    6. th3nightwolf
      6th March 2025, 17:43

      “Well, well, well, gather round and behold this miracle of chronological gymnastics! The legendary Lauda (may his celestial tyres never lose traction) had, by that point, shuffled off the mortal racing track. So, unless the dear departed was broadcasting press releases from the afterlife—complete with ghostly pit stops and all—it seems your claim has a certain whiff of the porky pie about it, doesn’t it?”

Comments are closed.