MotoGP Legends

I have been wondering recently, why exactly Wayne Gardner is considered a motogp legend. He was obviously an extremely good rider and one worth remembering, but everything i can find that makes a case for him can also be said of Alex Criville, who i consider more worthy.

Both have a single world title, both had roughly ten year careers, both won a similar amount of races(18 for Wayne, 15 for Alex), and both stuck with Honda throughout their time at the top. Both riders where also the first premier class world champions for their nations. However, Civille was the first one for Spain, an achievement which carried an unimaginable amount of pressure. Furthermore Alex has a 125cc world title to his credit, finished second only to Doohan in 96, and returned from serious injury in 97 to win the final race of the season.

I think you'll find it obvious that i am a Criville fan, but i want to know what other think. I don't know if either of them should be granted legendary status, but for sure i feel they have the same worth so currently there is mis justice.

Yeah, Criville gets a tough ride for being in Doohans shadow, but he wasn't far behind him really, and when he was forced to step out of the shadow, taking the weight of Honda and Spain with him, he rose to it perfectly and did exactly what he needed. For me that was an incredible feat.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (phleg @ May 9 2007, 01:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't think that is a great reason to class him as a legend.

I know I'm bringing the Ross-meister (mindless cheerleader) into it but:

1. Rossi had Honda's hopes on him in just his second season

2. He was going to be Italy's first champion for a very long time (in 500).

If he had lost the spark there and then, would you classify him a a legend?

I am not saying that as a reason alone to class him a legend, just explaining that i think the title he did win was a very impressive one. And as for The Rossi thing, its "ifs" again. I can't begin to imagine what the situation would be like if Biaggi was the 2001 world champ, so i don't bother.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (phleg @ May 9 2007, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Tom that avatar will bring arguements!

going to reply but in coll, so teacher is strict and arsy about it.

You what? i dont understand.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (phleg @ May 9 2007, 02:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hayden with Crashi Elias in the SAME shot!

'Some' on the forum dispute the cause.

I tried to make that my avatar just now, but my computer is just showing a picture of Lorenzo, something doesn't add up here.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ May 9 2007, 03:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Thats a touchy subject for sure.On one hand,there is only a handfull of riders that have dominated the sport,so that leaves you with very little legacy as far as the sport goes.On the other hand you have a group of riders that have done well enough to win a title and 15 -20 races.As hard as it is to win a race in GP,especially considering every era has a dominant rider that wins the majority,i say they are legends of the sport if they win a title and 15 or more GP's.

Exactly, so maybe Criville should be considered.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rising Sun @ May 9 2007, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Tom, are you referring to some kind of official NFL/Baseball Hall of Fame kind of thing? Or just general talk?

The official one.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rising Sun @ May 9 2007, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ah, I see. Well, in that case, I'd say the reason is that it probably hasn't been long enough since Criville retired. I have no doubt that he'll make the grade when the time comes.

True, his retirement was officially mid 2002, so if they have one of those "must be retired for 5 years" rules then he may be considered soon.