Autosport

[freedman]

I havent bought Autosport or MN for around 10 years

Today wjhilst shopping with the OH I spent afew minutes perusing it in the supermarket

£3:00 FFS and a standard of journalism so low its beyound belief

Thers an article about Can Am in there, written apparently by someone with no knowledge of the subject.

Apparently Jacky Ickx won the Can Am in 1977 (it was actually 1979)

McLaren allegedley won the title in 1972, it was George Follmer and Penske Porsche

And considering the fame of the cars and driver there was no mention at all of the 917/10, 917/30 or Mark Donohue

And breathe...

Apologies for what probably seems a somewhat childish and pointless rant but why cant they just get the basics right?

[stifler]

Meet Motorsport, Autosports older more mature brother.

[chevronb37]

Sadly, Autosport is now tabloid journalism about cars. Very poor and Mark Hughes is the most irritating journalist.

Anyone read Roebuck's rant in MS last month? It's getting more vitriolic as he settles into his role there. You can tell he's not having to bite his tongue to retain his paddock pass any more...

[FourWheelDrift]

All the good journos have departed.

[corozin]

I agree. Autosport now focuses far too much on F1, and is too tabloid.

If you want thoughtful, informative well written articles across a broad spectrum of International Motorsports you need to take Motorsport instead. You'll also be pleased to find that Nigel Roebuck writes in Motorsport too.

[Derek Smith]

freedman said:

but why cant they just get the basics right?

To be fair a weekly often has a lower standard of proof reading that a monthly. It goes with the deadline. Whilst the Can-Am article might have been written some time before, it will have been subbed just before going to press. And sub editors are not picked for their intelligence. (Or their ability as sub editors I reckon.)

I've found Autosport excellent on F1 which is the reason I buy it. For in-depth articles Motor Sport is obviously the better option. But a weekly magazine aimed and instant reporting of motor sport events will struggle this time of year.

[Nicholas Blair]

Used to get it every week back in the 80's/90's, haven't set sight on it for many a year.

Pity it's gone down hill - It was the bible at one point.

[fastfreddy]

A certain 'Richard Heseltine' has started writing features for Autosport recently.

The Can-Am one was penned by him.

I've not read such utter drivel for quite some time as the 'pieces' he's contributed over the last few weeks.

Now, there have been a few Motorsport related books and Guardian articles written by someone with the same name but I'm not sure they are the same person.

Could this guy be another Richard Heseltine, possibly related in some way to Autosport's owners? Anyone know?

[stockhatcher]

i used to pop out ans get autosport every lunch time from about 1986 to 2005, then I subscribed. I used to read it cover to cover like a good book, but now I tend to skip a lot of the articles. But I am not sure whether that is because I am older and my passion had dimmed, or whether it is because the articles aren't as good in the first place or some other reason. I do still get it and I always liked the club section best, followed by special stage then maybe the pit and paddock bit.

definately gone down hill since roebuck has left though

[Derek Smith]

stockhatcher said:

definately gone down hill since roebuck has left though

I wrote an article for Autosport cricising Roebuck. Not his professionalism which is very good, but the drivel he'd written as a filler. I got three letters printed in support and Roebuck then penned an article that picked on me. Bit of a bully I thought. Later that year I went to the Formula One Paddock Club at Silverstone and during a speech by some McLaren engineers and pit crew one of them asked: Is Derek Smith here?

I thought it couldn't be me so I stayed seated but mine host, a very professional Michael Holt, pointed to me and I stood up, confused and a bit apprehensive. The mechanic then referred to my article saying that I put [insert words and phrases that show some contempt for Roebuck and little concern for the few women present] in his place.

I got a round of applause, with cheering from the assembled pit crew. The guests joined in although virtually all of them had no idea why. I also got a pitpass to the McLaren pits right after qually with Senna still sweating in his overalls.

Roebuck writes well. Of that there can be no doubt. However, on talking to mine host, I discovered that most in the pit lane did not consider his writing particularly 'accurate'.

[motormania]

I used to get it everyweek for year after year - but stopped buying it about 18 months ago out of protest of how the spanky and midget were ruining the sport!

To be honest I have not missed it, I get all the news off the web.

To be frank, I'm amazed sooo many magazines are still in business. There is nothing you can't get for free on the web these days, I've saved a fortune now that I don't buy magazines anymore

[funkyrobot]

I used to buy it every week, but don't bother now. I got fed up last year with their biased viewpoints and the way that they sucked up to the FIA etc.

Bamber's cartoons are still ok though.

[Eric Mc]

Derek Smith said:

stockhatcher said:

definately gone down hill since roebuck has left though

I wrote an article for Autosport cricising Roebuck. Not his professionalism which is very good, but the drivel he'd written as a filler. I got three letters printed in support and Roebuck then penned an article that picked on me. Bit of a bully I thought. Later that year I went to the Formula One Paddock Club at Silverstone and during a speech by some McLaren engineers and pit crew one of them asked: Is Derek Smith here?

I thought it couldn't be me so I stayed seated but mine host, a very professional Michael Holt, pointed to me and I stood up, confused and a bit apprehensive. The mechanic then referred to my article saying that I put [insert words and phrases that show some contempt for Roebuck and little concern for the few women present] in his place.

I got a round of applause, with cheering from the assembled pit crew. The guests joined in although virtually all of them had no idea why. I also got a pitpass to the McLaren pits right after qually with Senna still sweating in his overalls.

Roebuck writes well. Of that there can be no doubt. However, on talking to mine host, I discovered that most in the pit lane did not consider his writing particularly 'accurate'.

Roebuck has become a bit of a grumpy old man (like the rest of us) and finds modern F1 not to his taste (like most of us).
So, I reckon he was done as a regular F1 reporter by the mid 1990s. What he is/was good at was historical perspective and is THE man to read when wanting an insight into the personalities and clashes of F1 in the 70s and 80s.

[kevin ritson]

Derek Smith said:

stockhatcher said:

definately gone down hill since roebuck has left though

I wrote an article for Autosport cricising Roebuck. Not his professionalism which is very good, but the drivel he'd written as a filler. I got three letters printed in support and Roebuck then penned an article that picked on me. Bit of a bully I thought. Later that year I went to the Formula One Paddock Club at Silverstone and during a speech by some McLaren engineers and pit crew one of them asked: Is Derek Smith here?

I thought it couldn't be me so I stayed seated but mine host, a very professional Michael Holt, pointed to me and I stood up, confused and a bit apprehensive. The mechanic then referred to my article saying that I put [insert words and phrases that show some contempt for Roebuck and little concern for the few women present] in his place.

I got a round of applause, with cheering from the assembled pit crew. The guests joined in although virtually all of them had no idea why. I also got a pitpass to the McLaren pits right after qually with Senna still sweating in his overalls.

Roebuck writes well. Of that there can be no doubt. However, on talking to mine host, I discovered that most in the pit lane did not consider his writing particularly 'accurate'.

Ironically I suspect McLaren would have been rather glad for his support during late 2007...

[Rude-boy]

I have long accepted that the magazine will always be far more F1 centric than anything else. For many years Motorsport News has been a far better resource for 99% of our National Motorsport.

Factual accuracy is vitally important, especially when the facts can be verified so easily and swiftly these days.

Purely my personal opinion, but when it comes to Autosport’s reporting of our domestic scene I am not always certain what is conjecture and what is pure fact at times. I am looking forward to another extremely competitive year for British Motorsport (even in these lean times) and when everyone grids up for the first time we will see which championships have strength in depth and quality, which have strength in numbers alone and which are looking at a year of ‘consolidation’. I believe there may be some surprises.

As they say, “When the flag drops, the bullst stops!”


Edit for typo.

Edited by Rude-boy on Thursday 26th February 12:15

[entropy]

Be careful what you wish for. I remember doing a survey about 10 years ago and said something along the lines of more colourful pictures. Autosport is now fancy pics with crappy writing.

chevronb37 said:

Sadly, Autosport is now tabloid journalism about cars. Very poor and Mark Hughes is the most irritating journalist.

I kinda love him and hate him. He writes interesting stuff but its Peter Windsor terrritory - the analyst who thinks he is the be all and end all of F1. And as a journo he should be unbiased but his scepticism of Vettel is blatantly biased against and vice versa with his love affair with Kubica.

[chevronb37]

entropy said:

Be careful what you wish for. I remember doing a survey about 10 years ago and said something along the lines of more colourful pictures. Autosport is now fancy pics with crappy writing.

chevronb37 said:

Sadly, Autosport is now tabloid journalism about cars. Very poor and Mark Hughes is the most irritating journalist.

I kinda love him and hate him. He writes interesting stuff but its Peter Windsor terrritory - the analyst who thinks he is the be all and end all of F1. And as a journo he should be unbiased but his scepticism of Vettel is blatantly biased against and vice versa with his love affair with Kubica.

I agree, his topics are good, but his style of writing is akin to a GCSE English student and he makes constant little references to make himself seem like an F1 oracle and every other commentator a bit out of their depth.

I'm pretty sure he was criticising Roebuck a month or two ago when discussing Raikkonen. Roebuck has been openly critical of Kimi; saying for his salary he ought to have got results. Hughes, on the other hand, says that view is facile and that Kimi can't get the nose of the car turned in. Frankly, I'm in the Roebuck camp - he's paid too much to justify failings like that.

[stockhatcher]

Rude-boy said:

I have long accepted that the magazine will always be far more F1 centric than anything else. For many years Motorsport News has been a far better resource for 99% of our National Motorsport.

i would buy MN as it probably represents a better demographic for the areas of the sport i am interested in - club racing - rallying - then at the every end F1, but I hate its newspaper style and printing. If it was a mag i'd buy it.

[Rude-boy]

stockhatcher said:

Rude-boy said:

I have long accepted that the magazine will always be far more F1 centric than anything else. For many years Motorsport News has been a far better resource for 99% of our National Motorsport.

i would buy MN as it probably represents a better demographic for the areas of the sport i am interested in - club racing - rallying - then at the every end F1, but I hate its newspaper style and printing. If it was a mag i'd buy it.

100% agree. Make it a magazine and I'd send my sub application off before they'd even decided what cuddly toy to give as a freebie!

Problem is i suspect that that would push the cover price up above a point they want to be at.

[fastcaterham]

Totally agree with the genral consensus, I rarely buy autosport now prefering motorsports news for the national stuff. I've also taken to buying the american magazine RACER which I think is actually produced by autosport. Its more of a feautures type magazine than news but if anybody is into american racing its a decent read if a litte short and hard to get hold of.