The Official Bahrain GP Thread***SPOILERS***
Discussion
Gene Vincent said:
Life is so much easier with simple hate figures.
Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, t.
Ditto Iraq, Libya, Syria Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, t.
The money comes from coverage, all the wealth of the sport is generated from that.
TV companies get very tetchy about events being called off after setting their course for broadcasting, without Bernie this last week and numerous other times too, the money would cease and the sport would lose its appeal with a 'superleague' of 4 teams emerging, bernie fears this more than anything [I'm guessing admittedly] that is why he hated watching the Red Bull processions for a few years, that is why he capped the money spent by teams and the regs try to bring smaller teams to the fore or at least give them their best chance.
If I'm any judge of the thinking behind the man then he is delighted to see this year 4 different winners in four races and even more happy to see Perez, Grosjean, Kimi and the rest mixing it up.
He will be delighted to see 2 lotus cars on the podium, not for nationalistic reasons [which may be there in small measure] but for the fact it throws the races open for other sponsors to pay up more money and build that team.
He is the epitome of egalitarianism in the sport, he would like to see all of them winning one race a year, that is why it is such a long season I think, 20 races 12 teams, fewer and fewer engines, penalties for swapping bits.
If you can look beyond the 'Wizard of Oz' charade, then it is far more interesting than a simpletons view of a nasty venal man with no heart behaving badly.
TV companies get very tetchy about events being called off after setting their course for broadcasting, without Bernie this last week and numerous other times too, the money would cease and the sport would lose its appeal with a 'superleague' of 4 teams emerging, bernie fears this more than anything [I'm guessing admittedly] that is why he hated watching the Red Bull processions for a few years, that is why he capped the money spent by teams and the regs try to bring smaller teams to the fore or at least give them their best chance.
If I'm any judge of the thinking behind the man then he is delighted to see this year 4 different winners in four races and even more happy to see Perez, Grosjean, Kimi and the rest mixing it up.
He will be delighted to see 2 lotus cars on the podium, not for nationalistic reasons [which may be there in small measure] but for the fact it throws the races open for other sponsors to pay up more money and build that team.
He is the epitome of egalitarianism in the sport, he would like to see all of them winning one race a year, that is why it is such a long season I think, 20 races 12 teams, fewer and fewer engines, penalties for swapping bits.
If you can look beyond the 'Wizard of Oz' charade, then it is far more interesting than a simpletons view of a nasty venal man with no heart behaving badly.
One thing I fail to understand is why cars are allowed to park immediately after the race to save fuel/weight. Vettel did this at Bahrain and didn't make it back to parc ferme.
Seems to me though that cars shouldn't be allowed to do that unless there's an emergency of some sort. Perhaps the race shouldn't be deemed to have been completed unless the car makes it back and those that stop deliberately out on the track should be penalised.
Seems to me though that cars shouldn't be allowed to do that unless there's an emergency of some sort. Perhaps the race shouldn't be deemed to have been completed unless the car makes it back and those that stop deliberately out on the track should be penalised.
A Scotsman said:
One thing I fail to understand is why cars are allowed to park immediately after the race to save fuel/weight. Vettel did this at Bahrain and didn't make it back to parc ferme.
Seems to me though that cars shouldn't be allowed to do that unless there's an emergency of some sort. Perhaps the race shouldn't be deemed to have been completed unless the car makes it back and those that stop deliberately out on the track should be penalised.
Nico did the same, can't see any harm done, what do you feel is wrong about it?Seems to me though that cars shouldn't be allowed to do that unless there's an emergency of some sort. Perhaps the race shouldn't be deemed to have been completed unless the car makes it back and those that stop deliberately out on the track should be penalised.
stephen300o said:
Nico did the same, can't see any harm done, what do you feel is wrong about it?
The whole point of Parc Ferme is so that scrutineers can quarantine the cars from tampering in order to scrutineer them. If they are allowed to be abandoned on track then this can't happen. Personally I'd argue that failing to make it back to the pits (and hence Parc Ferme) after crossing the finish line is a DNF as much as if you had stopped just before the finish line.
Eric Mc said:
Not sure about that. The hatred fired directly at F1 over the week-end was pretty much unprecedented as far as I can recall.
The South Africa GP in the middle 80s. There was massive pressure brought to bear on the sport but Balestre went ahead. The degree of criticism afterwards made him back down. For all the criticisms levelled at Balestre, and almost all justified, he was an enthusiast for the sport.I know memory can play tricks but I think that the pressure then was much more forceful. The Bahrain GP responses were quite muted in comparison.
Gene Vincent said:
Life is so much easier with simple hate figures.
Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, with some teams going, some not, and there would be no 'championship' worth calling the name... and Bahrain type of events have been plentiful in the past.
Perhaps without Ecclestone going towards money like a rat on a rocket down a drain there would not have been a GP in Bahrain to object to. It might have been replaced by one in a country where the populace cared about F1.Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, with some teams going, some not, and there would be no 'championship' worth calling the name... and Bahrain type of events have been plentiful in the past.
JonRB said:
stephen300o said:
Nico did the same, can't see any harm done, what do you feel is wrong about it?
The whole point of Parc Ferme is so that scrutineers can quarantine the cars from tampering in order to scrutineer them. If they are allowed to be abandoned on track then this can't happen. Personally I'd argue that failing to make it back to the pits (and hence Parc Ferme) after crossing the finish line is a DNF as much as if you had stopped just before the finish line.
joewilliams said:
Eric Mc said:
Don't they all pull in at Spa?
That's just down to the length of the lap - they still go to Parc Ferme.I was womdering about the two cars on Sunday not ending up in parc fermé. However, I am pretysure the regulations do allow a car to stop outside of parc fermé as long as an FIA official ensures that nothing is done to the car before it eventually gets back to parc fermé.
Derek Smith said:
Gene Vincent said:
Life is so much easier with simple hate figures.
Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, with some teams going, some not, and there would be no 'championship' worth calling the name... and Bahrain type of events have been plentiful in the past.
Perhaps without Ecclestone going towards money like a rat on a rocket down a drain there would not have been a GP in Bahrain to object to. It might have been replaced by one in a country where the populace cared about F1.Bernie has much to hate, a surfeit, but there is much to admire too, the teams would self-destruct if they were not controlled by a tyrant, he has to tyrannical to play on the same field and that is a persona, he has to be 'bigger' than all the teams combined, he is and many can't see why and just see the ego-mania.
When he started on his position he was no-where near as well known as the teams, he had an uphill struggle, but once on top he is the Ring Master, the circus plays his tune.
Something like Bahrain would have been a self-destructive event without him, with some teams going, some not, and there would be no 'championship' worth calling the name... and Bahrain type of events have been plentiful in the past.
Gene Vincent said:
The alternate view is that without him taking F1 to these places a more local competitor to F1 would emerge and we then have no clue who is the best driver or anything else, it would be a mess, just like Boxing for so many years.
You think the WDC shows which is the best driver? At the most it could only define who is the best driver in F1 and it doesn't do that. On these forums we've had arguments about which driver is the best one in a team.Derek Smith said:
Perhaps without Ecclestone going towards money like a rat on a rocket down a drain there would not have been a GP in Bahrain to object to. It might have been replaced by one in a country where the populace cared about F1.
If the race hadn't gone ahead Bahrain would have to pay Bernie more money than just the race fee. Financially it was in his interest for the race to be cancelled.Derek Smith said:
Gene Vincent said:
The alternate view is that without him taking F1 to these places a more local competitor to F1 would emerge and we then have no clue who is the best driver or anything else, it would be a mess, just like Boxing for so many years.
You think the WDC shows which is the best driver? At the most it could only define who is the best driver in F1 and it doesn't do that. On these forums we've had arguments about which driver is the best one in a team.Edited by DanDC5 on Tuesday 24th April 11:59
DanDC5 said:
If the race hadn't gone ahead Bahrain would have to pay Bernie more money than just the race fee. Financially it was in his interest for the race to be cancelled.
Only if the Bahrainis cancelled it. If he pulled the plug the money would have flowed in the other direction.Derek Smith said:
Gene Vincent said:
The alternate view is that without him taking F1 to these places a more local competitor to F1 would emerge and we then have no clue who is the best driver or anything else, it would be a mess, just like Boxing for so many years.
You think the WDC shows which is the best driver? At the most it could only define who is the best driver in F1 and it doesn't do that. On these forums we've had arguments about which driver is the best one in a team.Debate is good, things are debatable, it allows us to postulate, but as a snapshot, the WDC is a de facto statement on who has done the best in the given year, it's why Bernie rejoices when the cars are more even, he too, just like you and me, wants the cars to get 'closer' and the drivers challenge each other on a more even playing field, but without all of them driving the same car.
I can't think of a single WDC that didn't deserve the title.
DanDC5 said:
Derek Smith said:
Perhaps without Ecclestone going towards money like a rat on a rocket down a drain there would not have been a GP in Bahrain to object to. It might have been replaced by one in a country where the populace cared about F1.
If the race hadn't gone ahead Bahrain would have to pay Bernie more money than just the race fee. Financially it was in his interest for the race to be cancelled.Further, if Ecclestone had cancelled the race then he would not, in my understanding of the financial agreements, not have received as much money. So it was in Ecclestone's interest that the race went ahead.
Gene Vincent said:
Derek Smith said:
Gene Vincent said:
The alternate view is that without him taking F1 to these places a more local competitor to F1 would emerge and we then have no clue who is the best driver or anything else, it would be a mess, just like Boxing for so many years.
You think the WDC shows which is the best driver? At the most it could only define who is the best driver in F1 and it doesn't do that. On these forums we've had arguments about which driver is the best one in a team.Debate is good, things are debatable, it allows us to postulate, but as a snapshot, the WDC is a de facto statement on who has done the best in the given year, it's why Bernie rejoices when the cars are more even, he too, just like you and me, wants the cars to get 'closer' and the drivers challenge each other on a more even playing field, but without all of them driving the same car.
I can't think of a single WDC that didn't deserve the title.
Further, Ecclestone wants money. I have seen no evidence to support the suggestion he's an enthusiast for the sport.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff