The Official Bahrain GP Thread***SPOILERS***
Discussion
DanDC5 said:
The WDC has for the last 30+ years shown who was the best car/driver combination rather than outright best driver imo. F1 is a team sport and all that....
Yeah, but sometimes the Team make bad decisions and occasionally their driver is better than their expectations, this happened to Hamilton in 2007, his team made a crucial error and that year let Kimi win because of it.But Kimi was the best driver, he passed on enough information for his team to make the right decision and that year Hamilton didn't.
Kimi won because of that fact, he was the best driver, he was in tune with the team and the decision making was correct as a result, Hamilton didn't get enough across and wasn't.
Derek Smith said:
Whether they 'deserve' the title or not, I think history has shown us that the best driver often fails to win the WDC. I could produce a list if you wish.
Further, Ecclestone wants money. I have seen no evidence to support the suggestion he's an enthusiast for the sport.
Type Bernie into wiki... he is a real enthusiast.Further, Ecclestone wants money. I have seen no evidence to support the suggestion he's an enthusiast for the sport.
TheHeretic said:
Eric Mc said:
My prediction is that Bernie is sowing the seeds for just such a mess.
I don't think I've ever read a more 'glass half empty' person on PH before. And the dilemma he is in is one of his own making.
It's a classic case of a dictator being unable to come up with a practical strategy for his own succession.
TheHeretic said:
I don't think I've ever read a more 'glass half empty' person on PH before.
I can see no justification for beatifying Ecclestone. He's milked the sport for years, taking more from it than he has put in. In the years, many years, that he and his little me, Mosley, ran the sport it all but fell apart. I don't particularly like Todt and dreaded him moving into the FIA but I have to say that so far he has by no means justified my concerns. He has no money to play with of course. All motor racing assets have been all but given away during the Ecclestone/Mosley years. That is of major concern.The real test is yet to come, the new concord agreement. We'll see soon enough whether Ecclestone is indeed an enthusiast for the sport or whether he has been out for all he can get. If past history has been anything to go by I know what my suspicions are.
Far from being half full, the glass is, I think, in danger of draining away.
The real people to praise are the team managers and those who have put their time and money into the sport over the years. Dennis might well have taken more from the sport than it has cost him financially but when you consider how much enjoyment he has given to spectators since the start of the MP4 years, he has been a bargain.
Ecclestone is business. Nothing more. He's very clever, a real carpet bagger, but that is no reason to praise him.
Eric Mc said:
Pity he doesn't translate any of that enthuisiasm into ensuring that traditional enthusiasts are given a product they recognise.
I think he has.Almost every driver since the late nineties is still around today!
The circuits didn't want to do a thing, death was part of the ticket to ride, it was part of the attraction to many who went.
He has tried repeatedly to even the arena, but has had to accept the odd failure for a later bigger victory, that level of dedication is not forthcoming when you reach the amounts of money he had even 15 years ago, let alone today.
I have to start new businesses every few years, my enthusiasm peters out and I sell it on, he hasn't, he travels right across the globe every year, he is rich enough to have stopped doing that years ago.
Money is NOT his underlying motive, power is, the power to mould the sport his way and we are, as he closes in on his inevitable call to St. Peter, seeing this final picture.
The persona presented to the media is as contrived as any ever seen, the greatest skill is that, as yet, few have seen it as the masterpiece of artifice that it is.
TheHeretic said:
Nope... I've just gone back to check out any of my beautifying posts, and struggling to find a single reference. Could you help me out? The point is that be it sky/Murdoch, Bahrain, or Ecclestone, it seems Eric is on a mission.
Mission to do what, exactly?I thought we are allowed express opnions on a discussion forum.
Derek Smith said:
I can see no justification for beatifying Ecclestone.
That will come later for some, with the benefit of hindsight.He is no saint, he is the most manipulative man I can think of that is alive today.
But without him F1 would likely be a mess of factional warring and not worth watching.
I don't sit there thinking this every time I watch F1, but occasionally I realise or return to this thought and can't help admire the man, not like or beatify, just admire.
Gene Vincent said:
I think he has.
Almost every driver since the late nineties is still around today!
The circuits didn't want to do a thing, death was part of the ticket to ride, it was part of the attraction to many who went.
He has tried repeatedly to even the arena, but has had to accept the odd failure for a later bigger victory, that level of dedication is not forthcoming when you reach the amounts of money he had even 15 years ago, let alone today.
I have to start new businesses every few years, my enthusiasm peters out and I sell it on, he hasn't, he travels right across the globe every year, he is rich enough to have stopped doing that years ago.
Money is NOT his underlying motive, power is, the power to mould the sport his way and we are, as he closes in on his inevitable call to St. Peter, seeing this final picture.
The persona presented to the media is as contrived as any ever seen, the greatest skill is that, as yet, few have seen it as the masterpiece of artifice that it is.
What has any of that got to do with providing a form of motorsport that is affordable and enjoyable for all - especially for those countries that have nurtured motor sport in all its guises over 100 plus years?Almost every driver since the late nineties is still around today!
The circuits didn't want to do a thing, death was part of the ticket to ride, it was part of the attraction to many who went.
He has tried repeatedly to even the arena, but has had to accept the odd failure for a later bigger victory, that level of dedication is not forthcoming when you reach the amounts of money he had even 15 years ago, let alone today.
I have to start new businesses every few years, my enthusiasm peters out and I sell it on, he hasn't, he travels right across the globe every year, he is rich enough to have stopped doing that years ago.
Money is NOT his underlying motive, power is, the power to mould the sport his way and we are, as he closes in on his inevitable call to St. Peter, seeing this final picture.
The persona presented to the media is as contrived as any ever seen, the greatest skill is that, as yet, few have seen it as the masterpiece of artifice that it is.
As for safety, I always thought that was a governing body issue - not a commercial rights holder issue.
What we have at the moment is a governing body that has been almost completely sidelined from governing.
And I am not saying that Bernie hasn't done some good for the sport. I think what he did between about 1979 and 1984 put the sport on a good and susatainable footing COMPARED TO WHERE IT HAD BEEN. But since at least the mid 1990s I have not liked at all where he has been taking the "show".
Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 24th April 12:50
TheHeretic said:
Eric Mc said:
Mission to do what, exactly?
I thought we are allowed express opnions on a discussion forum.
Doom and gloom, it seems. I don't think I mentioned anything about not being allowed an opinion, merely that you seem to be on a downer recently.I thought we are allowed express opnions on a discussion forum.
Derek Smith said:
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.
I can think only of France really (which may be back soon anyway).
Surely if the support was so great then that in itself could pay for the race to be held.
Eric Mc said:
Sorry for sounding depressing but I just do not like the direction F1 has moved over the past ten years.
Wiki on the 2002 World Championship:Michael Schumacher finished first or second in every race except for the Malaysian Grand Prix, where he finished third, thus achieving a podium poistion in every race. He won a record 11 Grands Prix, surpassing the previous record of 9 wins, jointly held by himself (1995, 2000 and 2001) and Nigel Mansell (1992). He would also set the record for shortest time in which the World Drivers Championship had been clinched, securing the title with a win at the French Grand Prix, with 6 races to go in the season.
On that basis: I'll take F1 V.2012 thanks!
(I do realise you're refering to other issues, not least the TV coverage and Mr E's influence - but couldn't resist with the parallel discussion re MSc's grump about tyres!)
Eric Mc said:
What has any of that got to do with providing a form of motorsport that is afordable and enjoyable for all - especially for those countries that have nurtured motor sport in all its guises over 100 plus years?
As for safety, I always thought that was a governing body issue - not a commercial rights holder issue.
What we have at the moment is a governing body that has been almost completely sidelined from governing.
The money... follow the money.As for safety, I always thought that was a governing body issue - not a commercial rights holder issue.
What we have at the moment is a governing body that has been almost completely sidelined from governing.
The circuits washed their hands, the governing body didn't have the money, the media had it all, Bernie forced the change by having the money to do it.
Nurtured a sport that had become too fast for its own bounds and didn't want to change.
The real greed was the circuits, who took the gold and accepted death as an inevitable part of that bottom line. These were largely all European circuits.
In the early nineties the sport out grew its bounds again and we lost Senna, Ratzenberger and damaged severely a few others, this galvanised him again but on a different front.
If you want it like the old days, cheap and simple then fine, I don't, I quite like the idea of Schumacher having a fabulous career and coming back in 'old age' sufficiently undamaged to compete, not another Jim Clark or countless others who didn't get the chance.
As you say, the governing body is toothless in many respects, most importantly in the financial respect, if it had the purse it would be useless, Bernie is fabulously wealthy but in reality he is nothing more than a purse holder, looking to place the pennies in the right place and to be able to do so without bankrupting the sport.
Big changes = big money.
Not really.
The problem is that the venues have to pay BE/CVC over £40 million for the right to host the event. Very few European venues can afford that type of fee - even if they are a complete sell-out. Other countries, especially developing countries, have governments that are willing to stump up Bernie's fee and they are prepared to pay this even if nobody turns up at the venue to watch. For them, the interests of their citizens and the proper priorities for spending taxes are completely outweighed by a desire for international prestige. After a vast and glamourous international airport, a vast and glamourous F1 venue is usually next on the agenda.
It has become an impossible situation for the European circuits to match and sooner or later F1 wioll become a predominantly Asian/Middle Eastern activity.
The problem is that the venues have to pay BE/CVC over £40 million for the right to host the event. Very few European venues can afford that type of fee - even if they are a complete sell-out. Other countries, especially developing countries, have governments that are willing to stump up Bernie's fee and they are prepared to pay this even if nobody turns up at the venue to watch. For them, the interests of their citizens and the proper priorities for spending taxes are completely outweighed by a desire for international prestige. After a vast and glamourous international airport, a vast and glamourous F1 venue is usually next on the agenda.
It has become an impossible situation for the European circuits to match and sooner or later F1 wioll become a predominantly Asian/Middle Eastern activity.
llewop said:
Eric Mc said:
Sorry for sounding depressing but I just do not like the direction F1 has moved over the past ten years.
Wiki on the 2002 World Championship:Michael Schumacher finished first or second in every race except for the Malaysian Grand Prix, where he finished third, thus achieving a podium poistion in every race. He won a record 11 Grands Prix, surpassing the previous record of 9 wins, jointly held by himself (1995, 2000 and 2001) and Nigel Mansell (1992). He would also set the record for shortest time in which the World Drivers Championship had been clinched, securing the title with a win at the French Grand Prix, with 6 races to go in the season.
On that basis: I'll take F1 V.2012 thanks!
(I do realise you're refering to other issues, not least the TV coverage and Mr E's influence - but couldn't resist with the parallel discussion re MSc's grump about tyres!)
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff