You tube . . . The FIA . . and SPA 2007

You tube . . . The FIA . . and SPA 2007

Author
Discussion

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
lol,
The FIA have forced YouTube to remove the footage of the start of the 2007 belgian GP.

Well there are lots of F1 clips on so why remove this one,

Perhaps because the two moves made by Alonso into Hamilton before la source and the swerve afterwards are plainly seen.

Stil RD will have read the steering input Data and the G sensors
and he will know that Alonso comprimised his corner there allowing the ferraris to escape all for the sake of hurting his 'teammate'

ewenm

28,506 posts

246 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
But given that the manufacturers title fight is over, we should expect Alonso to do his best to impede Hamilton. After all, Hamilton is Alonso's closest challenger for the title and they are both racing drivers (highly competitive, self-serving, etc, etc).

The FIA have probably asked for it to be removed as YouTube isn't a licenced broadcaster of F1 - the FIA own the rights to the footage.

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
I am all for team members racing against each other but I don't see how at the pinnacle of so called motorsport driving standards that wouldn't be allowed at my local kart track are allowed in F1.

I see this kind of driving creeping into grass roots karting as youngsters or novices try to emulate heroes and it usually ends in the paramedics van , ,

F1 has a responsibility to uphold driving standards. Ironically the safety of the cars in impacts has probably made the authorities blase seeing accidents as something that only costs money or race finishes.

Unfortunately in the real world of karting accidents mean bones hitting tarmac.

Edited by mark69sheer on Wednesday 19th September 11:32

davidd

6,452 posts

285 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
ewenm said:
The FIA have probably asked for it to be removed as YouTube isn't a licenced broadcaster of F1 - the FIA own the rights to the footage.
Do they? I thought FOM owned the rights. They are the ones that have hired people to get stuff taken of utube.

D

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
FOM sorry I stand corrected , however just find it odd that this particular clip is removed when other from this season aren't???

ewenm

28,506 posts

246 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
davidd said:
ewenm said:
The FIA have probably asked for it to be removed as YouTube isn't a licenced broadcaster of F1 - the FIA own the rights to the footage.
Do they? I thought FOM owned the rights. They are the ones that have hired people to get stuff taken of utube.

D
My mistake, I meant Formula 1 Administration (i.e. Bernies crew), not FIA.
E.

kevin ritson

3,423 posts

228 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
I don't see what the issue is with that move. It was simply a robust defence, Alonso ran Lewis wide at La Source - a perfectly acceptable move, certainly no worse than Hamilton on Massa the week before. They then approached Eau Rouge together, when Lewis sensibly backed off.

All fair IMHO

lord summerisle

8,138 posts

226 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
same as the footage of Kubica's crash in Canada was removed from YouTube

hornet

6,333 posts

251 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
lord summerisle said:
same as the footage of Kubica's crash in Canada was removed from YouTube
They even removed spectator shot home video, as I recall. I really don't understand being that obsessive about it.

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
kevin ritson said:
I don't see what the issue is with that move. It was simply a robust defence, Alonso ran Lewis wide at La Source - a perfectly acceptable move, certainly no worse than Hamilton on Massa the week before. They then approached Eau Rouge together, when Lewis sensibly backed off.

All fair IMHO
At that corner as discussed Hamilton was able to use the tarmac runoff area and infact made better speed out of the corner thanks to the use of it.
Would opinion still have been the same if Hamilton had been pushed into a gravel trap or the wall that used to exist ? ?

flemke

22,865 posts

238 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
davidd said:
ewenm said:
The FIA have probably asked for it to be removed as YouTube isn't a licenced broadcaster of F1 - the FIA own the rights to the footage.
Do they? I thought FOM owned the rights. They are the ones that have hired people to get stuff taken of utube.

D
David is right - it's FOM who decide what gets released and to whom.
If there is still other stuff on the site, it is likely that it was added since the consultants who troll the net looking for copyright violations last checked the site.
I believe that FOM use an outfit called Net Result.

kevin ritson

3,423 posts

228 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
mark69sheer said:
kevin ritson said:
I don't see what the issue is with that move. It was simply a robust defence, Alonso ran Lewis wide at La Source - a perfectly acceptable move, certainly no worse than Hamilton on Massa the week before. They then approached Eau Rouge together, when Lewis sensibly backed off.

All fair IMHO
At that corner as discussed Hamilton was able to use the tarmac runoff area and infact made better speed out of the corner thanks to the use of it.
Would opinion still have been the same if Hamilton had been pushed into a gravel trap or the wall that used to exist ? ?
You can't speculate on that as the circumstances would have been different and Hamilton would have calculated that he'd have more to lose if it went wrong. Similarly Alonso knew that he could force Hamilton wide without putting his team mate out.

Joe911

2,763 posts

236 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all

Mr_Thyroid

1,995 posts

228 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
mark69sheer said:
kevin ritson said:
I don't see what the issue is with that move. It was simply a robust defence, Alonso ran Lewis wide at La Source - a perfectly acceptable move, certainly no worse than Hamilton on Massa the week before. They then approached Eau Rouge together, when Lewis sensibly backed off.

All fair IMHO
At that corner as discussed Hamilton was able to use the tarmac runoff area and infact made better speed out of the corner thanks to the use of it.
Would opinion still have been the same if Hamilton had been pushed into a gravel trap or the wall that used to exist ? ?
Surely the conditions of the circuit dictate what is fair. Pushing someone onto grass, gravel or a wall is clearly unfair but in my book going onto a tarmac runoff area that has a safe route back onto the track is fine.

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
The move wasn't dastardly but very cynical and as mentioned did Alonso no favours either giving the Ferraris a breathing space.In open wheelers any move that could interlock wheels is potentially very dangerous.

StevieBee

12,926 posts

256 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
hornet said:
They even removed spectator shot home video, as I recall. I really don't understand being that obsessive about it.
The rights to all TV images for F1 are held by BEs company who sells the rights to broadcast these images to the highest bidders (i.e. ITV). Secondary (and limited) broadcast rights are then sold to news channels, production companies for chat/sports shows, etc. By ensuring exclusivity, a higher price for these rights can be achieved.

This has to be balanced against the need to get good exposure for the sponsors. Key phrase here is “good exposure”. In order to justify spend, the sponsors also need to monitor this exposure which you can do through a TV network but not so easy to do via the web.

It’s a question of controlling quality, exposure and maximising revenue. But that’s a question for another thread.

flemke

22,865 posts

238 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
StevieBee said:
hornet said:
They even removed spectator shot home video, as I recall. I really don't understand being that obsessive about it.
The rights to all TV images for F1 are held by BEs company who sells the rights to broadcast these images to the highest bidders (i.e. ITV). Secondary (and limited) broadcast rights are then sold to news channels, production companies for chat/sports shows, etc. By ensuring exclusivity, a higher price for these rights can be achieved.

This has to be balanced against the need to get good exposure for the sponsors. Key phrase here is “good exposure”. In order to justify spend, the sponsors also need to monitor this exposure which you can do through a TV network but not so easy to do via the web.

It’s a question of controlling quality, exposure and maximising revenue. But that’s a question for another thread.
The thing that one finds insupportable is the fact that one has paid a price to view the race, either by buying a ticket or via tv advertising, yet, having paid that price, one is forbidden from sharing after the fact - when the "news" is old - what one has seen.
It is a disgrace that the world has no reasonable means of viewing clips of great or controversial moments in F1.
If these clips are so commercially precious, which is the basis for barring YouTube from hosting them, why the hell can't FOM put up its own site, with footage of every race during the 25 year copyright period? It could sell advertising on such a site, rather than trying to keep the history of F1 all secret, just like Bernie's collection of vintage F1 racing cars.

Mr_Thyroid

1,995 posts

228 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
mark69sheer said:
The move wasn't dastardly but very cynical and as mentioned did Alonso no favours either giving the Ferraris a breathing space.In open wheelers any move that could interlock wheels is potentially very dangerous.
I fail to see how Alonso's actions at the first corner let the Ferraris off the hook. I'd be suprised if he lifted at all from the apex La Sourse all the way to Les Combes.

mark69sheer

Original Poster:

3,906 posts

203 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
You can't obviously see the video now but when Alonso went wide on the kerb in his defensive move against Hamilton he comprimised his mid corner and exit speed. In fact even though Hamilton was slightly behind alonso when entering the corner he came out of it AHEAD of Alonso and only lost the battle of Eau Rouge because he was on the wrong side of the track.
if Alonso came out of the corner behind someone who had even been forced off tack and had to rejoin then it proves categorically that he had messed his corner up.
all the McClaren data will prove this fact if it were analysed.
This gave the Ferraris a second or so lead up to Blanchimont.... a second lost at the start of a race is extremely difficult and at this level often impossible to pull back.
It is so much easier to take places or make up space in the start of a race when the cars aren't running perfect than during the main race itself.
Winning races on track isn't about how fast you can drive as all cars have a limit imposed by the laws of physics. The skill is in keeping consistent and not making mistakes that chip away your hypothetical perfect lap.
Noone can actually technically get in a car and rag the ass off it and amaze everyone with their amazing speed.

OllieC

3,816 posts

215 months

Wednesday 19th September 2007
quotequote all
flemke said:
StevieBee said:
hornet said:
They even removed spectator shot home video, as I recall. I really don't understand being that obsessive about it.
The rights to all TV images for F1 are held by BEs company who sells the rights to broadcast these images to the highest bidders (i.e. ITV). Secondary (and limited) broadcast rights are then sold to news channels, production companies for chat/sports shows, etc. By ensuring exclusivity, a higher price for these rights can be achieved.

This has to be balanced against the need to get good exposure for the sponsors. Key phrase here is “good exposure”. In order to justify spend, the sponsors also need to monitor this exposure which you can do through a TV network but not so easy to do via the web.

It’s a question of controlling quality, exposure and maximising revenue. But that’s a question for another thread.
The thing that one finds insupportable is the fact that one has paid a price to view the race, either by buying a ticket or via tv advertising, yet, having paid that price, one is forbidden from sharing after the fact - when the "news" is old - what one has seen.
It is a disgrace that the world has no reasonable means of viewing clips of great or controversial moments in F1.
If these clips are so commercially precious, which is the basis for barring YouTube from hosting them, why the hell can't FOM put up its own site, with footage of every race during the 25 year copyright period? It could sell advertising on such a site, rather than trying to keep the history of F1 all secret, just like Bernie's collection of vintage F1 racing cars.
dont get me started on that

it drives me mad i cant get hold of DVD quality highlights of 80s races because the poison dwarf chooses not to make these available

maybe there worried it would make the current stuff look tame ?