Discussion
I know not everyone has SKY - but for those that do, this weeks SKY F1 show is superb. Nigel Roebuck gives his very dry but accurate view point on Vettel / Webber. And a quite emotional insight into Peroni / Villeneuve incident at the Italian GP just 2 weeks before Gille's tragic death.
I know it costs something but there's no turning back for me.
All the extra coverage you get is superb. Ted is the gem of the whole package.
Very valid point - he's not the most personable character is he. But you have to respect him and his knowledge.
Really too much to go in to.
Basically Giles was a hard racer - but a gentleman and a man of honour. Vettel isn't.
The Giles Villeneuve / Pironi parallel was drawn with Vettel / Webber - and that NR is convinced that Gilles was still so angry about the "betrayal" that is must of been a part in Giles death 2 weeks later.
A lot was said - hopefully it will appear on a download at some point.
Also Ted interviewed Horner on Tuesday - 20min interview shown later - again very interesting. Horner has no backbone at all. And again NR had some interesting views on the whole RB setup
Really too much to go in to.
Basically Giles was a hard racer - but a gentleman and a man of honour. Vettel isn't.
The Giles Villeneuve / Pironi parallel was drawn with Vettel / Webber - and that NR is convinced that Gilles was still so angry about the "betrayal" that is must of been a part in Giles death 2 weeks later.
A lot was said - hopefully it will appear on a download at some point.
Also Ted interviewed Horner on Tuesday - 20min interview shown later - again very interesting. Horner has no backbone at all. And again NR had some interesting views on the whole RB setup
Eric Mc said:
I have been a fan of Roebuck for 30 odd years. His current articles in Motor Sport are well worth reading.
However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
In some ways, I quite like the fact that someone so not moulded for TV is on just because of his knowledge and insight. It's quite refreshing.However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
Would you rather have a Saturday night grinning dancing donkey presenter?
woof said:
NR is convinced that Gilles was still so angry about the "betrayal" that is must of been a part in Giles death 2 weeks later.
This is utter nonsense - pure speculation, impossible to know.Imagine if Gilles had survived the crash and said himself that it happened partly because of the events a fortnight earlier, what would you think then?
woof said:
NR said he had spoken to Villeneuve earlier in the day and he was still angry and was his main focus.
It is of course pure speculation.
If he was still angry it puts the blame entirely with Villeneuve for irresponsibly allowing his emotions to affect his driving.It is of course pure speculation.
It is wrong to consider that Pironi had anything to do with the accident.
mollytherocker said:
In some ways, I quite like the fact that someone so not moulded for TV is on just because of his knowledge and insight. It's quite refreshing.
Would you rather have a Saturday night grinning dancing donkey presenter?
No - but I think those who take part in public speaking (which is what appearing on TV essentially involves) should at least have the ability to talk in an engaging manner. Some people are good at it naturally. Some need coaching.Would you rather have a Saturday night grinning dancing donkey presenter?
I am not saying I want inane TV personalities either - just someone who both knows their stuff and who can also express their knowledge in an interesting way.
The first time I came across him speaking was on the VHS video he narrated called "Grand Prix 100" which was made around 1990. Being a big fan of his writing I was very disappointed with his speaking style.
Mr_Thyroid said:
woof said:
NR said he had spoken to Villeneuve earlier in the day and he was still angry and was his main focus.
It is of course pure speculation.
If he was still angry it puts the blame entirely with Villeneuve for irresponsibly allowing his emotions to affect his driving.It is of course pure speculation.
It is wrong to consider that Pironi had anything to do with the accident.
weyland yutani said:
The journalist has interesting insight into F1 but the atmosphere turns stone cold dead whenever he is on the show, agonizing to watch.
What do you want him to do? Juggle!!The man is a very respected authority on motor racing personally I was enthralled by his insight...Why does everyone expect a song and dance act these days rather than just knowlegable commentary??
Eric Mc said:
I have been a fan of Roebuck for 30 odd years. His current articles in Motor Sport are well worth reading.
However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
The ideal personality for an accountant maybe? However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
markcoznottz said:
Eric Mc said:
I have been a fan of Roebuck for 30 odd years. His current articles in Motor Sport are well worth reading.
However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
The ideal personality for an accountant maybe? However, on TV he comes across as having the charisma of a plank of wood. He has a fairly monotone and slow way of speaking which makes him sound like a drone.
Mr_Thyroid said:
If he was still angry it puts the blame entirely with Villeneuve for irresponsibly allowing his emotions to affect his driving.
It is wrong to consider that Pironi had anything to do with the accident.
Why are you talking about blame? No-one else is talking about blame or responsibility so why are you?It is wrong to consider that Pironi had anything to do with the accident.
Roebuck spoke to Villeneuve personally at the time, in that in the period between the two races Villeneuve phoned Roebuck and let loose with his full opinion.
It's interesting that as a person who presumably never met Villeneuve, you're saying that the opinion of someone who was very much there at the time is nonsense.
I must say though, that I don't draw any parallels between GV & DP and SV & MW, they're two completely different scenarios imo.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff