No Bergkamp, I was not intending to be dismissive of your comments. Not at all. Mine was a comment about the general expectations of F1's audience and the efforts to satisfy this superficial thirst; a trend which is already cheapening the 'show' by continuing to move further and further from any relevance to road cars and their drivers. The FIA's original brief to Pirelli to come up with shoddy tyres was ridiculously short-sighted in my view and actually detracts from the thing I would hope everyone really wants to witness: the ultimate challenge to car and driver skill. My generalisation includes the DRS. An adjustable rear wing is an interesting idea with potential, but in my view, although I do agree with the '1 second' idea, the FIA should have no say in deciding where on the track it will be allowed. I also include KERS herre which I think is another 'gimmick' in its current configuration. But in my view, this is yet another thing which teams should be given greater freedom with. +++ I'm sorry if my comment sounded dismissive of you: this was entirely unintentional. However, the public feedback I have received and the general tone of this discussion has provided a convenient platform for me to air my view. Nothing personal. Absolutely not. I actually think it likely that we hold some similar feelings on this. Furthremore, I respect the views of anyone who presents them in the manner you have. - That's why I'm here and replying! Cheers. é
Thank you to those that make sensible responses to my point of view. Perhaps entertained was a provocative word? Would excited, interested, enthusiastic be better? I do not watch F1 as a 'nerd' needing to study minute detail. I merely proposed that for all the tinkering to appeal to the wider audience they failed. Lets get back to racing, driver skills against fellow driver, not ã200m budgets, nor hundreds of hours in the wind-tunnel, and precision pit crews almost deciding the result !!! Roll on the next race.....
Looking at it from an economics point of view, you can see why Bernie tries to make the racing exciting. The vast majority of the watching public want to see something that is interesting and entertaining, and are less bothered about the technical purity. If the sport is dull, these fans switch off. F1 is a massively expensive sport, and, especially in an economic downturn, sponsors are needed, and are more likely to put money into a team if millions of people are watching. If the 'casual' fans stop watching, no company will be interested in sponsoring. For this reason, Bernie is trying to make the sport more exciting, unfortunately just in a rather artificial way. Equally, you get the fans who want the cars to go as fast as they can, and watch the drivers struggle to put together a perfect lap, on the limit of their ability and the car. However, these people are greatly outnumbered, so F1 has to pander to the majority. This is the issue when it comes to limiting technology. If you give the designers too much freedom, it quickly becomes a battle of which team can spend the most. Allowing unlimited development of KERS will produce some excellent systems, which would probably be far more relevant to road cars, but at the same time push one or two teams out of sight of the teams on a tighter budget. This is why things like engine development are frozen, as no matter how great a test of skill driving the car is, there still needs to be a competition element to it all. Its hard to find the line between making the sport artificial, and losing the fans and therefore sponsors. I'm sorry if this doesn't read too well, I can't seem to word it better!
AG, I think that that was banned by the EU, not by F1 itself, so its outside of their control. I remember for a period teams ran a different livery in Europe which omitted the name of the tobacco company, but kept the logo, such as the Mika and David logos on the Mclarens that looks like the West logo, theres a pic here: please log in to view this image I was hoping for a side-on pic showing it on the side-pod, but its visible on the wings.
It's all about Jordan's Benson and Hedges cover ups for me: please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Incidently, I've always thought the bright yellow/orange livery on the Mclaren to the left in my picture would have looked excellent in a race. Its a shame they only ever used it for testing.
Oh yes, I agree with you here Bergkamp. - That was precisely my point! But Canary makes the case for F1's wider appeal. Unfortunately the FIA's efforts to pander to public opinion ultimately water down the thing that the purists like us want! - The general public seem not to appreciate that Grand Prix racing is more than (regular) overtaking. This is because they know no better; hence my use of the word 'ignorant'. What we need to do is educate them!
You being a moderator, do you truthfully consider this type of comment to be constructive, helpful, meaningful, in any way ! Regards Ernie
Surely we're still allowed the odd juvenile remark. I log into this site as an F1 fan, I only put the Mod hat when things get out of hand or some housekeeping (Stickying, merging etc) needs doing.
This being a public forum, and so far a very good one, particularily technicaly speaking, moderators should set an example, childish, juvenile and inane won't do, funny, comical, tonge in cheek, yep, in my honest opinion. Ask yourself why the BBC606 site has been abandoned, lets raise the game eh.
The thing is - surely we all want to have our views read and sensibly commented on - not crudely dismissed. It wasn't that long ago the Earth was definately flat. I'd rather see opinions that I don't agree with but hope I will not be offensive or respond badly.
Bright: Very true, I'm not sure these type of Forums can ever succeed in remaining objective, with reasonably polite behaviour, the problem seems to be with the passion that exists concerning matters F1 especially the nationalistic team aspects and driver favorites etc. I hope I am proved wrong.
I'm all for discussion and disagreement. Its only when the insults between members comes out that I feel a line should be pointed out. Disagree as strongly as you like about things, just have a reasonable argument to back up your points, and don't get personal
