BBC Blog Network

User Profile

gilesy_v

Listed below are comments made by gilesy_v between Monday, 9th February 2009 and Thursday, 9th April 2009.

« Newer
Older »

Classic Chinese Grands Prix 10:42am on 09 Apr 2009 Not a bad idea, why not have a "Classic Easter GP" weekends. Imola used to fall around this time, so we could see the 05 Alonso-Schumacher duel again. Or rather, for the first time given we missed it originally...
Classic Chinese Grands Prix 10:28am on 09 Apr 2009 I'm afraid to say that this is usually a dull race at not especially exhilarating circuit in a country where the fans don't turn up (or have to be shipped in) and the government is increasingly unwilling to pay the extortionate fee. Fingers crossed that this year will be better with the new regulations.

I will have watched all of the previous 5 but I guess it's a reflection of the event that the only one I can remember is Lewis ending up in the gravel. I'll pick 2004 but mostly just to re-jig my memory that there was a close race that year.
Shadow of Alonso hangs over Ferrari drivers 7:44pm on 23 Mar 2009 A great piece, though of course it's totally impossible to get into the psyche of Kimi Raikkoen..

It might sound blatant but I feel for the Ferrari drivers it'll all be down to the car. Last year the car suited Felipe perfectly and together with the fabulous motivation from Rob Smedley it all came good for him.

However this year the cars are far more likely to oversteer which from the outset would appear to suit Kimi more. Indeed while there is so little techinical feedback from the car performance due to the radical regulations, Kimi will come to the fore. Whenever it's a case of "just get in and drive as fast as you can" Kimi is the one who excels. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's Raikkonen who leads the points table after the first few races.
The problem with winner takes all 6:35pm on 18 Mar 2009 Andrew is right in pointing out the longer-term announcement with the biggest impact will likely the the second - that of the budget 'cap' on spending (which would be near impossible to regulate surely?) However the points issue is the current talking point & the more I think about it the more I see it being a bad idea.

Let's get back to the decision itself though - something which has not been given much prominence is the event of the week before. FOTA agreed to a points system of 12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1, which of course would give the winning driver a bigger reward and indeed incentive. (Personally I'd have gone 12-8-6 etc to mirror the old system - albeit with 8 points paying positions to compensate the lower teams for increased reliability of top cars always finishing at the front)

The point is that this would have more than adequately solved Ecclestone's problem of incentive for victory. BUT it was FOTA that came up with it. In my view this was a purely political statement to remind the teams that Ecclestone is in charge.

What is so crucial is that for the FIRST time in decades the teams are united together in one body. This is incredibly significant in the politics of F1. It's not Bernie & Ferrari vs the rest. FOTA could actually now have a massive say in how the sport is run - contrary to Ecclestone's traditional autocratic rule.

I believe the next Concorde Agreement is up for renewal relatively soon (2010?) Surely now it is time for the teams to go it alone. Bring back the soul of F1.

After all the money are problems stem from the greed of the organisers. The teams do not get a big enough percentage of revenue, hence none of the teams makes a profit. This wasn't a problem pre-recession, but now.. With CVC (Bernie's rights holder) eyeballed with debt after securing rights, money is made by going to oil-rich Asia with governments prepared to pay obscene amounts to stage a race, usually on circuits built under instruction from BE that offer little overtaking anyway.

We want the Tifosi of Imola. The securing of Silverstone and Spa. The speed & excitement of Montreal. No more desert races with empty stands.

FIA and Ecclestone out. Bring back the soul of F1. (Apologies for the length, a spleen needed venting..)
The problem with winner takes all 6:33pm on 18 Mar 2009 Andrew is right in pointing out the longer-term announcement with the biggest impact will likely the the second - that of the budget 'cap' on spending (which would be near impossible to regulate surely?) However the points issue is the current talking point & the more I think about it the more I see it being a bad idea.
Let's get back to the decision itself though - something which has not been given much prominence is the event of the week before. FOTA agreed to a points system of 12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1, which of course would give the winning driver a bigger reward and indeed incentive. (Personally I'd have gone 12-8-6 etc to mirror the old system - albeit keeping 8 points paying positions to compensate the lower teams for increased reliability of top cars always finishing at the front)
The point is that this would have more than adequately solved Ecclestone's problem of incentive for victory. BUT it was FOTA that came up with it. In my view this was a purely political statement to remind the teams that Ecclestone is in charge.
What is so crucial is that for the FIRST time in decades the teams are united together in one body. This is incredibly significant in the politics of F1. It's not Bernie & Ferrari vs the rest. FOTA could actually now have a massive say in how the sport is run - contrary to Ecclestone's traditional autocratic rule.
I believe the next Concorde Agreement is up for renewal relatively soon (2010?) Surely now it is time for the teams to go it alone. Bring back the soul of F1.
After all the money are problems stem from the greed of the organisers. The teams do not get a big enough percentage of revenue, hence none of the teams makes a profit. This wasn't a problem pre-recession, but now.. With CVC (Bernie's rights holder) eyeballed with debt after securing rights, money is made by going to oil-rich Asia with governments prepared to pay obscene amounts to stage a race, usually on circuits built under instruction from BE that offer little overtaking anyway.
We want the Tifosi of Imola. The securing of Silverstone and Spa. The speed & excitement of Montreal. Grand Prix State-side. No more desert races with empty stands.
FIA and Ecclestone out. Bring back the soul of F1.
(Apologies for the length, a spleen needed venting..)
How Cat Deeley got me a Lotus Elise 6:22pm on 11 Mar 2009 A Lotus Elise as your first car eh Jake? All sounds impressive, though I feel not a patch on my 1987 Nissan Sunny... (I used to joke that it doubled in value every time I filled it up!)
Looking forward to Melbourne 11:00pm on 06 Mar 2009 The prospect of a "Grand Prix Gold" section is one which excites me the most as the BBC F1 archive must be extraordinary going all the way back. I really hope this gets some serious 'airplay' devoted to it via the website.

As for the votes, I'm not sure I can bring myself to endure the pain of 1994 again - I never really brought myself to forgive Schumacher after that. In terms of showdowns though there weren't many better - it was just a terrible end to a tragic season.

Equally Adelaide 1986 wasn't exactly a good year for British drivers! Poor old Nigel, it was such a relief that he got the championship in 92, he really was one of the all-time greats. I still can't get over the phenomenal car control at the moment of the tyre blow-out the late great James Hunt alluded to.

1992 was a good race, at least to begin with, that you omit. The opening section of the race was one of those incredible Senna-Mansell duels which ended in tears on a gravel trap!

I'd have to go for 1991 though from your pick, the rain was nothing like anyone had seen. Prost pulled out because he said it was too dangerous.. so that gives you some idea of how bad it was if Le Prof stopped. Of course Senna didn't though... It was officially the shortest race in F1 history (and still is), remarkable really.
Let's celebrate Moore and Beckham 1:19pm on 12 Feb 2009 What I find noticeable is how we in Britain tend to perceive the great players to be the ones who were victorious and perhaps this is not always fair. Take a look at Tim Vickery's recent blog and he makes a great case for Alfredo di Stefano to be the greatest of all time over Pele and Maradona. Di Stefano never played at a World Cup, nevermind winning one. Granted he played further back in the past and there is less footage of him playing but it is clear to see how lack of World Cup success overshadows the greatness of a player.

On the other hand Paolo Maldini is rated by a significant number to be the best left-back ever and was the most capped Italian of all time when he retired from international football. Even as the most decorated European team the Italians never question his supreme ability despite never having won a major international tournament (but for the 4th officials dodgy watch in 2000...).

Therefore I think a better measure is to judge 'greatness' is to ask whether a player would fit into the victorious team of the competition. In the case of Bobby Moore it is without question that at his peak he would have been 1st choice in any team in the world. It is here that many would underrate Beckham if anything. He has proven, by playing for 3 of the top teams in the world, his immense skill & ability. He has that extra dimension which is highly regarded by coaches all over the world and until recently would have been an option any manager would loved to have had.
White Hart pain for Wenger 12:09pm on 09 Feb 2009 Phil: I apologise - the Champions League comments were moreover aimed at some of the posts than yourself. In fact I'm not an Arsenal fan but a massive admirer of what Wenger has done for the English game. My team won back-to-back European cups playing scintillating, and sometimes pragmatic, football managed by the greatest of them all- but given the way modern football is run will never achieve that ever again.

It was more of a criticism of the way the 'big four' almost seem to believe they are pre-destined for qualification to the top competition & the demands for continual success. Fans, and indeed players, of the Gunners need to remain patient, I don't think they are far off a new brand of breath-taking football.
White Hart pain for Wenger 09:17am on 09 Feb 2009 I think that Andy Gray's post-match analysis was far superior to this. Wenger is revolutionising the game again, transforming midfield tactics to remove the 'holding' player. This will take time but players like Arshavin, Fabregas and Denilson will prove this.

Gray also said that despite the numerical disadvantage Arsenal went for the win, playing 2 up top until being forced to bring back van Persie to midfield. He didn't complain about the sending off, saying if anyone saw it then it was the right thing to do.

As for imploding without the Champions League? They are financed without relying on that income - I doubt players will want to leave given the potential and bad luck of having so many key players missing through injury.

« Newer
Older »

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

gilesy_v