I am so angry over this man's handling of this great sport. The British Grand Prix is under threat thanks to him. He's ridden us, the f1 fans, of OUR excitement by getting rid of such entertaining tracks like Austria, Montreal to name a few. We are still presented the annual drivel of Barcelona, Hungaroring, Bahrain and undoubtedly Valencia again this year. Why, Singapore ain't that great either. It only took Felipe Massa's Ferrari pit crew to spice things up a bit. I couldn't give a damn whether it was at night to accompany us European viewers. Well Bernie, why don't you do the thing that WILL accompany us European viewers and give us some BLOODY excitement on tracks like Montreal. God I will celebrate the day that geriatric fool walks away from f1 for good.
Rid F1 Of Ecclestone
- Thread starter McFerrari
- Start date
bogaTYR
Points Scorer
me myself am very thankful for bernie.
before F1 was a tiny sport and we were lucky to get even a GP on tv, this was all done from country to country. let alone a live broadcast. it was bernie who changed this and made f1 the world wide sport it is these days. he single handed negotiated for instance tv rights and its cos of that we all are able to see races at all. you might be unhappy with the way he does business but at least he got the sport somewhere.
i think F1 is very complicated nowadays and we, the fans, don't have full understanding of what goes on. also, is it bernie who removes races from the FIA calender? or is this the FIA? i fully agree the FIA could be more transparent and this make decisions more understandable. from your post i understand you are angry cos of the situation surrounding the british GP. why do you point at bernie? i see no arguments in your post and that makes it hard to react.
F1 is constantly moving and innovating. the same thing goes for circuits. unfortunately, the decisions are as is normal with the FIA often not really clarified to the fans. but that does not mean the decisions are not safe and sound. its all very well to have great memories to racing tracks which are no longer on the calender. i have that too. the dutch GP for instance. no one even mentions that one anymore, but sandvoort used to be a pretty famous track with some great racing.
its ok to be sentimental and to remember circuits fondly. but we just do not know why these circuits are no longer used. at least not fully. so blaming bernie is like blaming tilke for bad circuits.
before F1 was a tiny sport and we were lucky to get even a GP on tv, this was all done from country to country. let alone a live broadcast. it was bernie who changed this and made f1 the world wide sport it is these days. he single handed negotiated for instance tv rights and its cos of that we all are able to see races at all. you might be unhappy with the way he does business but at least he got the sport somewhere.
i think F1 is very complicated nowadays and we, the fans, don't have full understanding of what goes on. also, is it bernie who removes races from the FIA calender? or is this the FIA? i fully agree the FIA could be more transparent and this make decisions more understandable. from your post i understand you are angry cos of the situation surrounding the british GP. why do you point at bernie? i see no arguments in your post and that makes it hard to react.
F1 is constantly moving and innovating. the same thing goes for circuits. unfortunately, the decisions are as is normal with the FIA often not really clarified to the fans. but that does not mean the decisions are not safe and sound. its all very well to have great memories to racing tracks which are no longer on the calender. i have that too. the dutch GP for instance. no one even mentions that one anymore, but sandvoort used to be a pretty famous track with some great racing.
its ok to be sentimental and to remember circuits fondly. but we just do not know why these circuits are no longer used. at least not fully. so blaming bernie is like blaming tilke for bad circuits.
Personally, I don't like a lot of the things that Ecclestone does, but I do understand why he does them. Bernie is now effectively an employee of CVC and as such his brief is to maximise income for F1's owners.
Silverstone were not willing to sign the contract that Bernie put on the table because of the financial obligations; Donington were. He was given assurances that Donington would be ready on time - as were we all - so if there is no British GP I really don't think the blame should be laid at Bernie's door. In fact, I think he and the BRDC would probably come to some arrangement over the race going back to Silverstone - better to have a smaller income from them than none at all - but then on the other hand, if another country came in offering to match or better Donington's fee, why wouldn't he take that? The same principles apply to Montreal, Indianapolis and Magny-Cours.
The real problem, in my view, lies in the ownership situation, which results in the profit-making imperative taking over all other considerations. I would sooner see the teams themselves as the shareholders in FOM, with a chief executive appointed to run the commercial side and a board consisting of the team principals taking decisions, one vote each, rather like the Premier League in football. Such a structure would allow the competitors to share much more of the collective FOM incomes than the current 50%, and would allow proper initiatives to support existing teams and incentivise new entrants.
Whether some of the current teams, with their favourable terms, would go for such a radical plan is doubtful, however.
Silverstone were not willing to sign the contract that Bernie put on the table because of the financial obligations; Donington were. He was given assurances that Donington would be ready on time - as were we all - so if there is no British GP I really don't think the blame should be laid at Bernie's door. In fact, I think he and the BRDC would probably come to some arrangement over the race going back to Silverstone - better to have a smaller income from them than none at all - but then on the other hand, if another country came in offering to match or better Donington's fee, why wouldn't he take that? The same principles apply to Montreal, Indianapolis and Magny-Cours.
The real problem, in my view, lies in the ownership situation, which results in the profit-making imperative taking over all other considerations. I would sooner see the teams themselves as the shareholders in FOM, with a chief executive appointed to run the commercial side and a board consisting of the team principals taking decisions, one vote each, rather like the Premier League in football. Such a structure would allow the competitors to share much more of the collective FOM incomes than the current 50%, and would allow proper initiatives to support existing teams and incentivise new entrants.
Whether some of the current teams, with their favourable terms, would go for such a radical plan is doubtful, however.
bogaTYR
Points Scorer
GM, that makes a lot more sense then the OP. i just do not understand why people have the need to make things so personal when it comes to F1. people 'hate' tilke cos they hate the circuits, people 'hate' bernie cos they don't like what goes on with a GP. i myself find it really hard to 'hate' anyone i dont even know. but i can agree or disagree with his actions.
i am not sure if the teams should have any input in matters other then commercial. for instance, i see no point in them having any saying in rules and regulations. that 'sport' side should rest entirely with FIA in my view. the idea competitors can decide on the rules of the competition makes no sense to me. sport is no democracy and someone has to be in charge, the perfect role for an organization like the FIA. again, this has nothing to do with FIA handling the whole chain of events in a good or bad way or communicating well.
the profit in F1 lies with FOM, not with the FIA. i wholly agree that the teams should be paid more. but in the words of brian epstein, famous from the beatles: a whole not of nothing is worth less then a little of something. if bernie would not have been there, then even FOM would not exist. and teams would not have the money they have now. at least part of it.
i am not sure if the teams should have any input in matters other then commercial. for instance, i see no point in them having any saying in rules and regulations. that 'sport' side should rest entirely with FIA in my view. the idea competitors can decide on the rules of the competition makes no sense to me. sport is no democracy and someone has to be in charge, the perfect role for an organization like the FIA. again, this has nothing to do with FIA handling the whole chain of events in a good or bad way or communicating well.
the profit in F1 lies with FOM, not with the FIA. i wholly agree that the teams should be paid more. but in the words of brian epstein, famous from the beatles: a whole not of nothing is worth less then a little of something. if bernie would not have been there, then even FOM would not exist. and teams would not have the money they have now. at least part of it.
Sometimes, a man can pass his expiry date and continue.
There is now doubt that Bernie has improved F1 from the dark days of yonder. However, that does not necessarily mean he is the best man to carry it forward now.
I don't know of a better candidate, however.
As for Hermann Tilke, I like Istanbul and the new Hockenheim. It is certain that even Sakhir has more overtaking than Barcelona, Monaco & Hungaroring! He ain't done too bad a job, although someone should have looked at the design for Shanghai and said "no, mate!"
We have to love without Bernie sometime, he can't go on forever...
There is now doubt that Bernie has improved F1 from the dark days of yonder. However, that does not necessarily mean he is the best man to carry it forward now.
I don't know of a better candidate, however.
As for Hermann Tilke, I like Istanbul and the new Hockenheim. It is certain that even Sakhir has more overtaking than Barcelona, Monaco & Hungaroring! He ain't done too bad a job, although someone should have looked at the design for Shanghai and said "no, mate!"
We have to love without Bernie sometime, he can't go on forever...
bogaTYR
Points Scorer
mcferrari: why? why do you want bernie to leave? so far you came up with he was the one who was messing with the british GP, then that he was old and you really hated him and now that enough is enough.
i am just interested in what your argument is. i mean, you don't have to agree with the guy but surely he did and is doing a great job for F1.
i am just interested in what your argument is. i mean, you don't have to agree with the guy but surely he did and is doing a great job for F1.
I'm in two minds about Bernie. From the FIASCO of the early 80's Bernie spotted the potential of F1 and grew it to an audience far outside of it's traditional European base. Now, until recently at least, governments saw staging a Grand Prix as a sign to the world that they were an economic power to be respected, although I do think some of the races were moved simply to chase tobacco money.
But has Bernie, like all innovators and visionaries reached the end of the line? Many of the circuits can't fill the grandstands, races are run at strange times to suit a European TV audience. Radical changes to the scoring system are being proposed to try and encourage drivers to "try harder" (like they weren't?) and major changes to the design of cars have been made in an attempt to reinvigorate public interest - without success if this season is to be the measure.
Perhaps more radical changes are needed? Perhaps a period of stability will allow the teams to catch up with this who have stolen a lead?
The simple fact is I don't know what can be done to improve the spectacle in F1 but I'm not sure Bernie (or Max) does either. So perhaps instead of floating around crazy new scoring systems, more huge changes to the rules and finances in F1 and arguing with all and sundry, with artificial deadlines which simply compound the problem, a period of reflection is required. Go back to the fundamentals of the sport and ask what F1 should be, not what it is and how to change it. Unfortunately that's not the way of F1, especially with the egos at the top of the sport and, more importantly, the money involved; a bit less George W and bit more Barack Obama is perhaps needed?
From my perspective racing cars should be developing systems which can have applications for normal road cars. I have a semi-automatic gearbox and traction control in my Smart (stop laughing) but I don't recall there being a double decked diffuser at the back. I would welcome a CVT or active suspension or environmentally friendly energy recovery system which F1 has the capability to produce. Why not let it go back to being the summit of automotive engineering? If I want to see drivers racing the same cars with the same technology there are plenty of other race series which I can follow.
But has Bernie, like all innovators and visionaries reached the end of the line? Many of the circuits can't fill the grandstands, races are run at strange times to suit a European TV audience. Radical changes to the scoring system are being proposed to try and encourage drivers to "try harder" (like they weren't?) and major changes to the design of cars have been made in an attempt to reinvigorate public interest - without success if this season is to be the measure.
Perhaps more radical changes are needed? Perhaps a period of stability will allow the teams to catch up with this who have stolen a lead?
The simple fact is I don't know what can be done to improve the spectacle in F1 but I'm not sure Bernie (or Max) does either. So perhaps instead of floating around crazy new scoring systems, more huge changes to the rules and finances in F1 and arguing with all and sundry, with artificial deadlines which simply compound the problem, a period of reflection is required. Go back to the fundamentals of the sport and ask what F1 should be, not what it is and how to change it. Unfortunately that's not the way of F1, especially with the egos at the top of the sport and, more importantly, the money involved; a bit less George W and bit more Barack Obama is perhaps needed?
From my perspective racing cars should be developing systems which can have applications for normal road cars. I have a semi-automatic gearbox and traction control in my Smart (stop laughing) but I don't recall there being a double decked diffuser at the back. I would welcome a CVT or active suspension or environmentally friendly energy recovery system which F1 has the capability to produce. Why not let it go back to being the summit of automotive engineering? If I want to see drivers racing the same cars with the same technology there are plenty of other race series which I can follow.
I think BE and MM should realise that, despite their best endeavours, F1 is a "niche" market. It isn't football or rugby or cricket or tennis or athletics. But it is quite peculiar in it's reality and, as such, will not appeal to the majority of people round the world, which is why there are only 16/18 events spanning any one year.
They (BE and MM) can't engender interest where there is none and they should understand this - their life might be F1, but most people don't actually give a toss.
They (BE and MM) can't engender interest where there is none and they should understand this - their life might be F1, but most people don't actually give a toss.
jenov2003 said:
I'm not sure that football, rugby, cricket or tennis can be spread to new places either - they are more niche markets. OK, football seems to have got a foothold in the Far East, (and Japanese rugby is growing) but they're not really replacing anything out there. More obvious is FIFA's cringe-worthy attempts to break America. The 1994 World Cup has not changed the perception that football is a girls' sport!
Yes, sports do go in and out with success; Spain and Germany have proved it with F1 and so have Argentina's rugby union team. Spanish tennis recently built a big new stadium too off the back of Nadal, Ferrer, Verdasco et al!
Essentially though, China has enough sports - it has its ping-pong and it is importing football and (fsr) snooker! America won't take to anything that is held in Johnny Foreignland, but Canada is an F1 market. India is cricket mad, Korea has a soft spot for football nowadays.
Who knows? I just think chasing these markets is like chasing your shadow, time-consuming and utterly pointless. Although the 2011 Rugby World Cup should've been in Japan!
TBY - you're probably right, But some sports do have a more universal appeal than F1.
It is quite odd to note that, so far, all new circuits have materialised in relatively well off countries/cities and this can only be explained by the impression that the new hosts thought they would "make a killing" - whereas the opposite is more likely in these dire times. Even Monaco, the ancestral home to the "beautiful people" was undersubscribed this year - is it likely that this circuit will be strruck off in the next few years if it continues to make less money? By BE rules, it should be.
I'm all for profit, that's why everyone works or is in business but there does come a time when one has to be a little more pragmatic. Like knowing that Eskimoes won't buy ice and Saharans just need the cement.
It is quite odd to note that, so far, all new circuits have materialised in relatively well off countries/cities and this can only be explained by the impression that the new hosts thought they would "make a killing" - whereas the opposite is more likely in these dire times. Even Monaco, the ancestral home to the "beautiful people" was undersubscribed this year - is it likely that this circuit will be strruck off in the next few years if it continues to make less money? By BE rules, it should be.
I'm all for profit, that's why everyone works or is in business but there does come a time when one has to be a little more pragmatic. Like knowing that Eskimoes won't buy ice and Saharans just need the cement.
bogaTYR
Points Scorer
TBY
sports can be launched in new countries, best example: tennis in russia.
remember russians never ever had any tennis players of fame and look at them now. basically what happened, yelstsin was a big tennis fan and he gave a lot of money to the russian tennis federation so they could set up a youth training scheme and there you are. our boris saw tennis as a great way to prove russians they can be great at tennis. tennis is now a monster sport in russia.
the lesson; it takes time and money plus the government have to support and there has to be a reason. but sports can be made big in countries where that particular sport was not to be seen before.
sports can be launched in new countries, best example: tennis in russia.
remember russians never ever had any tennis players of fame and look at them now. basically what happened, yelstsin was a big tennis fan and he gave a lot of money to the russian tennis federation so they could set up a youth training scheme and there you are. our boris saw tennis as a great way to prove russians they can be great at tennis. tennis is now a monster sport in russia.
the lesson; it takes time and money plus the government have to support and there has to be a reason. but sports can be made big in countries where that particular sport was not to be seen before.
Tennis is easier to fill, a circuit tends to hold 10x as much as the bigger tennis courts (Centre Court will hold 15,000 for example). And all you need is one good player and the place goes wild! Look at Novak Djokovic buying his own tournament so he could go to Belgrade!
You need national players to build an interest in a sport - the Russians had Marat Safin and now have half the women's draw! But anyone can pick up a racquet, not everyone can go karting, into the junior formulae etc.
You won't find some guy from Majorca being coached by his uncle in F1!
You need national players to build an interest in a sport - the Russians had Marat Safin and now have half the women's draw! But anyone can pick up a racquet, not everyone can go karting, into the junior formulae etc.
You won't find some guy from Majorca being coached by his uncle in F1!
You wouldn't need a boat to get to your nearest track from Stevenage. And, lets be honest, Mr. Hamilton probably got more support from the top end of the sport as a kid than did Mr. Nadal!
Lewis Hamilton was in the same class at school as Aston Villa winger Ashley Young. Useless trivia, I know, but still absolutely true.
And I am not someone who abhors useless trivia, for more info see the quizzes forum!
Lewis Hamilton was in the same class at school as Aston Villa winger Ashley Young. Useless trivia, I know, but still absolutely true.
And I am not someone who abhors useless trivia, for more info see the quizzes forum!
Similar threads
