BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?

Subject: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Stu
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 03:06 PM

Disaster.

A triumph of money over tradition and a slap in the face to the spiritual home of motorsport in the world.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 03:12 PM

I'm bloody livid, that little squirt Bernie Ecclestone should be strung up by the balls. If only the UK based teams would act in concert some way and force him to change his mind, but they will be sniping at each other as usual. They are also in the pay of the makers of cancer sticks to some extent.
God it stinks, I'm so cross!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 06:22 PM

John. I don't believe the fault here lies with Bernie Eccleston. He is not the one who should be supplying the money for the upkeep of the track. It has been sadly neglected by the Country as a whole and in paticular the Government, who need to invest in the future of another great British tradition......They are failing us, motor racing....the world of sport.....GREAT BRITAIN is little Britain nowadays and seems to be riding on the back of big brother America. Meanwhile..China continues to grow and grow and grow....... The decline and fall of the British Empire.....sounds like a good title for a book.
Best wishes.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 06:38 PM

Well I must admit that the BRDC might have done more to upgrade the track, but it is a private members club, and as such not too deep in the pockets. Yes the government should help for the sake of Britain's image around the world, but hey there is no other sport apart from football, for most of the morons in the present goverment.
Lottery funding is I think, out of the question because it is a private club, so I don't have an answer. I do know that even before this happened I thought Ecclestone was a slimy little shit, and this hasn't proved me wrong in any way. He is English after all, and one would have thought that a bit of patriotism might have crept into his heart, if he has one!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Mr Red
Date: 30 Sep 04 - 06:55 PM

relax - there is still one at Donningtom and you get three Grand Prix on the day. True there aren't as many wheels (per) but if you add-up all the races & racers and divde by 2 you will still have much more racing and a lot more overtaking and the guy who is doing most of the winning - smiles - and does his victory antics standing on the seat doing wheelies. Often as he crosses the line. He is worth £40 million at 24. He has figured that he is in show business and performs as well as he rides - which is argued to be "the best ever" - there aren't too many dissenters. he is coy about his skills till he gets on the bike. And this year he rides a poorer bike and still rubs their noses in it.

Formula 1 is eponimous - it is formulaic.   True - Schumaker drove a poorer car and made it what it is, But his smile is not entertaining - now is it?

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 04:34 AM

Schumacher smiles more often than either Ron Dennis or Frank Williams!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: The DeanMeister
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 04:45 AM

What we need is Valentino in a Ferrari!

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 05:05 AM

I'm not so sure... OK, let me be the devil's advocate here:

Motorsport is so much about technology that it is a bit of a stretch of the imagination to call it "sport". All right, there is a human element, endurance, concentration, focus, reaction times, strategy too. But still, one could not say that it is as much "sport" as tennis or athletics or even football. And its following in the UK at least is not as great as for some of those other sports. That, after all, is also the reason why the BRDC is not flush with money and cannot afford to invest.

While I agree that not having Silverstone in the programme would sadden me a little, it wouldn't really be such a great loss. Any income to the area from having the circuit would be swamped by the policing costs. And the vast majority of the sport's followers watch it on the television, rather than go to the circuit. So - what does it matter where the pictures are being transmitted from?

It is an elite sport, because entry to the sport (as a competitor) is not cheap. As such, its social impact/benefit is minimal. The same money, spent to promote sports in inner city areas would have a better result, I argue, and might even provide us with a British basketball team or tennis player worth cheering in the next 10 years.

The sport also has an elite image. It is no longer the sport of truly enthusiastic amateurs tinkering in garages and coming up with innovations that change the world of motoring. Rather, it requires huge and expensive design teams trying dozens of options to squeeze a measly percentage of power or reduce drag, in ways that rarely get adopted by the industry nowadays. And its elite image is made worse by the prancing up and down of models, the corporate hospitality and the obligatory drenching in champaign (like the obligatory encore in a folk club these days; pointless).

The sport we remember and love was a different animal. Not this. Let this die.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 06:01 AM

It would be sad to see the end of the Silverstone Grand Prix because I do not think that it would return a la Brands Hatch and Donington which are both below par as far as Ecclestone is concerned. Besides the Gulf States and Chinese must be pouring far more money into his pockets that we can.

I often wonder where all the money goes given the astronomical prices of admission and the massive television receipts.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 06:17 AM

... and don't forget the advertising, GUEST, Mingulay. I reckon it goes to abnormally high rewards for drivers, engineers and designers. And to bottles of bubbly to be sprayed needlessly. And dry cleaning.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 06:26 AM

I reckon El Greeko is right.
Bernie Ecclstone was asking the goverment for money to put this sport on, and subsidise it.
why should tax payers pay for it?
he was on radio last night, moaning that John Prescott told him he cant have any tax money for formula 1.
them that want it, should pay for it themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 06:35 AM

I think O Greek one that a significant proportion must go on baseball caps. Re the bubbly, what did they spray in Dubai?

Oh for the days of BRM, Lotus, March, Cooper, Vanwall etc when extra downforce meant a heavier driver.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 06:53 AM

He-he! I'd have done all right in those days.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Hugh Jampton
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 08:06 AM

Don`t forget the Government has provided funds for improved roads around Silverstone to somewhat defray the costs imposed upon the BRDC.
Today!s "Daily Telegraph" details the monies spent by China and Dubai to join the "big boys" with quite a few waiting in the wings. It is frightening.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 08:42 AM

Also George the cockpits were larger then and you would have had room for your 12 string. Maybe written a song or two during pitstops.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 09:17 AM

Mmm...I need more pitstops these days

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 09:47 AM

If Motor Sport is supposed to help develop the sort of cars we drive on the road normally, then they should be researching better noise muffling devices... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 10:10 AM

I think the idea that motorsport performs a research function went out of the window years ago apropos road cars. Unless you can afford a state of the art Ferrari or similar. My car was put together in Luton (I hesitate to say built) and its only similarity to F1 is the wheel at each corner.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 01:16 PM

If I may pursue J0hn frae Hull's theory a little. A child is a minority interest, only important to it's parents, and the immediate family. The parents are given an allowance from the government to help bring it up, and the Father's tax code is changed so that he pays less. In the majority of cases the child goes to a state school, and many benefit from a subsidised university education. All this at the expense of the tax payer, married, single, childless, or otherwise. If we subsidise one minority interest to this extent, then why not others? Like say motor racing!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 01:36 PM

John,

Given that government funds are finite, they have to prioritise as to which minority interests they will fund. The case for subsidising the child has a number of other things going for it also: It is to do with propagation of the species, at the core of our existence; it is expected to grow itself and become a taxpayer, or serve the country in other ways. In any case, having a child is considerably more important to a country than sport. The comparison works only if one brings procreation as a function down to the level of sport and entertainment.

The case for motorsport is further weakened by the fact that BRDC is a private club, which has declined to date to throw the doors open to public membership.

The case for subsidising Motorsport is more comparable to subsidising Angling, or Hunting, or Air Races, or Horse Racing.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 01:38 PM

Don't get me wrong - I'd miss it too. But not enough to want to pay for it.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 05:50 PM

No I'm sure that you like me would far rather pay for a Scottish parliament 10 times over budget, and a millenium dome still costing millions of pounds a year. Then there's trips abroad for juvenile offenders, and junkets for MPs and councillors. Yes I agree, let's not waste taxpayers money!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: HuwG
Date: 01 Oct 04 - 08:22 PM

Certainly, you can make a case against subsidising Formula 1 racing. But then, the same criteria would see the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Covent Garden, the Commonwealth Games, London's bid for the 2012 Olympic Games, the MCC, all cancelled or closed down.

Personally, I rather agree that the BRDC (British Racing Drivers' Club) which owns Silverstone and controls F1 racing in Britain, could do with being thrown open to public ownership, scrutiny and control. However, I would regard the loss of such a premier sports event as a shame. I believe that more than half the current Formula 1 teams are based in Britain and use British parts, labour, design, engines etc. (Even the all-conquering Ferraris depend on British design facilities for some details and facilities.) On those grounds, you could argue that the cancellation of the British GP will ultimately lead to the loss of skilled engineering and technological jobs in Britain, and therefore to a greater (though very hard to calculate) eventual loss to the economy.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 06:48 AM

Quote "A child is a minority interest", that must be one of the stupidest things i've ever read here!
Having a family can hardly be described as "a minority interest"!

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I'm sure most people would agree that there are more people raising a family, than there are taking in part in Formula 1 Motor Racing.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 07:04 AM

Well, procreation is a much more enjoyable sport;-) If I remember right :-(

John , I agree that tax money has been, and is (and no doubt will continue to be) wasted on silly/stupid projects, and the two you mention rank highly in that category. I wouldn't rank F1 in the silly category at all; it has some merit - just not enough compared to other sport-related funding opportunities, always IMO.

And HuwG, yes, it's a tough call what to support and what not to, and opinions will always differ because some would prefer to give money to music (RPO, CG) than to sport - and others the reverse. Both needs support, but it has to be prioritised.

As for the benefit to British industry, as Mingulay said above, the days when F1 had significant benefits for the average car either in features or manufacturing techniques are long gone. What is left is the emotional argument for "being there with the big boys" or for not losing the "glory" of the past etc. While I feel the emotion, logic dictates otherwise, I fear.

It would be nice to retain F1 racing in Silverstone. But not necessary, I think.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 08:24 AM

Giok, running Silverstone as a private members' club is a farce. Where else but in Britain. And I can't see the point of slagging Ecclestone. Surely he's an inevitable product of the obscene industry over which he presides.

HuwG, there is very little basis for comparison with those other activities you mentioned. Cities like Birmingham and Glasgow, not to mention those like Moscow and Dresden in Warsaw Pact days, have shown the value of sponsoring cultural development. But there is very little of cultural value in F1. F1 could be about developing fuel efficiency or alternative fuels, but it is interested only in lines of development that are completely at odds with the needs of the planet. It could be an exciting competitor sport like the Isle of Man TT or track athletics, but instead it is a circus extravaganza, in which the participants parade in the order of their wealth, repelling spectators and TV viewers in their thousands.

As Mr Red pointed out, you would get more thrills, spills and sheer excitement from one day at Donington than you'd get from a month of F1 Sundays at Silverstone.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 09:04 AM

J0hn I knew that you would misunderstand, intentionally or not, what I posted. Each individual child is of most interest to his or her parent, and to a few others, usually immediate family. Even if this comprises 20 or 30 people, it is still, in the context of the total population of the UK a minority interest. It was a lateral thought, and not in any way aimed at children or their parents. Folk music is also a minority interest, albeit not usually classified as a sport.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: selby
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 10:42 AM

I think the point is being missed GP racing has become about markets, cigarettes put a huge amount of money into GP racing, in Europe ciggie advertising is about to be/has been banned think of the Belgium GP last year. The get out for the small person is the track etc but I suspect the real reason is ciggie sponsorship and opening markets. Therfore silverstone and /or anywhere else does not have a chance, watch other European GP's follow. I have no personal knowledge but have been told by a work collegue who is insensed over the decision, that when he went to the Brazilian GP that circuit and its facilities lagged behind Silverstone but ciggie advertising is still ongoing in that country.
Just my thoughts
Keith

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: HuwG
Date: 02 Oct 04 - 11:37 AM

The news today was that the British GP might be reinstated if the teams agree to allow another (eighteenth) event in the calendar. I believe half of them would have little objection, as Silverstone is an easy hour's drive from their various headquarters. A lot would depend on what Ferrari (whose HQ is in Italy) would allow.

However, the main thrust of my argument in my post above, was that the justification for the scrapping of the British GP was rather arbitrary, given that several other events and sports can offer no better excuse for their existence, or their support by government or private money.

It might well be the point that F1 has rather little relevance these days to the development of the motor car, or transport in general. (Their relevance here was far greater perhaps fifteen to twenty years ago, but even that is arguable.) But take just one of my pet hates; Manchester United FC. It could as well be argued that they have as little relevance to the sport of football, and to sport's development of physical well-being, teamwork and "fair play" in the individual. Or how about, say, Pavarotti's relevance to classical music. (OK, he can sing it. But ask most of his listeners about the translation or meaning of "Nesun dorma", its setting, the stories behind many classical tunes or operas, and you will get blank looks.)

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Billy the Bus
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 06:57 AM

Awww... Shucks....

Here's a toast to Stirling Moss and Juan Fangio
But ket's not forget a couile of "Southern Blokes" who did quite well in F1 racing. Jack Brabham and Bruce Mclaren . Both built their first cars in the family garage. Oh that F1-2-3, or even the "go-carts" were still the same.... Remember Denis Hulme?

We're having a similar hassle in NX at the moment. It seems Ardmore GP is a thing of the past - not that it was ever very flash. It's to become a road race in Auckland city for v8's.. and block the main highway for three days... all for the $$$$s

Does Aintree still run? It seems F1 is a thing of the past...

Cheers - Sam

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: catspaw49
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 01:34 PM

Fionn hit a great point. Bernie is a product of the sport which has become "obscene" around the world. That doesn't make him any less obscene himself. And the same is true for the France family here in the States as well as that "wannabe somebody," Tony George.

I have beeen a fan and participant for almost 50 years and I could write a book here on what I think is wrong and right with racing in general and F1 and NASCAR in specifics, but why bother. This thing is so far along the line now..............Well, just try and take the best from it you can and not dwell too much on how great it was "once upon a time."

HEY!!!! CLICK HERE---Bernie's for sale!!!!!!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Mr Red
Date: 03 Oct 04 - 07:23 PM

MotoGP Dubai this weekend - no spraying - not even water - that is too precious to waste.

F1 aren't cars - they are vehicles, projectiles, or missiles. It is entertainment not sport. Yer picks yer interest and consumes.

simlarly.....
I picks my folk festivals because too often the "FOLK" is less prominent than "entertainment". The bigger the spectacle - the less it resembles what it purports to be.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 06:18 AM

Ecclestone looks as if he has just spent a week in a wind tunnel. You would think with all his money that he could afford a haircut.

ANNOUNCEMENT 5th November 2004 - Silverstone Fireworks Party. Burning of remarkably lifelike effigy of B. Ecclestone as an offering to Vroom, the god of motor racing. Sponsored by Zip firelighters and Shell motor fuels.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: Dave Bryant
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 06:42 AM

Bridgestone and Michelin will each donate a tyre to be burnt round the neck of the effigy.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 06:58 AM

As this event is November, they really should be full wet tyres.

Should the Ecclestone become unavailable for any reason, a Moseley is being prepared as a stand-in.

Late news, food concessions are still available for burgers and hot dogs. No more foie gras, oysters or champagne please.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 08:13 AM

"No more foie gras, oysters or champagne please"...

OOWWW! Back to lard, snot and plonk!

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 08:31 AM

Sorry about that George. We all know that that is normal fare for oil tycoons but we must cater in some small part to the lower orders. After all it is they who buy the overpriced merchandise churned out by the teams in some backstreet sweatshop in darkest Thailand.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 09:54 AM

What are you doing posting here, Mingulay? I thought you were 10 meters down in the Red Sea by now...

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 11:00 AM

Wrong Mingulay George. I'm the one still living there. The boy Sullivan is the one in the Red Sea having deserted the good ship to marry some doxy he met when on shore leave. Just to confuse things I'm the one with the beard.

By the way you really should lay off the lard. It's doing your hair style no good at all.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 11:15 AM

Ha! Hiya, P!

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 04 Oct 04 - 11:35 AM

Hello George.

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 05 Oct 04 - 05:20 AM

Subject: RE: BS: No Grand Prix at Silverstone?
From: GUEST,Mingulay
Date: 05 Oct 04 - 05:47 AM

What's wrong Sir jOhn, lost for words?