Last weekend I watched the Bahrain grand prix. As you're probably aware, before the race there was a ton of media hype about whether F1 should attend the race given the current situation over there. Arguments against ranged from the political, moral and ethical standpoint to the safety elements of holding the race. Personally, I didn't see exactly why the race should be cancelled providing that the area was deemed safe by the relevant authorities. As much as I agree that the human rights situation is diabolical, I hold the view that Formula 1 is a sport - no more, no less. It has no involvement with the politics of a country, and just because the race is held there doesn't mean that it endorses the political regime of the area. Besides, F1 has held races in several countries with somewhat dubious moral standpoints (China the week before, for example), and yet these races had not been questioned. As such, the only difference with Bahrain was related to safety.
While there were several off-track incidents involving a couple of teams, overall the weekend appeared to go smoothly. There was no interruption to the sessions, and so we could finally get down to watching the racing. Saturday's qualifying session came up with a surprise pole sitter (at least in terms of this year's performance standard). No McLaren or Mercedes this time. Instead, the Renault powered Red Bull of Sebastian Vettel was back where it belonged on the first slot of the grid - much to my delight!
With the grid decided and (as far as I'm concerned) back to where it should be, the race on Sunday was promising. The previous race in China was fantastic, with lots of tight racing. Bahrain to me has never been a particularly thrilling race, however once again the value of DRS was proven and we finally saw an exciting race this year. Vettel got a fantastic start and ultimately went on to win the race. The biggest surprise was who was occupying the second and third place slots. While you'd have expected the McLarens or even the Mercedes' to be near the top, Bahrain was obviously favouring the Renault powered cars as Kimi Raikkonen and Romain Grosjean joined Vettel on the podium! If you never watch the press conferences, I suggest you try and catch this one - just to see Grosjean's expression of happiness!
So, the race was absolutely thrilling and great fun to watch. Hopefully, this is what this race will be remembered for, rather than for the political circumstances surrounding it. There was a lot of questions whether attending Bahrain would damage F1's reputation, but to be honest so far I haven't witnessed a lot of backlash - I think those of us who watched the race were just concerned with the racing, as any motorsport fan should be.
Now that Bahrain is behind us, we've got a bit of a break before the European rounds begin in Spain on the 13th of May. For me, this time will be filled with revision and exams, and I have no excuse to be distracted by F1 any more! The return to Europe also marks the countdown to Spa - the race that I will be attending this year. My race tickets were delivered today, and so the excitement begins...
Showing posts with label Bernie Ecclestone. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bernie Ecclestone. Show all posts
Tuesday, 24 April 2012
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
That Bahrain Race
In my last post, I briefly eluded to the latest controversy in F1; that of whether the F1 circus should be making its way to Bahrain given the difficulties currently faced there. There's been no end of coverage in the media about this point, with different outlets giving different views on why F1 should or shouldn't attend this weekend.
Last week, Bernie Ecclestone met with the teams to discuss the race after the FIA had previously stated that everything would be going ahead. Sure enough, after the meeting Bahrain was confirmed as going ahead, prompting criticism from some.
There are a lot of media outlets discussing the ethical issues surrounding attendance in Bahrain. I'm obviously not an expert on the situation in the country, but I can see the point of those citing this reason for cancelling the race. There are massive human rights issues in Bahrain, something which I'm sure most people want to see changed. It's obviously unacceptable that people in the country are being treated poorly, and it should be a matter of importance to rectify this. However, I'm in disagreement with many who claim that F1 should abandon the race on these moral grounds. Personally, I'm with Bernie Ecclestone et al. who state that F1 is a sport, and as such should not be involved in the political debates of the country. Yes, F1 does bring benefits to the countries it visits by way of tourism and so on, however I disagree that F1 itself can be a catalyst for political reforms.
Because of the events in Bahrain making the issue of human rights more salient, a lot of people have been talking about F1's presence in China - another country with problematic human rights issues. People have questioned whether it is morally right for F1 to take place in countries which treat their citizens poorly, and it's right to question these points and get an insight into the politics of a country. However, politics is just that. It's not the place for a sport to try and reform a country by protesting and withdrawing. Reforms should be left to people in places of authority - governments and such. While Bernie Ecclestone undoubtedly has power and influence, this influence does not - and should not - extend into the range of changing a country. The attendance of F1 in a country with poor human rights records does not mean that the sport is an advocate of this country's mode of operation, it simply means that a sporting event is going to take place. As such, I'm not wholly swayed by the argument against Bahrain on moral grounds.
What I am more concerned with is the safety of the people who will be in attendance of the race - not just teams, but spectators, officials, caterers and so on. Mark Webber summed this up nicely when speaking to the BBC - there is always large security precautions for the teams and drivers, however it's also important to protect everyone else in attendance at the race. There has clearly been unrest in Bahrain, leading to violence and injury. These outcomes are intolerable for anyone to experience, and so I would question whether it's right that F1 should attend if there is a large risk of the event becoming a target.
Of course, at any event there are security issues. Red Bull announced after the meeting with Bernie Ecclestone that their security would be tightened at Bahrain, however that this was not far removed from the security provided for any other race. Any large event is going to appear to be a target for violence, and the situation in Bahrain is just enhancing that. However there's no reason why the event shouldn't take place providing that precautions are taken and the whole thing stays safe.
Ultimately, the FIA has taken the decision to hold the race, and everyone has to accept that judgement. Bernie Ecclestone stated that nobody was forced to take part in the event if they genuinely had concerns (although he also reminded everyone that all teams were bound to a contract stating they had to take part in all events on the calendar, so this point is arguably dubious), and all teams have been consulted. Nobody wants anyone to be at risk during a sporting event, and it's up to the officials to make sure that risks of all sorts are minimised. If the FIA honestly believed that there were huge safety implications to racing in Bahrain then we can safely assume that the event would have been cancelled. As for the moral issues in the country, well I'm sorry but this has little to do with F1 or any other sport (let's not forget the large golfing tournament taking place in Bahrain as well). While ethical problems are damnable, it's up to politicians and the like to fix them - not F1 teams. Providing the situation in Bahrain doesn't worsen, in all likelihood we'll be watching the racing action this weekend. Hopefully it will be another memorable race, but let's hope that's for the on-track racing than for any other reason.
Last week, Bernie Ecclestone met with the teams to discuss the race after the FIA had previously stated that everything would be going ahead. Sure enough, after the meeting Bahrain was confirmed as going ahead, prompting criticism from some.
There are a lot of media outlets discussing the ethical issues surrounding attendance in Bahrain. I'm obviously not an expert on the situation in the country, but I can see the point of those citing this reason for cancelling the race. There are massive human rights issues in Bahrain, something which I'm sure most people want to see changed. It's obviously unacceptable that people in the country are being treated poorly, and it should be a matter of importance to rectify this. However, I'm in disagreement with many who claim that F1 should abandon the race on these moral grounds. Personally, I'm with Bernie Ecclestone et al. who state that F1 is a sport, and as such should not be involved in the political debates of the country. Yes, F1 does bring benefits to the countries it visits by way of tourism and so on, however I disagree that F1 itself can be a catalyst for political reforms.
Because of the events in Bahrain making the issue of human rights more salient, a lot of people have been talking about F1's presence in China - another country with problematic human rights issues. People have questioned whether it is morally right for F1 to take place in countries which treat their citizens poorly, and it's right to question these points and get an insight into the politics of a country. However, politics is just that. It's not the place for a sport to try and reform a country by protesting and withdrawing. Reforms should be left to people in places of authority - governments and such. While Bernie Ecclestone undoubtedly has power and influence, this influence does not - and should not - extend into the range of changing a country. The attendance of F1 in a country with poor human rights records does not mean that the sport is an advocate of this country's mode of operation, it simply means that a sporting event is going to take place. As such, I'm not wholly swayed by the argument against Bahrain on moral grounds.
What I am more concerned with is the safety of the people who will be in attendance of the race - not just teams, but spectators, officials, caterers and so on. Mark Webber summed this up nicely when speaking to the BBC - there is always large security precautions for the teams and drivers, however it's also important to protect everyone else in attendance at the race. There has clearly been unrest in Bahrain, leading to violence and injury. These outcomes are intolerable for anyone to experience, and so I would question whether it's right that F1 should attend if there is a large risk of the event becoming a target.
Of course, at any event there are security issues. Red Bull announced after the meeting with Bernie Ecclestone that their security would be tightened at Bahrain, however that this was not far removed from the security provided for any other race. Any large event is going to appear to be a target for violence, and the situation in Bahrain is just enhancing that. However there's no reason why the event shouldn't take place providing that precautions are taken and the whole thing stays safe.
Ultimately, the FIA has taken the decision to hold the race, and everyone has to accept that judgement. Bernie Ecclestone stated that nobody was forced to take part in the event if they genuinely had concerns (although he also reminded everyone that all teams were bound to a contract stating they had to take part in all events on the calendar, so this point is arguably dubious), and all teams have been consulted. Nobody wants anyone to be at risk during a sporting event, and it's up to the officials to make sure that risks of all sorts are minimised. If the FIA honestly believed that there were huge safety implications to racing in Bahrain then we can safely assume that the event would have been cancelled. As for the moral issues in the country, well I'm sorry but this has little to do with F1 or any other sport (let's not forget the large golfing tournament taking place in Bahrain as well). While ethical problems are damnable, it's up to politicians and the like to fix them - not F1 teams. Providing the situation in Bahrain doesn't worsen, in all likelihood we'll be watching the racing action this weekend. Hopefully it will be another memorable race, but let's hope that's for the on-track racing than for any other reason.
Thursday, 15 March 2012
Hours to go until the first green flag of the season
It's Thursday evening and I'm sitting in the living room of my student house nearing the end of the university term, reflecting on the fact that it's now only a few hours before F1 2012 starts. In the six or so years that I've been adamantly following F1 there have been vast changes to the sport, some good, some perhaps not so good. One thing I have noticed though is the increasing length of the seasons.
For those of you who perhaps don't follow F1, the season usually runs from mid-March to November, giving us fans eight months (or thereabouts) of weekends filled with the sound of those beautiful cars (of course, with the stepped noses we might have to rethink the term 'beautiful'). However, I find that the time in between seasons we're left somewhat in a void, where there is very little news until we near the start of the new season.
At the end of November last year I genuinely didn't want the season to finish. I'd pretty much based my time around watching the races. For people like me who have to dedicate most of their lives to university work and passing exams, the relief of a weekend watching F1 is beyond comparison. It's more than just watching a sport; for me it's a time when I get to go back home with my family and just spend time enjoying a break from work. So, when the season ended I was completely lost. I'd not been able to justify spending a weekend away from university work, and so over the last four months I've mostly been removed from regular motorsport.
While the off-season sounds completely like a down side, there is a massive bonus to a lack of F1. Simply that with no F1 on the television, we have to go out and seek things to do. This year, like last year, my Dad and I went to the Autosport International Show.
If you've never been to this show before, I'd wholly and completely recommend it. Dad and I have been to our fair share of Top Gear Live shows, and while admittedly the live action show there is beyond comparison, the motorsport element to Autosport is simply amazing. This year, an Ayrton Senna display was one of the highlights, as well as the F1 grid. When I first went to Autosport International in January 2011, I was amazed by the F1 grid. The cars there (although labelled as the most recent are actually from several different years - you know you're a bit too obsessed with F1 when you're lecturing why a car is from 2008 and why another is from 2009...) are really up close, and so it's a rare opportunity to see them in all their intricate detail. My first trip to Autosport represented the first time I'd actually seen a range of real F1 cars in the flesh, bar the odd one or two at other shows. That year I must have managed to spend at least a whole hour staring at the cars, looking at the smallest details on them. You can stand and stare at those cars for ages and still notice everything about them - it's testament to the sport's attention to detail that the smallest things count. When I went to the show this year, I was prepared for seeing the F1 cars, I'd seen them on track at the Nurburgring after all. However, being so close to them was again mind boggling. I was also in for a rare treat courtesy of Caterham F1 (formerly Team Lotus). I got to get next to an F1 car with no restrictive barriers. For the first time, I was able to get within inches of a car and see literally everything about it really up close. Going to that show honestly makes you appreciate the sport all the more. So, while the off-season has the massive down side of no on-track action, it also makes you see the sport from new angles by getting off of the sofa and actually doing something.
What else can be said about four months with no F1? Well, quite simply it makes you appreciate it more. The anticipation you feel when you're coming up to that first race of the season is special. The first race of the year is also kind of magical in its own way. The atmosphere among the fans when preseason testing starts up is perhaps the first indication of a new year to come, and it's then that the excitement starts. Honestly, I know Bernie Ecclestone wants to extend the season to 25 races, and have F1 nearly all year round, but it just wouldn't be the same. Where would the anticipation be? Would you really get the interest around who will be the fastest? And would you have to actively seek out new things to do when the racing was off? Probably not. The off-season is, in a way, an important part of any F1 fan's appreciation of the sport. If that four month break wasn't there, I doubt very much that we'd be as excited and interested by this weekend. I also doubt that I'd take the effort to get up at a ridiculous hour to watch the testing. However, the break's been a long one and so in a few hours from now I'll be tucked up warm in bed with my (personalised) Red Bull Racing blanket (I know, it's one of the awesome Christmas presents I got this year) and my laptop, watching the ugly nosed cars and listening to that amazing sound. It's been a long winter, and frankly it's great to be back at last.
For those of you who perhaps don't follow F1, the season usually runs from mid-March to November, giving us fans eight months (or thereabouts) of weekends filled with the sound of those beautiful cars (of course, with the stepped noses we might have to rethink the term 'beautiful'). However, I find that the time in between seasons we're left somewhat in a void, where there is very little news until we near the start of the new season.
At the end of November last year I genuinely didn't want the season to finish. I'd pretty much based my time around watching the races. For people like me who have to dedicate most of their lives to university work and passing exams, the relief of a weekend watching F1 is beyond comparison. It's more than just watching a sport; for me it's a time when I get to go back home with my family and just spend time enjoying a break from work. So, when the season ended I was completely lost. I'd not been able to justify spending a weekend away from university work, and so over the last four months I've mostly been removed from regular motorsport.
While the off-season sounds completely like a down side, there is a massive bonus to a lack of F1. Simply that with no F1 on the television, we have to go out and seek things to do. This year, like last year, my Dad and I went to the Autosport International Show.
If you've never been to this show before, I'd wholly and completely recommend it. Dad and I have been to our fair share of Top Gear Live shows, and while admittedly the live action show there is beyond comparison, the motorsport element to Autosport is simply amazing. This year, an Ayrton Senna display was one of the highlights, as well as the F1 grid. When I first went to Autosport International in January 2011, I was amazed by the F1 grid. The cars there (although labelled as the most recent are actually from several different years - you know you're a bit too obsessed with F1 when you're lecturing why a car is from 2008 and why another is from 2009...) are really up close, and so it's a rare opportunity to see them in all their intricate detail. My first trip to Autosport represented the first time I'd actually seen a range of real F1 cars in the flesh, bar the odd one or two at other shows. That year I must have managed to spend at least a whole hour staring at the cars, looking at the smallest details on them. You can stand and stare at those cars for ages and still notice everything about them - it's testament to the sport's attention to detail that the smallest things count. When I went to the show this year, I was prepared for seeing the F1 cars, I'd seen them on track at the Nurburgring after all. However, being so close to them was again mind boggling. I was also in for a rare treat courtesy of Caterham F1 (formerly Team Lotus). I got to get next to an F1 car with no restrictive barriers. For the first time, I was able to get within inches of a car and see literally everything about it really up close. Going to that show honestly makes you appreciate the sport all the more. So, while the off-season has the massive down side of no on-track action, it also makes you see the sport from new angles by getting off of the sofa and actually doing something.
What else can be said about four months with no F1? Well, quite simply it makes you appreciate it more. The anticipation you feel when you're coming up to that first race of the season is special. The first race of the year is also kind of magical in its own way. The atmosphere among the fans when preseason testing starts up is perhaps the first indication of a new year to come, and it's then that the excitement starts. Honestly, I know Bernie Ecclestone wants to extend the season to 25 races, and have F1 nearly all year round, but it just wouldn't be the same. Where would the anticipation be? Would you really get the interest around who will be the fastest? And would you have to actively seek out new things to do when the racing was off? Probably not. The off-season is, in a way, an important part of any F1 fan's appreciation of the sport. If that four month break wasn't there, I doubt very much that we'd be as excited and interested by this weekend. I also doubt that I'd take the effort to get up at a ridiculous hour to watch the testing. However, the break's been a long one and so in a few hours from now I'll be tucked up warm in bed with my (personalised) Red Bull Racing blanket (I know, it's one of the awesome Christmas presents I got this year) and my laptop, watching the ugly nosed cars and listening to that amazing sound. It's been a long winter, and frankly it's great to be back at last.
Sunday, 15 May 2011
A Breakaway Championship?
There has been a lot of speculation surrounding what will happen to F1 when the Concorde Agreement runs out in 2012. The Concorde Agreement is basically a contract between the FIA, current partners CVC and the F1 teams (represented by FOTA - the Formula One Teams Association) which states how the revenue from television showings and prize money should be divided. It also contains specific details of the terms for how the teams compete in the races. There have been a number of Concorde Agreements over the life of F1, but the details have all remained secret. Each time the Concorde Agreement comes up for renewal there is speculation of what effect the new agreement will have for the fans. From what I can gather, not a huge amount has changed for the fans for each agreement, however personally I still find it a tense time - for reasons I shall explain below.
Speculation has been further promoted this time around because of the rumours that News Corp (Rupert Murdoch's company) are interested in purchasing F1 from current owners CVC. The take over of F1 isn't in itself any cause for worry - largely because of the Concorde Agreement maintaining the status quo for fans of the sport. However, the fact that the terms of the new contract are being re-negotiated becomes a cause for concern should News Corp choose to buy the rights to the sport. It's thought that if News Corp did acquire F1 from CVC there is a chance that F1 would be shown on pay-per-view television, rather than its current free-to-air status. If News Corp acquire F1 before the terms of the Concorde Agreement are renewed then there is a likelihood that they may place a term that F1 can only be shown on the pay-per-view channels of Murdoch's company.
Despite the speculation, various F1 officials have argued that the idea of News Corp acquiring F1 is simply posturing at the moment and CVC have no interest in selling the sport. Bernie Ecclestone has been one of the most outspoken on this issue, as has Eddie Jordan, whose views can be read here. However, even though the F1 officials have been dismissing the speculation, nobody has denied that News Corp wouldn't be able to purchase the sport if they offered the right price. Without a definite 'no' from CVC, there's simply no way that a fan such as myself can understand whether the sport will be sold or not.
So, if News Corp did buy F1, would F1 be shown on pay-per-view TV only? At the moment, the BBC have the rights to show F1, but this agreement runs out itself very soon - adding to my worry that F1 could move from the accessible free-to-air television to pay-per-view. Bernie Ecclestone has branded this 'suicidal'. The teams have also spoken against this idea arguing that moving F1 from free-to-air TV would be madness - and they're right in this respect. Formula 1 teams rely on sponsorship for money and to keep the teams going generally. If F1 moved away from free-to-air TV then suddenly the audience decreases massively. I love F1, however I simply cannot afford to watch nearly 20 races on pay-per-view television. Should the audience decrease, then sponsors would lose interest in teams as they get little return on their investment - investments of millions of pounds. This reason alone is weighty enough to mean that the teams are opposed to F1 being shown on pay-per-view TV. It is likely then that teams would fight any bid by News Corp to change the Concorde Agreement's clause of showing F1 on free-to-air television.
The negotiations of the Concorde Agreement themselves appear to be somewhat fraught, with Jean Todt (president of Ferrari) arguing that there are three options for the sport prior to the negotiation of the agreement - article here. First, the teams could go for the easy life and simply renew the Concorde Agreement as it stands with CVC - the option which seems most likely for the moment. Second, they could seek out a new partner to replace CVC; the likely choice being News Corp providing that F1 stays on free-to-air TV, or a partnership between News Corp and Exor. The final option which Todt rose was to form a breakaway championship - similar to the NBA in Basketball (apparently... I'm no expert on basketball!).
Now, I doubt that F1 will form a breakaway championship - it just seems like F1 is too expensive to be run without the support of a large company like CVC. That, and this isn't the first time that teams have threatened a breakaway series. When the points system was being overhauled there were similar threats of forming a breakaway championship - this never happened and the points system which we have currently was used as an alternative to the proposed medals system. To me, it just seems like the threat of a breakaway championship is used by the teams as a negotiating tool.
Personally, as a fan I am very happy with how the sport is run at the moment. Despite the criticisms of the rules, argument that overtaking is artificial because of DRS and KERSwatch F1 on a Friday, Saturday and Sunday and I get the opportunity to save up my money and attend races in person. Hopefully the Concorde Agreement terms will be sorted in time and once again the fans will come out on top - in a choice between business and sport I so hope that sport comes out on top!
Speculation has been further promoted this time around because of the rumours that News Corp (Rupert Murdoch's company) are interested in purchasing F1 from current owners CVC. The take over of F1 isn't in itself any cause for worry - largely because of the Concorde Agreement maintaining the status quo for fans of the sport. However, the fact that the terms of the new contract are being re-negotiated becomes a cause for concern should News Corp choose to buy the rights to the sport. It's thought that if News Corp did acquire F1 from CVC there is a chance that F1 would be shown on pay-per-view television, rather than its current free-to-air status. If News Corp acquire F1 before the terms of the Concorde Agreement are renewed then there is a likelihood that they may place a term that F1 can only be shown on the pay-per-view channels of Murdoch's company.
Despite the speculation, various F1 officials have argued that the idea of News Corp acquiring F1 is simply posturing at the moment and CVC have no interest in selling the sport. Bernie Ecclestone has been one of the most outspoken on this issue, as has Eddie Jordan, whose views can be read here. However, even though the F1 officials have been dismissing the speculation, nobody has denied that News Corp wouldn't be able to purchase the sport if they offered the right price. Without a definite 'no' from CVC, there's simply no way that a fan such as myself can understand whether the sport will be sold or not.
So, if News Corp did buy F1, would F1 be shown on pay-per-view TV only? At the moment, the BBC have the rights to show F1, but this agreement runs out itself very soon - adding to my worry that F1 could move from the accessible free-to-air television to pay-per-view. Bernie Ecclestone has branded this 'suicidal'. The teams have also spoken against this idea arguing that moving F1 from free-to-air TV would be madness - and they're right in this respect. Formula 1 teams rely on sponsorship for money and to keep the teams going generally. If F1 moved away from free-to-air TV then suddenly the audience decreases massively. I love F1, however I simply cannot afford to watch nearly 20 races on pay-per-view television. Should the audience decrease, then sponsors would lose interest in teams as they get little return on their investment - investments of millions of pounds. This reason alone is weighty enough to mean that the teams are opposed to F1 being shown on pay-per-view TV. It is likely then that teams would fight any bid by News Corp to change the Concorde Agreement's clause of showing F1 on free-to-air television.
The negotiations of the Concorde Agreement themselves appear to be somewhat fraught, with Jean Todt (president of Ferrari) arguing that there are three options for the sport prior to the negotiation of the agreement - article here. First, the teams could go for the easy life and simply renew the Concorde Agreement as it stands with CVC - the option which seems most likely for the moment. Second, they could seek out a new partner to replace CVC; the likely choice being News Corp providing that F1 stays on free-to-air TV, or a partnership between News Corp and Exor. The final option which Todt rose was to form a breakaway championship - similar to the NBA in Basketball (apparently... I'm no expert on basketball!).
Now, I doubt that F1 will form a breakaway championship - it just seems like F1 is too expensive to be run without the support of a large company like CVC. That, and this isn't the first time that teams have threatened a breakaway series. When the points system was being overhauled there were similar threats of forming a breakaway championship - this never happened and the points system which we have currently was used as an alternative to the proposed medals system. To me, it just seems like the threat of a breakaway championship is used by the teams as a negotiating tool.
Personally, as a fan I am very happy with how the sport is run at the moment. Despite the criticisms of the rules, argument that overtaking is artificial because of DRS and KERSwatch F1 on a Friday, Saturday and Sunday and I get the opportunity to save up my money and attend races in person. Hopefully the Concorde Agreement terms will be sorted in time and once again the fans will come out on top - in a choice between business and sport I so hope that sport comes out on top!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)