Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 7:34:05 GMT
I don't know about nominations, Chris, and can't comment on MS' plight, but the point about Roebuck, or anybody else, today it's not anymore as thirty years ago and beyond, when there wasn't internet and scrutiny on what the journos wrote was non-existent and they could get away with anything.
Reading Roebuck's Autosport columns today shows two things in my view, both of which are interlinked (in his deluded mind): one, he thinks himself as an absolute authority on the sport, what he says is divine law; two, he clearly decries all this scrutiny by the "internet pleb", in reality, sometimes by people who by and large are way more educted than him and know where to find information, read the history books with critical spirit and do two plus two on their own.
I am not saying that his opinion is not welcomed, on the contrary. But, as shown in his rare but bitter replies to readers in the Motor Sport threads of his colums, he doesn't accept any scrutiny or argument, he "has been going at GP races since 1971", then he is entitled to his opinion and anybody else not. He is way out of sync. He should realize that even the word of the Pope isn't worth a penny these days...
Hughes is obviously extremely knowledgeable about current proceedings, he works there. In my view, I have two basic issues with him. One, he doesn't consider the human factor as far as drivers' performance is considered, it seems for him they are all like machines, numbers to be crunched in whatever spreadsheet he may have setup himself. Two, when asked (usually by Valentin) about the past, he seems to extrapolate that approach backwards. As his two books (very good on their own and original as they try to have a different take at least on those two seasons, 1970 and 1980) show, the main issue I have is exactly the one he retorts to others when his views are challenged: the lack of context.
There is one book, one research that literally screams to be written and recounted before even Peter Wright leaves us, the advent of ground effect in motorsport and nobody - not Hughes - seems is even trying to attempt that. Because they don't understand the technical side of it, and because they would need to provide context, quite a lot of it, and that is the domain of historians not journalists. That is the point, they like to see themselves also as historians (conveniently, to get a final good paycheck with a near-meanigless column on Autosport, whe they really should be retired), the only ones who understand the undercurrents of the sport at hand, but actually are only day reporters. Very few are, or have been, capable to jump from one to the other, to have that vision.
Few years back, on another forum, I had a short exchange with Michael Oliver, who doesn't seem to be a journalist but who has written a couple ot outstanding scholarly books on the Lotus 49 and 72 respectively, asking whether he would go for the next step of the "evolution", the 78 and 79. He replied that that was the plan, but then Tipler's (poor) book was published and pre-emptied his own work, hence he wouldn't do it.
It just came to my mind who, Chris. David Tremayne. He can't be too bad, can he? But he has to accept the scrutiny. MS is not the Bible. Not anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Apr 29, 2018 15:30:53 GMT
hear hear John, Carl, wonderful, I would be so sad if our beloved MS disappears - i don't particularly care for the present editor and still think they are missing a writer, i know Roebuck isn't popular here but someone like the late Jabby or perhaps someone like the retired Gordon Kirkby or a European writer - actually yea - that would work, i would really welcome that but who? nominations? Somewhere there must be a young Pete Lyons...
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Apr 29, 2018 16:04:58 GMT
Lucio the Mike Oliver books on the 49 and 72 are essential reading to a Lotus fan but are hard to get. I enjoyed them both immensely and liked the style of his writing. I have the Tipler book but find him very difficult to read and enjoy. Pity he pre-empted Oliver though as I was hoping Oliver would complete the tripple.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Apr 29, 2018 18:43:52 GMT
hear hear John, Carl, wonderful, I would be so sad if our beloved MS disappears - i don't particularly care for the present editor and still think they are missing a writer, i know Roebuck isn't popular here but someone like the late Jabby or perhaps someone like the retired Gordon Kirkby or a European writer - actually yea - that would work, i would really welcome that but who? nominations? Somewhere there must be a young Pete Lyons... We can always live in hope Carl. With regard to Chris' comment about Gordon Kirby, I used to read his reports from America in Autosport for years and liked them, however my respect for the man dropped like a stone when he actually referred to Ronnie Peterson as being none too bright! An absolute disgrace putting something like that in print even if it were to be true, which incidentally it was not. I actually responded to that on the MS site but received no reply, yet another example of one of these specialists being brought to book by us "plebs".
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Apr 29, 2018 19:58:02 GMT
thanks Lucio, enjoyed reading that- and would agree wholeheartedly with David Tremayne, trouble is he wrote for MS after Jenks left and i get the feeling it wasn't the best experience of his life, but he would be very welcome, and sadly what you say about MS rings true, it isn't what it once was and is any motor racing magazine at the previous heights, certainly Autosport is hardly the leading light now, but as for NR I did have a long standing argument with NR over Jimmy and Stirling and give him his due he did reply, but it was clear he didn't like responding to his articles, and seemed to have little patience with anyone who disagreed but i inconsistently liked him, got a bit sick about Alonso but, you are so right - it is different now, the internet has opened up worlds and NR doesn't seem to welcome that to much
with regards to Mark, technically he must be the most informed journalist I have ever read, but as you say the human element isn't so strong, but a super bloke in person and approachable, I bought his 1970 book and found it very interesting and thoroughly enjoyed meeting him - what came across was that he is a fan of a certain quiet Scot,
Carl, wouldn't it be great and soon please
John, eeh - i am thunderstruck, I had no idea Gordon wrote something like that, aw that is a shame, I had liked Gordon whose quiet prose I enjoyed, disappointed now - and his lack of response doesn't surprise me, you tend to get a reply when you pay a compliment as I got one from the editor for saying what a pleasure it was to meet Mark,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2018 20:54:09 GMT
Chris, I have no doubt Mark Hughes is a great guy and it is not easy to deal with internet comments, some (most?) from crackpots.
I recall Kirby's comment about Ronnie, I posted on that same thread about the 78, and was shocked that someone, let alone an alleged journalist, could be allowed to write that nonsense. Kirby has a long history of being dismissive of F1. Reading him lately, one was led to believe that Unser Jr was instantly quicker than Damon Hill and Patrese on the Williams, or that Rick Mears would have walked, or even had a chance on a Brabham, in F1.
In general, those journalists, they are all very defensive, they don't take criticism at all. The fact they relate to "Lewis" or "Adrian" not only does not impress me in the slightest, it leaves me stone cold and reinforce my conviction that they should stick to the day job - report the facts, and only that.
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Apr 30, 2018 6:38:05 GMT
I don't think you can be thick and drive a Formula 1 car to the limits like these guys do. Ronnie was to bright for Kirby and probably found his questions too inane to spend much time on.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Apr 30, 2018 11:12:28 GMT
I might be incorrect here but from what I know most of those that populated the British motor sport journals were the "old boy" Public School set. I hardly know of any that were from good working class backgrounds. A guy who used to make good comments on the MS Forum about four years ago often went on about this. I was always surprised that they were not removed, but such is indifferent arrogance.
Lucio's observations are profound and telling; he is spot on about the change in dynamics thanks to the internet. Now everyone can make known their feelings and ideas, and the research potential is quite simply breath taking. The one downside is the influx of the idiots who "troll" the sites and ruin what was once good with their poisonous diatribe.
The MS site was good at one time but signing up to DISGUST was a fundamental error; they would have been far better off making the comments a subscription based system. What it has done though is to bring about something like our excellent and wonderful forum. We don't always agree with one another but not one cross word has ever occurred, for one simple reason we all respect one another.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Apr 30, 2018 17:43:14 GMT
I have just read a few more chapters of the Didier Pironi book, mostly the lead up to Imola 1982 and the events of the day. A very good read and there is little doubt that the author had little time for the stuff written by certain members of the press. Roebuck's work was quoted in one section and in the context of the book it was pretty appalling.
The book is only available in soft back format and comes in at under a tenner GBP, and is well worth a read. It is interesting to read that both Gilles and Didier were not unlike Jim Clark in that they were somewhat ladies men. The reason that Giles was not at Didier's wedding was probably due to Gilles and Joanne having a very difficult period in their relationship at that time.
One sad thing is the fact that the two lads were very good friends before Imola. So much so that while Didier was having a romantic time with a lady he had known for some years, Gilles was playing the piano in the background. They don't even write movie scripts like that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 18:22:20 GMT
I do have that book at the top of my list, just waiting for a work situation to be clarified (may, or may not, move to the Far East shortly for few months) before making the order. It was reported on Autosprint or Rombo at the time that the Villeneuves went through a rocky patch in their marriage, and Pironi was quite a ladies man, he had a lover right until the day before (I bet also the day after... ) he got married to the French singer Veronique Jannot, which marriage didn't last long. The distance of time, as far as I am concerned, has removed all vested interests I had at the time and that often clouded my judgement. The result is to re-discover great - sometimes tragic, unfortunately - human and sporting stories that at the time I overlooked. Reutemann, Pironi, Villeneuve too (for me at least) and re-assess them under a more objective light.
|
|
|
Post by René on Apr 30, 2018 18:28:29 GMT
Joanne was also not present at that fateful day in Belgium. They say because of the first communion of Mélanie. It was all so tragic.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Apr 30, 2018 18:43:02 GMT
Lucio,
Ms Jannot was the love of Didier's life, he met her after he married. The marriage was something he was not certain about but the lady was somewhat determined to marry. It then transpires that it ended very swiftly after Pironi found out about an affair.
He certainly was a ladies man, according to the book.
René,
The Villeneuve's relationship was very rocky at that time and it is disclosed in the Pironi book that Gilles had a lady in Toronto (i think), so all was not good there.
My how times change, you do not hear of things like that now in the squeaky clean F1 of today.
JC
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 19:03:34 GMT
Lucio, Ms Jannot was the love of Didier's life, he met her after he married. The marriage was something he was not certain about but the lady was somewhat determined to marry. It then transpires that it ended very swiftly after Pironi found out about an affair. He certainly was a ladies man, according to the book. René, The Villeneuve's relationship was very rocky at that time and it is disclosed in the Pironi book that Gilles had a lady in Toronto (i think), so all was not good there. My how times change, you do not hear of things like that now in the squeaky clean F1 of today. JC JC, now I recall I read at the time about Pironi finding about an affair in relation to Ms Jannot (without details), but didn't know about Gilles having a lady somewhere, the Villeneuves looked always such a close family, moving with the children around the circuits. Different times indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Apr 30, 2018 19:52:10 GMT
I think in the Donaldson biography it talks of Gaston Parent hiding evidence of Gilles’ affair........different times.
The Pironi book is well worth a read, I really enjoyed it. It’s written by a Pironi fan of course, much as the pro Villeneuve stuff is written by his own supporters......I had that in mind when I read it after the excellent opinions of the Imola fracas from the ROTRT.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Apr 30, 2018 20:07:17 GMT
Chris, I have no doubt Mark Hughes is a great guy and it is not easy to deal with internet comments, some (most?) from crackpots. I recall Kirby's comment about Ronnie, I posted on that same thread about the 78, and was shocked that someone, let alone an alleged journalist, could be allowed to write that nonsense. Kirby has a long history of being dismissive of F1. Reading him lately, one was led to believe that Unser Jr was instantly quicker than Damon Hill and Patrese on the Williams, or that Rick Mears would have walked, or even had a chance on a Brabham, in F1. In general, those journalists, they are all very defensive, they don't take criticism at all. The fact they relate to "Lewis" or "Adrian" not only does not impress me in the slightest, it leaves me stone cold and reinforce my conviction that they should stick to the day job - report the facts, and only that. Don’t know much about Kirby to be honest but he was right anout Rick Mears.........but then I am a big Mears fan 😂
|
|