|
|
Post by robmarsh on Jul 12, 2018 6:34:47 GMT
A quick flick through the index reveals that Andrea and Keke get quite a few mentions so I’ll let you know when I’ve read it through. Just started to read this one....the book purports to be warts and all and is a biography so we’ll see. I will be very interested in your views on the book Jamie and whether it is worth getting. Like Lucio I didn't really warm to John Barnard but it was about a period of F1 which I followed very closely via TV, at least 3 magazines and annuals so would be interested in his insights. |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Jul 12, 2018 6:45:12 GMT
I’ve just read the first couple of chapters on the train to work and I’m very much enjoying it so far.
The author makes it clear that John was, and remains, a quite difficult character....
The author is quite obviously not a motor racing expert which will possibly allow John’s real opinions to take precedent with none of the authors natural take on things......maybe, I hope so anyway, haven’t got into any of the racing stuff yet.
I’ll post a review when I’ve got through it 👍
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Jul 12, 2018 12:45:07 GMT
I viewed an interview with John Barnard that was i believe on S*YF1 and in that he was OK, not too opinionated or full of himself, in fact I quite liked the interview. However there can be little doubt that he was a difficult character, mind you not that Adrian Newey comes across as an easy personality. Reading the brief summary featured on MS it does a real hatchet job on Andrea de Cesaris which wasn't really necessary as we all know he crashed a lot early on in his career, and then some afterwards, but the lad was quick at times. He was a darn sight more useful than a certain Canadian of contemporary times  . It doesn't really matter what Barnard's comments are about Keke are, as we all know they didn't gel. To sign a guy who you know full well has a certain driving style and then make a car, or should i say set a car up that is totally alien to him, well........ A man of his time and a great designer with some superb innovations, but I prefer the Colin Chapman's & Gordon Murray's of this world. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2018 15:34:56 GMT
They – Dennis and Barnard – were prejudiced towards De Cesaris form the first moment on, they never gave him a fair chance, they judged every single move he might or might not have made. Not easy for a deb in that kind of environment and with that attitude towards you. I didn’t like De Cesaris at all personally, and I do appreciate Barnard and Dennis were upstarts hell-bent to make their marks at the time, but three and a half decades after one would suppose they would have a bit more of perspective and show some understanding and magnanimity for someone in his first full F1 season. They never liked Italians – Dennis and Barnard – never understood whether they are thick like that naturally or as result of dealing with De Cesaris, but I would say it comes natural to people like that.
On the issue of the Canadian, I recall when De Cesaris crashed at Silverstone as a result of Villeneuve causing mayhem at Woodcote, if I recall right. I always thought Andrea was in the right in that occasion, but nobody cared. The comparison with Villeneuve also shows how very different the attitudes towards the two were. On one side, Ferrari stick by him in public through thick and (lot of) thin. On the other, instead… As I have said many times, many have the basic talent requirements, it's the confidence that makes the trick and gets you to the next level. Gilles (or Mansell and others) made it, De Cesaris (Patrese etc) never really did it. |
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Jul 12, 2018 17:29:00 GMT
I think one must remember that this is a biography telling a story, it’s not JB’s own words, so it’s right to tell it how it was, however unpalatable.
I wonder if Marlboro’s placing of him in the team was the only factor in their general dislike of him or if there was more to it, it’s obvious they didn’t rate him and they probably had a point there, but it does seem disproportionately venomous certainly.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Jul 12, 2018 18:53:39 GMT
JC - sorry did i misunderstand [the Canadian? you but were you referring to Stroll?
Lucio, i was at Silverstone on Woodcote and saw the accident that Gilles had, those cars were just rock solid and he just lost it over the hump of the chicane and in the ensuing smoke Andrea took what he believed was his only option, and that definitely wasn't his fault - I do remember some intereviews with Andrea after he retired and he came across as a realy nice guy and to lose your life in that way after all that you had been through was awful
I seem to vaguely to recollect an interview with John Barnard - possibly 'a lunch with?' must have a wee look, but from what I remember he came across as single minded but not that bad a bloke, i will have to check what he said about Andrea but i suspect Jamie is spot on given how Dennis was when he was told to do something that would not have gone down well, and given Dennis's already obvious paranoiac personality that would have really bugged him and even if de - Cesaris had won a GP Dennis would not have forgiven him,
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Jul 12, 2018 19:18:16 GMT
there was an interview with JB in June 2010 but it was primarily about his time at Ferrari and barely mentions anything else
|
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Jul 12, 2018 19:27:48 GMT
I have to say the book is brilliant and it’s hard to put it down at the moment, an excellent addition to my collection.
|
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Jul 12, 2018 21:22:09 GMT
JC - sorry did i misunderstand [the Canadian? you but were you referring to Stroll? Blimey Chris you cannot for one minute think I was referring to Gilles. Probably not well explained by me on that; of course I was referring to Stroll. As quick as he was on his day Andrea de Cesaris was not in the same class as Gilles, and could never have risen to the heights that the French Canadian attained. |
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Jul 13, 2018 1:12:26 GMT
...I suspect Jamie is spot on given how Dennis was when he was told to do something that would not have gone down well, and given Dennis's already obvious paranoiac personality that would have really bugged him and even if de - Cesaris had won a GP Dennis would not have forgiven him, Chris, Well said! Sometime ago in Motor Sport's comment section, I may have encountered Ron Dennis and the arrogant rage displayed could easily have been stoked by massive paranoia. In the comment to which (I presume Dennis) responded, I had credited him and Bernie Ecclestone with delivering our sport into corporate servitude. A more rational paranoiac might have conceded the point... 
Cheers, Carl
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2018 1:45:41 GMT
In 1978 Villeneuve didn’t look any better than De Cesaris in 1981, and if it wasn’t for Reutemann giving the boot to Ferrari and moving to Lotus, motorsport history would have been VERY different.
I thought the Canadian referred to was Villeneuve. Seriously, if you guys are comparing Stroll to De Cesaris then please continue this discussion without me.
Hindsight is 20/20, as they say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carl on Jul 13, 2018 3:48:12 GMT
In 1978 Villeneuve didn’t look any better than De Cesaris in 1981, and if it wasn’t for Reutemann giving the boot to Ferrari and moving to Lotus, motorsport history would have been VERY different. I thought the Canadian referred to was Villeneuve. Seriously, if you guys are comparing Stroll to De Cesaris then please continue this discussion without me. Hindsight is 20/20, as they say. I thought John Charles' reference to a Canadian "contemporary" meant a contemporary of De Cesaris who also had more than his share of bent monocoques, namely Gilles Villeneuve.
Formula One has had champions whose success owed more to dumb luck than they can admit and many more with championship potential who never had a chance. The powerful in Formula One can be as arbitrary and capricious as elites anywhere and as cruel as teenage girls born rich and amoral.
Nonetheless, I think Gilles Villeneuve's extraordinary ability would have brought great success in any competitive car. It may have been tragic fate that the acutely perceptive Enzo Ferrari fully understood his innate talent. His affection and patience despite the crashes probably inspired an equal loyalty toward Ferrari in Villeneuve. Fate... |
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Jul 13, 2018 11:43:40 GMT
As I mentioned to Chris, my sentence mentioning "contemporary" was not well written as I meant the word as "now and current F1", so hence Stroll.
I originated the analogy in comparing de Cesaris with Stroll, not with regard to driving ability but through the fact that they arrived at their drives through substantial sponsorship, and to a certain extent family contacts. Andrea's whole career was supported by Marlboro Italy, and through it he gain drives that if we were to be honest would have been better served with other drivers of that period. From memory Andrea did two full seasons of British F3 with Marlboro sponsorship and should have won in 1979 but lost out to Chico Serra following too many accidents.
Towards the end of that year Mike Thackwell (still in his teens) arrived in the factory March 793 and blew everyones doors off.
I cannot believe that Lucio feels that de Cesaris' 1981 season was comparable with Gilles Villeneuve 1978 year; yes Gilles had a few accidents, one early coming together with Ronnie Peterson drew the remark from the Swede that Villeneuve "lacked judgement". However that being said Gilles also put in some stunning drives including a race victory, especially considering he was paired with one of the real great drivers in Carlos Reutemann.
It has been discussed many times on the internet forums of late that Gilles was on the cusp of loosing that Ferrari drive, but I have no knowledge of it being written in any Uk publication at the time. Even if he had have been dropped there would have been little doubt that one of the British teams would have signed him, and that being said the whole outcome of history may have been very different for all concerned.
|
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Jul 14, 2018 7:36:51 GMT
Gilles had his crash with Ronnie Peterson at the Japenese GP IN 1977. I think that was his third or fourth race for Ferrari. GV led the first half of the USA GP West at Long Beach, the fourth round of the 1978 season. Sadly he made a bit of a mistake and clouted the wall when lapping Reggazoni, and retired. Reuteman won. DSJ was effusive in his praise of GV after that race. GV won in Canada 1978 could have won Monza earlier. His 1978 rookie season was better than a lot of more experienced drivers and his learning curve was steep. No way was his first season on a par with De Ceaseris, it was way higher. Sadly to my eyes De Ceaseris, though blindingly fast on occasion, made too many mistakes and never seemed to learn from them. I agree with Charles that there were more deserving drivers at the time, but there will always be drivers in F1 that are there because of connections and money and not talent. I wonder how many of the kids of F1 drivers in the 70s 80s and 90s have tried to get to F1 and have progressed more through connections than talent.
|
|
|
|
Post by René on Jul 14, 2018 10:00:49 GMT
It has been discussed many times on the internet forums of late that Gilles was on the cusp of loosing that Ferrari drive. As far as I remember it was not so much a case of Gilles being dropped by Ferrari but more a matter of Gilles having a look around (McLaren and Williams both showed interest) after two uncompetitive seasons at Ferrari in 1980 and 81. A situation that could easily have changed if 1982 had not been so crude. If Gilles had been WDC that year, he probably would have resigned. At least, this is how I always understood it was. |
|
.
