Heroes and Villains

[charleselan]

René, I think we are at crossed purposes here. My understanding is that we are talking about the end of 1978. Ferrari had Carlos Reutemann, and were signing Jody Scheckter, so it would appear that Gilles was out of a drive for 1979. However Carlos then decided to sign for Lotus thus freeing up the seat at Ferrari alongside Jody.

If Carlos had stayed I have little doubt that one of the UK based teams would have picked Gilles up, if not he would have been a shoe in to replace James Hunt when he retired mid season, at Wolf. The car was a dog, but I think he would have moved on from there pretty quickly.

[chrisb]

somehow I just couldn't see Carlos and Jody in the same team, maybe I'm wrong but....

Given how well the 79 had gone and had Carlos stayed with Ferrari Gilles could well have ended up at Lotus - now that would have been fun - in the unfortunate Lotus 80 - ah well- perhaps not - but i would have loved it 

[René]

Jul 14, 2018 13:29:06 GMT charleselan said:

René, I think we are at crossed purposes here. My understanding is that we are talking about the end of 1978. Ferrari had Carlos Reutemann, and were signing Jody Scheckter, so it would appear that Gilles was out of a drive for 1979. However Carlos then decided to sign for Lotus thus freeing up the seat at Ferrari alongside Jody.

If Carlos had stayed I have little doubt that one of the UK based teams would have picked Gilles up, if not he would have been a shoe in to replace James Hunt when he retired mid season, at Wolf. The car was a dog, but I think he would have moved on from there pretty quickly.

Ah yes of course, I was on the wrong page! Holiday mode I guess.

[Deleted]

Ten years since that infamous GP, and this piece from the BBC asks who sanctioned it. I thought that was clear – Briatore and Symonds.

www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/45459334

The BBC thus is asking the wrong question. What would be interesting to know is who came up with that idea. That is an open question.

Frank Dernie, among (many?) others, is not shy to show all his contempt towards Briatore, saying he was only good in the commercial side of the business, not on the sporting-technical one. [he said that at one of the Hertfordshire film shows I attended]. Hence, I would find it unlikely it was Briatore who had the genius spark.


Who, then? Mmm.

[robmarsh]

I think it was Piquet jr, i read that somewhere a while back. Regardless of whether he did or didn't I think he showed a double lack of morals. First for agreeing and then second for spilling the beans because he was being fired. I know this may sound really horrible but I wouldn't be surprised if Piquet senior was more involved than he should have been.

[Deleted]

You are right, now I recall reading that it was Piquet Jr who claimed he put the idea to the team management.

It's almost unbelievable the sheer idiocy of all that, before any ethical judgement.

He could have gotten the idea from Sr, wouldn't be surprised.

[Deleted]

Look at this, more than a villain, he is mentally challenged. A comedian worth an Oscar.

[René]

That is not normal! Piquet Jr's nephew?

[Deleted]

People are mad.

[Deleted]

Hero?

[Deleted]

As I was saying...

[chrisb]

fortunately, I have now fitted a dash-cam

[Carl]

Here's another well-reasoned MS comment by Bill in Sydney, who may soon need an agent, responding to severe criticism of Andrew Frankel's article about Lewis Hamilton, whose character is rancorously debated and on whose epaulettes the future of goodness may rest. 

---------------

motorsportmagazine.com F1 Opinion by Andrew Frankel, September 17th 2018

Bill in Sydney > DR

"I don't agree. To say that the author is 'disgusting' and 'racist' is unconscionable and downright unfair. The article is nothing of the sort - in fact, quite the contrary. Frankel is all praise and admiration!

Grow up, Kay and DR, and read it again. It's an opinion piece and it's a timely one as my favourite driver powers toward his fifth title. Hamilton's public petulance and inelegant behaviour is well-known and disappointing and he lets himself down when he slips into it - jumping to conclude that Frankel is 'racist' for expressing an opinion and calling Hamilton out is not only nasty but borderline dumb.

Check the look of wonder on that karting kid's face in the clip I posted above/below - how Lewis Hamilton behaves in public MATTERS because thousands of kids like him look up to Lewis and watch his every move.

It's something he needs to be made aware of and it's something he needs to cut right out. It's unbecoming and not reflective of the real Lewis, in my opinion."

  ---------------

His comment goes on to discuss the state of race relations in Australia and that is not included here.

Cheers, Carl

[Deleted]

I agree it’s not a “racist” piece or “disgusting”. It seems to me it has nothing to do with Hamilton, rather with the writer’s own problem, as he sees the public man. The writer is not very specific on his criticism; he says:

But while Lewis Hamilton the driver only got better as his star ascended to the heavens and the championships started piling up, Lewis Hamilton the person seemed, at least to me, to have forgotten how lucky he was to have been born with a talent so sublime as to have afforded him a life of which the rest of us could not possibly dream.

He should have expanded that further, trying to point out where Hamilton came short of Frankel’s expectations. Frankly I don’t know what did he expect. For the little I know, I can’t recall Hamilton behaving that badly, but as I said I am really not interested in their private lives, nor I take them as role models (at my age…). The bottom line is that they are all humans, not saints.

The issue is trying to ascribe them moral qualities which often we don’t have ourselves in the first place. Trying to invest celebrities, most of which have only been lucky in the lottery of life – lucky to have born with a skill or in riches or with looks etc – with our moral expectations, it tells everything about ourselves, rather than them in the specific.
Then, in this case I do believe there is also a cultural thing at play, all internal to the public discourse in Britain today - or the denial of it.

It has also been pointed out that the writer seemingly was not compelled to write something similar when Vettel, to make one example, covered of abuse the race director in Mexico. Many other cases could be quoted too. For example, personally, I always felt unease with Senna’s public persona, his studied intensity and almost “messianic” attitude. But what did I know, I never met him, nor was I interested to. I just looked at the driver, incredibly gifted, but also capable to send a competitor off track at 150mph on purpose, because he thought he had God’s ear.

It is always difficult to judge people, especially when one doesn’t know them, and particlarly when they are “public”. The writer says he would like to spend a couple of hours with Hamilton. I say, he should get a life instead and enjoy it. Watch them racing, appreciate the sporting gesture, and then forget about Hamilton and co.

[charleselan]

Sept 20, 2018 20:36:34 GMT Carl said:

Here's another well-reasoned MS comment by Bill in Sydney, who may soon need an agent, responding to severe criticism of Andrew Frankel's article about Lewis Hamilton, whose character is rancorously debated and on whose epaulettes the future of goodness may rest. 

---------------

motorsportmagazine.com F1 Opinion by Andrew Frankel, September 17th 2018

Bill in Sydney > DR

"I don't agree. To say that the author is 'disgusting' and 'racist' is unconscionable and downright unfair. The article is nothing of the sort - in fact, quite the contrary. Frankel is all praise and admiration!

Grow up, Kay and DR, and read it again. It's an opinion piece and it's a timely one as my favourite driver powers toward his fifth title. Hamilton's public petulance and inelegant behaviour is well-known and disappointing and he lets himself down when he slips into it - jumping to conclude that Frankel is 'racist' for expressing an opinion and calling Hamilton out is not only nasty but borderline dumb.

Check the look of wonder on that karting kid's face in the clip I posted above/below - how Lewis Hamilton behaves in public MATTERS because thousands of kids like him look up to Lewis and watch his every move.

It's something he needs to be made aware of and it's something he needs to cut right out. It's unbecoming and not reflective of the real Lewis, in my opinion."

  ---------------

His comment goes on to discuss the state of race relations in Australia and that is not included here.

Cheers, Carl

Thanks for posting this Carl, very interesting to read and good for Bill as that site badly needs more like him, men with balance.
I have always had time for Bill as his comments are always excellent even if he sometimes gets caught up in some flippancy that can detract from his main points.

It actually prompted me go onto MS and read the feature and comments, Jeez some of the cr*p written on there is disgusting and just shows how ill educated and lacking in knowledge most of those fools are. I am not a big fan of Frankel but the article was sound and well reasoned and expressed his values which were dismissed by those that disagree as racist. By implication then I must be, as I share the same values.

In actual fact I couldn't care less if the subject was "sky blue pink", it matters not a jot to me, but sportsmanship; decorum; honour and respect do. If I am happy to openly criticise a close relative for poor public speaking (see MotoGP post), then i am entitled to do so of anyone else, as those are my values and those that I would wish to apply to any offspring.

In closing, how the blazes did that pr*ck DR know that you were Carl?

Cheers

JC