Governments and F1

[lkjohnson1950]

Joe Saward takes Bernie's side today in his Blog:

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/

He seems to feel it's more important to be global than to preserve the connection to the past. What do you guys think?

Lonny

[Scott]

It's a bit late in the day to be applying for work with Bernie, but hey Joe, maybe he'll be around another 15 years for all we know.  I can't remember the percentage for the word I'm thinking of, but he's definetely giving more than 100%.

Seriously, the only part of the article I agree with is the bit at the end about Tilke.  Comparing F1 to the Olympics is insane.  The infrastructure legacy from the Olympics is enjoyed by cities for decades afterwards.  An abandoned racetrack, or one used once a year, is a waste of land and an eyesore.  If Bernie wants better infrastructure, bring more to the venue that people can enjoy year round.

[John S]

Have to agree with Scott on this one Lonny, the Olympics is in a whole different class both in participation by nations & individuals, and in world politics. I think Joe is confusing world markets with the politics of the world, the two are certainly not interchangeble. F1 is only ever able to work with and influence at a national level in politics, if at all, now the Olympics is in a whole different league above that.

For me the big mistake is not paying enough attention to the sporting element and show of F1, without tracks both good and varied enough to be a true test of the driver's and car's abilities the show will inevitably be the poorer.  That is not to say that all the old circuits have to be kept, but more brains must have input to track design Tike should not have free reign to keep repeating follies endlessly, Formula 1 doesn't allow one man to design cars for more one team, so why have one man create all the circuits these highly individual cars must race on.

 

[cosworth151]

I have to strongly disagree with Mr. Saward on this one. Governments should have nothing to do with F1 (or any other professional sports), and vice versa. As much as I love racing, taxpayers shouldn't have to pick up the tab for any sport. In bad times like these, taxpayers are less and less likely to vote to spend scarce financial resources on sporting venues. That will inevitably lead to F1 moving away from democracies and into dictatorships. Is that what we want?

I'd love to see F1 back at Indy, but I surely don't want my tax dollars lining Bernie's pockets!

[Jericoke]

It is a little weird to compare F1 with the Olympics.  (Although I'd love motor racing to be an Olympic event!) I suppose a country could use an F1 race to show off to the world, but I don't know that any of the current races do that... except perhaps the races run in a city-state.

Certainly the Canadian Grand Prix does show off the city of Montreal (using infrastructure left over from a government sponsored World's Fair!), and while it's a debateable use of money, the government is breaking even on it. 

I agree that the sport should spread.  If for no other reason, older facilities should be modernised to compete with potential new locations.


(PS, back to racing at the Olympics...   surely karting would be reasonable?  The FIA would gain plenty in the USA if they could get the top NASCAR drivers into the Olympics alongside Schumacher and Hamilton!  Drivers from smaller nations would have a great stage as well.)

[Scott]

And don't forget Montreal '76 too - Olympics helped build the infrastructure around what was left over from Expo '67.

[lkjohnson1950]

You guys pretty much said what I was thinking. I was just surprised that someone who seems to know F1 so well could be so far off what I thought. F1 needs the Spa, Monza, Silverstone etc. to connect with it's history. You have no foundation wothout a connection to the past. On those circuits you can "see" Nuvolari, Fangio, Moss, Clark as well as the current crew. Too much of F1 is just about the dollars in Bernie's pocket and I was shocked to read Saward siding with Bernie. If Bernie went away there would still be F1, might even be better.

Lonny

[Ian]

It's not just the history factor Lonny, they are REAL racing circuits.

[lkjohnson1950]

So why don't more people go to Spa? Too expensive, No facilities, Can't see properly?

Lonny

[cosworth151]

I've never been there, but I've heard and read many reports of the local law enforcement personnel at Spa making life miserable for the fans.

[Scott]

I had heard that too, but Ian and I met a Kiwi in Monza who had just come from Spa and he had nothing but great reviews - no mention of security hassles or anything.   

[Ian]

How do you fancy Silverstone next year Scott.

[Alianora La Canta]

Spa has the twin problems of high prices (like most circuits) and competition with the German Grand Prix (both lose spectators because people can only afford one or the other). It doesn't help that not every seat can see a big screen, meaning some of the power of the circuit is lost if you turn up live. It's easier to appreciate great corners if you have a clue as to what's happening elsewhere and don't have to worry which seat you buy in order to get that.

[lkjohnson1950]

Welcome back Alia.

Lonny

[John S]

Yeah nice to have you back Ali.

I'm sure you are right about the German race affecting Spa, with the gap on the calendar usually only 4 weeks between the two, even enthusiastic fans must find the races are too close, geographically as well as the date. I think putting a bigger gap by moving Spa earlier in the calendar, end of May for instance, and  the German GP to end of August could help. The weather also plays a big part at Spa, with it's current place on the calendar it seems to fall more into inclement weather, so moving it might not be a bad thing. With Turkey likely to be dropped in the next couple of Years moving the Belgian GP could be an option.