McLaren will continue to let drivers race

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: McLaren won’t “compromise our values” and will let their drivers race each other on the track.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

McLaren tell Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button to carry on racing (The Guardian)

Jonathan Neale: “We are not about to compromise our values and what we believe with our racing at McLaren. When we were in Canada we let them get on with it and they had a coming together. It’s risky but when you have back-to-back world champs you have to respect they are the ones there in the moment.”

Jake Humphrey on Twitter

“Yesterday’s BBC F1 programme was the most watched show, on any channel, at any time, all day long. Wow. Thank you.”

Via the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app

RBS analysts hail BSkyB’s Formula 1 success (Proactive Investors)

“Many of the F1 viewers will no doubt be Sky subscribers, but F1 fans who are not Sky customers now have a reason to subscribe, while those F1 fans who are Sky customers are less likely to churn.”

Lotus vs Lotus – Round Two: More Details Revealed (The Race Driver)

“If Mr Fernandes’ latest evidence had been presented when it should have been, when this purchase of Caterham had been carried out, my judgement might well have been different…”

Much work before the summer break (Ferrari)

“One department that is going to be under a lot of pressure in the next few days is Production, which since the recent reorganisation, is led by Corrado Lanzone: the aim is to produce all the planned updates from the development programme, especially in terms of the car’s aerodynamic package, in time for the next race.”

Renault’s Hungarian sidepod fire (ScarbsF1)

“When this aluminium cylinder was heated in the flames and then suddenly cooled by the marshals extinguisher, the casing shattered sending the pressurised gas out in a hail of debris.”

Follow F1 news as it breaks using the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app.

Comment of the day

Harvs spotted an interesting trend in the Hungarian Grand Prix:

The driver who has been in third position out of the first corner has ended up winning the race for the last four years.

2008 – First Massa, second Hamilton, third Kovalainen (winner)
2009 – First Alonso, second Webber, third Hamilton (winner)
2010 – First Vettel, second Alonso, third Webber (winner)
2011 – First Vettel, second Hamilton, third Button (winner)

From the forum

Galvinc is planning a trip to next year’s Goodwood Festival of Speed and is looking for tips.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Daniel and Nefer!

On this day in F1

Nelson Piquet won the German Grand Prix at the Hockenheimring 30 years ago today.

Alain Prost finished second, coming out on top in a battle with Alan Jones.

Jacuqes Laffite completed the podium for Ligier.

Here are the opening laps of the race:

Image © McLaren

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

85 comments on “McLaren will continue to let drivers race”

  1. Listen to that Horner… listen…

    And you too Ferrari…

    1. yes or just look to the untold physiological damage done on Felipe Massa for further evidence.

      1. as someone who supported hamilton throughout 07/08, after massa pushed lewis hard and was very graceful in defeat i started to like him, and now i think that after his accident he wasnt fully ready, then being teamed with alonso and after team orders his confidence took a huge blow and he hasnt really got it back, shame, alonso is good but i dont think the massa of old would get out qualified for almost a year on the trot!

        1. Ya, I was actually wanting Hamilton to win then too against Massa but defo wouldn’t be that way now.

          Think Massa seems to be the type of driver who thrives on confidence and maybe hasn’t the same mental strength of say a Webber.

          If he somehow got a win in the bag I think he would suddenly be the Massa of old again but he is not only fighting a very good Alonso but a team who keep screwing up his races with badly timed pit stops probably supposed to help Alonso in some way.

          I just wonder if Ferrari didn’t rob him of that emotional win last year how different things might be now and maybe even toward end of last season he might have helped Alonso win championship.

        2. I also belive the 2008-2009 Massa would give Alonso a nice fair fight.

          But after Germany 2010, that’s very unlikely to happen.

          1. Yeah, his mental damage is too big. but if he is 1st class driver, he should get over it.

          2. I believe 2008 was last chance for Massa to win WDC. Now he’ll never win.

          3. @Nin13 wrote: “I believe 2008 was last chance for Massa to win WDC. Now he’ll never win.” Funny, I was thinking the exact same thing about Hamilton.

    2. This team mates racing is all good and well in theroy but I,m not so sure. Button only seems to race Lewis hard,no other drivers. I cant think of any other drivers other than Lewis that he has put in a wall as he did Lewis in Canada. If Schumi had done that to any driver, well. And then in Cataluna he just let Vettel waltz on by without the slightest whimper.Race everybody hard, not just Lewis.

      1. I’d have to disagree that JB is only racing LH hard…I don’t think he won in Canada and in Hungary by only racing one guy. I also think it is incorrect to say JB put LH in a wall in Canada. LH was trying to squeeze himself between the wall and JB, but JB was on the normal racing line. LH was the trailing driver so it was up to him to see the situation and see that room was inevitably going to run out. He should not have expected any driver to move themselves off the racing line just to make room for him at the particular spot.

        And sure, if MS had done it there would have been a lot more talk and analysis…why? Because MS has a reputation for this type of thing. JB does not.

        1. Schumacher has a reputation to be awesome :-D
          I really hope next year he’ll have a car that suits him perfectly and is capable of winning races so we can see him race extremely hard at the front once again. Sure he might get penalties and people will hate him more again, but I want to see that old Schumacher again on track, the man who converted me from a fan to an f1fanatic in the 90s.

          Sorry for getting off topic.

          1. I don’t think it is that far off topic…this is about drivers being allowed to race each other, and the old MS that converted you from a fan to a fanatic had a perfectly suited car because it was built with him in mind and he had the luxury of teammates that were not supposed to race him, and so they didn’t, which is why I share the opposite view to yours. But hey, thank goodness we don’t all think alike or wouldn’t life be boring.

        2. But you wouldn’t expect your teammate to put you in the wall. In 200 races I can’t recall any other time Button has put a driver into the wall. I mean would,nt it be of more benefit for Button to put Vettel in the wall than his own teammate.

          1. Matty…I think you are among the minority in describing JB’s action as putting his teammate in the wall…it was LH that tried to put himself between JB and the wall at a spot where all JB was doing was taking the normal racing line…and since you can’t recall another time that JB did something like this in 200 GPs, I’d suggest you give him the benefit of the doubt you seem to have that he likely was just taking his normal racing line.

    3. Hewis Lamilton
      2nd August 2011, 14:54

      Yes, listen to that Coulthard and Hakkinen. No wait, it is ok when it is McLaren issueing team orders.

      1. For sure…as I recall at least one race with DC and MH where the team order was something like whoever had pole, or was it whoever gained the first corner first between the two of them would have the nod for the win if it worked out that they would both be there for it in the end.

    4. Let’s see… McLaren has won exactly one WCC since 1991 (in 1998) and one WDC since 1999 (in 2008) and that was by luck and a single point. In 2007 they went to the trouble and expense to bring the current two-time WDC to the team. Instead of throwing their full support to Alonso, the team made a choice to support the hot new rookie. Yes, Hamilton was great in his rookie season, but, like a rookie, he choked a 17-point lead away and McLaren walked away again with nothing. Hamilton won in 2008, but only because of Ferrari’s late season errors and mechanical problems. Had they supported Alonso and groomed Hamilton they would have easily won both championships in 2007 and 2008, saved $100 million, and probably would have built a bulletproof team, with two outstanding drivers, for several years to come. Now they can only win the occasional race and finish second or third every year in the WDC. Listen to that Whitmarsh… listen… And you too Dennis…

    5. Exactly. It does give you a tougher task of beating someone, but I think this is good for the lovers of the sport. Who knows, if they really keep to this, they might even get a big load of new fans.

      Although, if you look at it from another agngle, McLaren is not going to win any championship this year, they might as well get most out of their drivers to please the fans and sponsors by having great on track action this year.
      Making it acceptance of defeat but making the most out of it.

    6. In the last 11 years Red-Bull look as if they’ll have 4 titles, Renault have 4 and Ferrari have 13. All used team orders

      McLaren, despite having the most resources and the talent of Montoya, Raikkonen, Alonso, Hamilton and Button, have 1 in those 11 years.

      1. I think the whole problem is that up until MS/Ferrari no team had gone to the ultra-extreme measure of designing and building a car with only one driver in mind while contracting the other driver to not compete against him from race one of each season. This is why I have no respect for MS’s numbers.

        Sure it was a formula that made for record-breaking numbers, but to me it was not racing in the pinnacle of racing…it meant that the paying fans had that element removed…if a Ferrari was going to win, it had been preordained in a boardroom that the winner would be MS.

        One of the unfortunate spinoffs to that era of manipulation of the viewing audience was that in order to compete against that elephant in the room other teams had to decide on designating a number one as early as possible in the season, earlier than usual, once some numbers started to favour one driver on the team, be it Mac or Renault or whoever, as being a potential WDC fighter.

        So when you spew out all these summations of why team orders ‘work’ consider that done the MS/Ferrari way it is not about the pinnacle of racing, not when one driver is not allowed to race his teammate, but about greed and share value, forgoing what the viewing audience would prefer, that is to see all the drivers racing all the other drivers until the season winds down and the math only dictates that some drivers have a WDC shot, some do not, and it shouldn’t take a team order for the driver who hasn’t a WDC shot to not impeded his teammate who does.

  2. Fascinating stat for the COTD, definitely worthy of it.

    I like that McLaren wants to let their guys race, they have the best driver lineup and they handle their drivers far better than Ferrari and Redbull do.

    1. Yes, it;s a good one that. But I’m not sure if McLaren have the best driver line up, it’s hard to say.

      1. I think they have the most balanced line up.

        One driver who drives very aggressively, is a great qualifier, is absolutely stellar in both dry and wet conditions, but also makes mistakes from time to time.

        The second driver isnt all that flashy or quick, but maintains a steady pace, is very consistent, keeps a cool head and is great in changing conditions.

        1. so you like lewis more then?

          1. I’m not a fan of either driver. But yes, I do think Lewis is a few leagues above Jenson as a driver.

    2. If Massa had had a slow start in 2008… he’d have been… WDC…

  3. polishboy808
    2nd August 2011, 0:23

    Good job bye McLaren on letting their drivers battle. That may have cost them some points in Canada, but it shows that they at least still have the racing spirit that many teams are beginning to lose. At the same time, if one of their drivers was clearly faster, and had a much greater chance at winning the WDC, they would probably not allow that. It bothers me that Red Bull did it so obviously at Silverstone, but since it isn’t illegal anymore, not taking advantage of it would be stupid.

    1. i think they would still allow but the drivers themselves would be sensible enough not to. As Ted Kravitz pointed out in his hungarian gp from the pit lane, mclaren don’t even go onto the radio to tell them to be careful or anything, they just let them get on with it knowing they have great respect for eachother and are among the best drivers on the grid

      1. I certainly applaud any team that truly honestly lets both their drivers race it out on the track. I’m a 100% believer in that. I’m not sure that is always going on though, even when the team says it is. We have witnessed that sometimes for one race even, a team order is used just because of the circumstances of said race and where other drivers are in the points for that race and in the standings overall. And it doesn’t matter whether team orders are legal or not. They just had to be more secretive about it before and didn’t even always do that so well.

        If Mac is so sportsmanlike as they claim, then I guess when FA was there he was totally dillusional that the team was favouring LH?

        Anyway, I have always understood that once the math dictates that one driver has a legitimate WDC shot on a team and his teammate does not, then as the season winds down the one driver does not, or should not need a team order to understand he would be a fool and be going against the team and the sponsors to hinder his teammate with the WDC shot. And as long as both drivers had a fair shot from race one, then the driver for whom it didn’t work out must just accept that he had his chance and it just didn’t work out…no need for bitterness…time to think of the team then.

        I think that is what is going on with FM now…he doesn’t need to be told that he has so few points there’s no way he has a WDC shot, so might as well let FA have the lion’s share whenever possible. If after several more races FA is looking to not have a WDC shot either due to SV’s increasing lead, then FM should be ‘allowed’ to race him again.

        So as I say I applaud Mac for letting their drivers race, and at the same time SV must be thrilled to hear that news…he can keep coming second for the rest of the season and still be WDC easily if the remaining wins are split amongst JB, LH, and FA…yet he’ll likely win at least a few more races anyway. I question whether MW will be ‘allowed’ to win another race this year unless SV is too far out to be ‘helped’ which these days would only mean a mechanical issue or contact with someone, the car with it’s driver being that good.

  4. but F1 fans who are not Sky customers now have a reason to subscribe

    Not worth it.

    1. Only a bunch of bankers could see the good in that deal.

      1. “The arguments for protecting events of national resonance and moments that unite the country for the widest audience are absolutely as relevant today as they were when the system was devised.

        “This is not about digital versus analogue, this is about pay versus free-to-air, and our view is that the audience prepared to pay for events is finite, and it is therefore right that a broader more general audience can still access major events.”
        A valid argument but who said it?
        Barbara Slater the woman who with Ben Gallop the BBC F1 boss (who used to work for Sky!) decided to go to sky rather than C4 or Channel Five.

        Hows that all working out for you? The 7000+ comments and 2000+ shares of the article (which STILL doesn’t get it onto the most shared list) give you some indication of the depth of feeling.

      2. To be fair, they say it is a great deal for Sky, not for the fans or for F1.

        And they are of course right, for Sky this is a big opportunity and a major change to grow their customer base and get a more varied (and perhaps a more interesting part of) demographic – good value to ask more money for ads.

        Some positive news for BSkyB after the negative reporting about Murdoch in connection with fully taking them over, which surely cost them share price.

        In a way it is disturbing how that is completely disjunct from how it will effect F1 as a sport, let alone the UK audience, and that ‘s important to keep in mind for how the sport develops.

        To combat that it is important to let FOTA and maybe the FIA, which unlike the F1 teams isn’t about money but about motor sports, know how you feel about this business.

        1. How can they claim many F1 fans are Sky subscribers? Judging by the number of customers (est 3.5million) of Sky Sports, around 1 in 20 people in Britain have it, so therefore only around 1 in 20 F1 fans have it; about 400,000 of the 8 million we have seen recently. That’s not many. Also, the popularity of F1 has tripled or more just this year with the new rules, so the most of the viewers will be new, and thus less likely to want to spend £500 a year on a sport that is new to them. If it’s the most popular show on TV, then it should be kept that way.

          1. Thats 3.5 million households, not people, and F1 fans tend to have above average income and therefore slightly better uptake of Pay TV. If you don’t have Sky maybe you have a friend with it, take a few beers over and watch it at their house, could be fun.

        2. They say its a great deal for us because somehow having half the season on the BBC is better than the whole season on C5 or Channel Five.

          Sky don’t care about whether they get any extra subscribers – F1 is going to get kicked to S3 or S4 because it clashes with the Premiership – this was about taking it off free to air and nothing else.

  5. Most watched show on sunday and they’re doing what with it again?

  6. I find this Sky thing very disappointing.

    It seems to me the BBC were intent on dropping the F1 anyway, and it almost looks as if they have only kept it to satisfy a certain part of the Concorde agreement which was designed to expressly forbid pay TV.

    Sky TV, who made $1 billion profits last year, will no doubt be better off. Considering the F1 draws (on free to air) at least half the number that actually have the Sky service.

    Sky seems to me like classic Murdock, with the buyback seemingly only to increase in house profits and control.

    I think there is only one last card to play out here, and that is FOTA. They have remained quiet on the matter so far, but as this is a direct attack on the teams ability to pull sponsors I suspect they will put up a protest.

    1. The teams will receive more money through this deal so it’s difficult to see them objecting.

  7. Elliot Horwood
    2nd August 2011, 0:58

    Wow! so its better to be 3rd after first corner than to be leading :P

  8. Jake Humphrey posted this on twitter.

    It’s sad, to hear these guys speak it’s like the end.

    1. From the coverage and certainly the Forum on Saturday they were all gutted about it. Some of the production team will undoubtedly go to Sky, but Jake has the Olympic gig: realistically for his career, he will take that one as possibly the biggest opportunity he’ll ever have.

  9. Cheers for COTD Keith, made my day.

    1. Congrats Harvs

  10. I don’t know why Massa don’t pushing hard against Alonso. maybe He didn’t make contract for 2012 yet? well, main problem is he’s not usually in the same league to Alonso.

  11. A true team spirit of both their driver racing which even Mclaren hater won’t mind enjoying.

    If Ron Dennis wouldn’t have started this culture we would never would have had Senna Prost battle.Hamilton is a Senna fan where Button like Prost.I love both of them battle it hard on track with respect.Their spirit of letting both their drivers fight it out on track will make Mclaren more popular then Ferrari & Red Bull.

  12. McLaren will continue to let drivers race

    Very idealistic position from McLaren. Anyway, I was reading the radio transmissions exchange and is very interesting:

    Button: “How does the weather look?”
    Pit » BUT: “It’s spitting in the pitlane, but we don’t think it will get any worse than this.”[/b]…..
    Button: “Info on the weather, guys. Info on the weather.”
    [b]Pit » HAM: “These conditions are going to remain for the next 15 minutes or so.”

    (it was raining)

    ….Pit » HAM: “How are the conditions? Do we need to change to inters, or stay on dries?”
    And Lewis passes Jenson to re-take the lead! What a race!!
    Lewis pits for inters.

    Pit » BUT: “It’s your call on tyres, Jenson.”
    Button: “I’m staying out.”….

    Pit » BUT: “Understood. We think sector one is the only really wet sector.”
    Pit » BUT: “We are a lot quicker than the cars on inters. Just take care in sector one.”

    Pit » HAM: “We believe there is more rain coming.”

    Hamilton: “These tyres are finished.”


    If this is accurate, Button is doing his amazing and right calls because his race engineering team can read the race better and can judge the changeable better than Lewis team, that looks less experienced.

    How McLaren can fix that? Or can I assume that this is an imaginative way to equilibrate the internal fight in the team?

    1. Both teams are working from the same data under Lewis’s original engineer, at a central console where they can share opinions and discussions. The basic difference is that the team know they can leave marginal decisions in Button’s hands, and he’ll not only be able to see the big picture, but make the right judgement – and if he calls it wrong, he’ll put his hand up and accept it like a man.

      The problem with Lewis’s team is that they don’t seem to have a driver who can do that, they have a driver whose focus is so much on “being a racer” he hands off those decisions to “the team”. If they call it wrong, they know they’ll be in for a public dressing down from their driver.

      1. Exactly, Lewis needs to grow as a driver and be responsible for making these kind of calls. The pits have no idea what it’s like out on the track, only the drivers do. I think Lewis’s spin made him hot-headed as well which did not help and made him lose alot of confidence (which was due to loss of tyre temperature)

        1. If Hamilton had been on the primes like Jenson it’s less likely he would have come in for inters. Maybe his spin was even due to pushing on the options to get the required gap for another stop. As it was, his tyres were shot and they thought rain was on the way. Jenson could afford to wait and see, Hamilton could not. He made the call, it turned out to be wrong. On another day it could have been the correct one and we’d all be talking about Hamilton’s crucial overtake that led him to get on the inters first.

          1. And it didn’t help they couldn’t hear the feedback from Hamilton about how the situation on track was.

          2. Maybe the fact he saved a set of options in qualifying actually tempted him and/or the team into opting not to run the primes.

            Given Hamilton was (a) able to establish a lead consistently in the race, and (b) able to overtake all the front runners if need be, there was really no need for him to take the risk of a different strategy to Vettel and Button. Given equal conditions, Hamilton will usually come out better, even factoring in Button’s tyre conservation. McLaren (his side of the team anyhow) should focus on being conservative/reactive in strategy when he’s at or near the front and leave the risk taking to Hamilton on track.

      2. I’m sorry but if the team told me it was going to rain for the next 15 minutes and I needed to pit again anyway, I think most would have come in for inters. The race was lost for Lewis with the odd (to me anyway) lack of pace of the super-softs at the end of the race.

        1. Correct.

          While I agree that Hamilton is not as mature as Jenson in some of his calls, he can’t see the rainfall data from his cockpit and Jenson can’t either. It didn’t rain anymore and Jenson got lucky.

    2. “we believe there is more rain coming.”

      Hamilton did not get the same information that Button did. Moreover, they didn’t give Hamilton the choice, or indicate to him that the data were marginal and that it was thus up to his discretion. They told him it was going to rain more.

      Does anyone really think that tires-genius Button would have decided to stay out on slicks if he was told “more rain is coming”? Button is not a mystic, just a driver.

      Thanks for putting up the radio dialog.

    3. Reading the radio transmissions, got to ask why the information given to LH and JB was different. Seems LH had no choice but to go for inter esp with the super worn out enough.

    4. Great post Becken.

      There really is a crucial difference in the information given to the two drivers. Putting aside the fantasy that Button is some kind of rain diviner and Hamilton a out-of-the-box unthinking McLaren product, I think most drivers (or anyone else) would have taken Button’s info to mean stay on slicks and Hamilton’s to go onto inters.

      You can understand the difference could emerge in the heat of the race, but it’s a bit unfair on Hamilton for McLaren to later state that Button ‘made the decision’ as though he guessed right on the same information. In fact both drivers were clearly asked what they wanted to do, but on different bases. McLaren (or Hamilton) need to look at this.

  13. Call me cynical but its very easy for Neale to say that, given neither of his drivers have a realistic shot at the title and the constructors is all but Red Bulls. I enjoyed McLaren’s battle at the weekend as much as anyone but I won’t be taken along with McLaren being the goody two shoes of the gang. I’d respect them more for issuing a team order, where necessary, than potentially compromising points.

    1. Call me cynical but its very easy for Neale to say that, given neither of his drivers have a realistic shot at the title and the constructors is all but Red Bulls.

      They expressed the same policy last year when both drivers were still in the hunt.

      1. Their prospective to win the title notwithstanding they behave the same… That’s why I respect McLaren team more than others.
        Now, RB is within the range of their canons. I hope they’ll aim precisely!!!

      2. But team orders were banned last year. Not that it stopped Ferrari of course…

        Technically McLaren wouldn’t be breaking any rules.

    2. I’d respect them more for issuing a team order, where necessary, than potentially compromising points.

      I just don’t get your thinking here. Which would you prefer, seriously, seeing no racing between the McLaren drivers with one of them maybe ceding position (like Massa almost instaneously this race) or the kind of battle we saw on track? Each to his or her own, but I watch Formula 1 races to see racing, not a points tally. I could ‘understand’ McLaren deciding to use team orders (and I’m sure they do issue them, subtly) but I respect them for respecting Hamilton and Button as drivers and allowing them to sort out who’s best on track. That’s real respect – for them, the sport and for us as an audience.

      1. I did enjoy the battle and I welcome them, much more than team orders. However, should McLaren ever be presented with a situation where their drivers are having a tiff on track I would expect the pit wall to intervene and salvage points for the constructors rather than risk an RBR situation like we had in Turkey last year.

        1. I think if they’re evenly matched, they should race and try to pass each other however many times it turns out. However I *do* think that when one driver is clearly faster and can make headway against other drivers if the team mate lets him past sooner (rather than later), the team could ‘advise’ as such. But I think Hamilton and Button have enough mutual respect and understanding now to know when that’s the case without being told by the pit wall.

  14. Seriously Keith, COTD is inaccurate!! Hamilton started from 4th on the grid when he won the 2009 Hungarian Grand Prix! Sorry Harvs :)

    1. Oh I feel silly! Just read it again!! Ermmm sorry!!

  15. So … Tony Fernandes conveniently forgot to mention that he was in the process of purchasing Caterham and had been for months when the original trial took place? That’s a fairly large oversight.

    1. Just like your claim that Jarno Trulli was one of the three tallest drivers.

    2. I find it hard to care anymore. So long as Renault don’t come out of this with everyone calling them Lotus I’ll be a happy man.

      1. +1 Icthyes! :P

  16. First Ferrari had a driver with a large amount of points compared to the other driver and a shot at the title so they didn’t let them race. Red Bull said that they’d never do anything like that. Then Red Bull had one of their drivers with far more points than the other so they called off the racing. Call me cynical but it’s not surprising they’ll say that right now.

    1. Considering that Red Bull already said one thing but only did that in reaction to having sort of done the other thing last year, they stood out mostly as hypocrites already in this respect.

      Do you mean McLaren might say the same if in a few races only one of their drivers has a shot at it? Last year they didn’t really, but I guess the other driver might be “persuaded” to help if he can and it doesn’t cost him too much.

      DC seems to point to you having a point, even if his experience is from a few years ago, and he isn’t a Button or Hamilton to make it a big dilemma who to support.

  17. They should spice up F1 by adding Ben Hur Chariot-style spikes on the wheel rims.

  18. You are on G+ you might have wanted to tell us – might have started a invite thread

    1. It’s early days for me on there, not found a particularly efficient or thorough way of using it yet.

      Anyway, in the meantime I’m over here:

      Not sure what you mean by invite thread?

    2. there is on on already for a few weeks now.

  19. India to host F1 but plans leave locals ‘alienated’

    1. Well the BBC are experts when it comes to alienating the locals…

      1. Indeed, it would also appear that the BBC is in breach of the it’s Fair Trading Policy, a brief overview follows:

        Charter and Agreement

        The Charter makes it clear that the BBC exists to serve the public interest and that its main object is the promotion of the Public Purposes through its Public Service Activities. Commercial Services may be carried out ancillary to this main object.

        Key Principles

        Any Commercial Activities carried out by the BBC must fit with the BBC’s Public Purpose activities, exhibit commercial efficiency and comply with the Fair Trading Guidelines, in particular, by avoiding distorting the market. They must also take into account the BBC’s other obligations in the Charter and Agreement.

        The BBC should ensure that it preserves the brand and reputation of the BBC, both in the UK and overseas, in such a way that it appropriately maximises the value of the BBC to the Licence Fee Payer. An important aspect of this relates to how the BBC deals with other companies and individuals in connection with its brand. The BBC must consider carefully the identity of its trading partners, its use of its brand and the appropriate pricing for its brand.

        Requirements relating to Brand and Reputation

        31. The Trust expects the BBC to deal fairly and reasonably with all its stakeholders. The Trust wishes to encourage and enable responsible behaviour by the BBC Executive and avoid bringing the BBC brand into disrepute. The brand may be brought into disrepute, for example, by the BBC conducting deals with particular third parties or by how the BBC uses its brand. Equally, it is important that the brand is appropriately valued when dealing with other parties. Too low a value may diminish the BBC brand.

        33. The Guidelines should require transparent, objectively justifiable and proportionate criteria where appropriate in order to implement the above principles.

        34. The Trust is of the view that these requirements are legal obligations in that they are derived from the Charter and the Agreement.


  20. RBS: ““Many of the F1 viewers will no doubt be Sky subscribers”

    Really? Theres no doubt about that?

  21. Drivers with equal opportunity will always perform better. With Hammy and Button it’s rare to see the respect they show each other as team mates.

  22. Hey fellow fanatice, just thought I’d share this with you, my new poster design! :D

    Spot the F1 references! :D

Comments are closed.