Marco Simoncelli 1987 - 2011

I make no apologies for a second post in a week which is about the wider world of motorsport, rather than Formula 1. Yesterday at the Malaysian Motorcycle Grand Prix at Sepang, Marco Simoncelli lost his life in an appalling accident. The 24 year old crashed and slid into the path of Valentino Rossi and Colin Edwards, who helplessly hit him, removing his helmet. By all accounts the accident was not survivable, and the young Italian was declared dead at the circuit.

I will not attempt a comprehensive obituary for Simoncelli, as my knowledge of MotoGP is not great enough for that. Others have succinctly captured what the Italian meant to them and to the sport elsewhere. Indeed, my own personal interest in the sport has waned somewhat over the last couple of seasons, due to the dwindling numbers of bikes on the grid.

But Simoncelli was undoubtedly the star of the majority of the limited number of MotoGP races I have seen in full this year. His tall, gangly frame made it appear that he was constantly on edge, but he was incredibly quick (though accident prone). Two podiums in recent races, including a second place just a week ago in Australia, seemed to indicate that he had calmed down somewhat, whilst still retaining his speed. And then came yesterday’s horrific accident.

Of course, this is the second prominent motor racing fatality in the last week, after Dan Wheldon’s untimely death in an IndyCar race. Once again, we have been reminded of what we all know; that motor racing in any form is inherently dangerous, and accidents can and do happen, occasionally with devastating consequences.

For two sportsmen to die in this way in such a short space of time makes me feel almost guilty for following motor racing, but it is important to remember that, just like Wheldon, Simoncelli was a true racer and died doing what he loved. As well as hearing of these two deaths in the last week, I also had the privilege to watch the last rounds of the British Superbike Championship on television. This clip, from the last lap of the championship decider, helps to remind me why I and thousands of others around the world watch motor racing so avidly. No doubt Marco Simoncelli would have approved.

Dan Wheldon 1978-2011

I was saddened to hear this morning of the death of Dan Wheldon in the final IndyCar race of the season at Las Vegas yesterday. Wheldon was involved in a frightening 15 car pile-up in the early stages of the race, receiving fatal injuries when his car was launched into the air and hit protective catch-fencing. Wheldon leaves behind a wife and two infant children, and his tragic death has shocked the American and world motorsport fraternity.

Admittedly this is not a Formula 1 story per se – despite his achievements in the US, Wheldon only ever registered as a blip on Formula 1’s radar. He was reportedly offered a drive with BMW Sauber in 2006, and was also linked with a move to Honda, the engine supplier which powered him to his IndyCar victories. But Wheldon did race in the UK and Europe in his early career; indeed, Jenson Button was one of his closest rivals, and the 2009 World Champion has expressed his sadness at Wheldon’s death today.  

Despite early success, Wheldon suffered from the funding difficulties that blight many a talented driver’s career, and made the brave decision to move to the USA to live and race there at the age of 21. His rise to IndyCar racing was rapid, and his success there almost instant – he won three races in his first full season and finished runner-up in the championship, before taking the title in 2005 as well as the coveted win in the Indianapolis 500.

To call the Indy 500 America’s equivalent of the Monaco Grand Prix belittles the significance of the annual 500 mile race to American fans, which perhaps gives some indication of the level of Wheldon’s achievements. It also explains why Wheldon never openly sought a move to Formula 1, instead preferring to remain a big fish in the fairly large pond of American open-wheel racing, which has become significantly deeper recently after the merger of the Champ Car and IndyCar series which had split in the mid 1990s.

The quality of the field is such that Wheldon himself was unable to find a full-time drive this season, but he sensationally won the Indy 500 for the second time after rival JR Hildebrand crashed in the last corner. He also tested and developed the next generation of IndyCar, built by former HRT collaborator Dallara, which will make its debut next season. The significance of his death will hit home again next May, when 33 drivers will line up for the 96th running of the Indy 500 race in cars heavily influenced by Wheldon himself, but without the 2011 winner among them.

The tragic loss of such a talented driver serves to proof that no matter how much safety standards are improved, motor racing remains a dangerous sport. The dangers of IndyCar racing in particular have been discussed today by Jonathan Legard (suddenly ‘promoted’ to being a BBC motorsport expert after his removal as F1 commentator at the end of last year) and Mark “tyres what were on the car” Blundell, who predictably both claim that Indycar racing is far too dangerous. Certainly the speeds involved are extreme, with cars racing wheel-to-wheel at well over 200 miles an hour. But motor racing in general and Indycar racing in particular will never be truly safe activities.

Certainly lessons need to be learned from this tragic incident, but precisely what these lessons are should wait for another day. Suffice it to say that despite the danger, men and women will continue to race cars due to their inherent love of the sport, which we as fans all appreciate. Wheldon himself was only participating in Las Vegas as a one-off, in an attempt to win $5 million to be split between himself and a fan if he could come through the field from the back and triumph.

Dan Wheldon wrote in his last blog entry of putting on a show and providing the fans with “pure entertainment” in yesterday’s race, and it is the fantastic racing action that he provided in his career, as well as his success, which he will always be remembered for.

Normal Service Will Soon Be Resumed

Hello everyone. Pitstake (i.e. me) is currently without the internet, and therefore no updates are currently possible. However, this situation will soon be rectified, and the regular mix of driver ratings, comment and Jake Humphrey bashing will be available again soon. I had considered treating this as practice for next season, and asking for money so that you could view half a season's worth of content, but I have relented...

Further Comment: Formula 1 Coverage in the UK

I was rather disappointed yesterday. Not with the Hungarian Grand Prix itself, which was surprisingly excellent (driver ratings to follow once Germany’s are up), but with the attitude shown during the BBC’s coverage, specifically by the imbecilic Jake Humphrey.

On the Saturday qualifying show, there was no mention made of Friday’s announcement, barring a couple of job centre-related jokes from a clearly frustrated Martin Brundle. However, during Sunday’s race build-up, the elephant in the room was finally acknowledged, although not before a smug, self-satisfied Humphrey had introduced the programme as “live, uninterrupted coverage of the Hungarian Grand Prix in High Definition only on the BBC” and made reference to “every single race” being covered for the rest of the season, “every single step of the way”.

Humphrey (who whoever writes his scripts) totally misjudged the strength and direction of public feeling by claiming that the BBC’s coverage is “held in high esteem” and expressing his gratitude to fans who had taken time to email the BBC to express their frustration about the Sky announcement.

The problem is not that the BBC is losing coverage of half the races. Frankly, the BBC coverage is perfectly adequate, in that they show the actual races which are after all what we tune in for, but also has numerous problems (as explored below) and is not what will be missed. The fans are upset because Formula 1 will no longer be available on free-to-air television – whether the BBC, ITV, Channel Five or Dave cover it is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

To be so arrogant as to claim that their coverage is “dedicated, passionate and under the skin”, as Humphrey did yesterday, and to somehow imagine that it is the loss of this that has got everybody up in arms, goes some way to explaining why the BBC’s coverage has deteriorated in recent times - they clearly think that they are doing a fabulous (rather than an average) job.

No doubt Humphrey would point to the awards gained by the BBC’s coverage, such as a Bafta television award for the 2010 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix coverage. However, ITV’s coverage (despite being panned by many critics) also won a Bafta in 2007 for their Hungary 2006 programme. This goes to show that F1 isn’t really that hard to cover correctly and competently, which no doubt Sky will prove next year.

The problem is that many of us will never see the fruits of Sky's endeavours, not that they will struggle to match the BBC. If only the BBC spent as much time gauging the true opinions of the fans as they did boasting about what a great job they have done, perhaps they would realise what the loss of Formula 1 from free-to-air television really means to the long-suffering, dedicated fans who are ultimately the losers from the Sky deal.

Editorial Comment: Formula 1 Coverage in the UK

I couldn’t let the opportunity go by without passing comment on today’s announcement that Sky and the BBC are to jointly show Formula 1 coverage in the UK from 2012 until 2018. What that means for the fans is that only half the races will be shown live on free-to-air television, with the remaining races to be shown as highlights. Sky will show all races, qualifying and practice sessions for every event.

This is obviously extremely disappointing for fans without access to Sky, and contradicts Bernie Ecclestone’s previous promise that F1 would remain on free-to-air television. F1 fans who want to see every race live will now be expected to pay to receive Sky’s coverage – difficult to justify when the BBC are still showing half of the races, and given Sky’s morally questionable ownership (the recently tarnished News Corporation).

The context to this move is pressure on the BBC to cut costs across its entire business. Nevertheless the approach that the BBC has chosen to take, in showing only half the races, is disappointing, and symptomatic of their increasingly half-hearted approach to Formula 1.

When coverage first moved across to the BBC in 2009, expectations were high that the quality of the broadcast would significantly improve on that which ITV offered. The ITV coverage had numerous problems – adverts in the middle of races, appalling ‘lifestyle’ pre-race features (e.g. “let’s visit a fashion show with Jenson Button’s girlfriend”), Mark “tyres what were done on the car” Blundell and the buttock-clenchingly awful lead commentator James Allen.

Early signs were promising that the Beeb would improve matters, with the appointment of all the best people (Martin Brundle…. er, Ted Kravitz?) from ITV’s coverage. David Coulthard and Eddie Jordan, while irritating at times, also proved to be an instantly entertaining pairing.

But the BBC, while appearing to try to cater for the ‘hardcore’ audience in the beginning, has also made numerous concessions to the mass market. Their initially excellent ‘Classic F1’ online feature has increasingly been marginalised and now appears to only show races from the last five years. And the pre-race coverage has also taken a turn for the worse by giving little or no insight into goings-on in the pit lane or on the actual track, instead focusing on the B-list celebrities and supposed glamour of the Formula 1 paddock.

I don’t understand the point of this. No doubt the BBC would say that they are trying to appeal to a ‘casual’ audience, but in my experience the ‘casual’ Formula 1 audience don’t watch the build-up at all; they switch on just before the start of the race, watch the first few laps, and then go off and do something else before tuning in again at the end to see who has won. The sight of the two McLaren drivers directing a photo shoot is hardly likely to change their viewing patterns.

The BBC also openly admitted recently that they were trying to make the ‘Classic F1’ feature more suitable for the mass market – a contradiction in terms in that fair-weather F1 fan are exactly the sort of people who won’t want to watch 10 minute highlights of old F1 races… Similarly, only showing half the races in a season is hardly likely to inspire a casual audience either.

Of course, the flavourless cherry atop the increasingly stale cake which the BBC has decided we F1 fans must endure is lead anchor Jake Humphrey. The patronising, moronic former children’s television presenter gives the impression that he’s never seen a Formula 1 race, despite having fronted the coverage since it moved to the BBC in 2009.

At every race he asks idiotic questions (witness him asking George Lucas in Canada what tyres he expected the cars to be on after the restart – I half expected him to ask Martin Whitmarsh about the chances of a further Star Wars prequel), talks complete drivel and makes ridiculous statements about a sport which he clearly knows nothing about. He’s also shown a staggering lack of loyalty, skipping the potentially crucial Japanese Grand Prix last year to present that school sports day of athletics tournaments, the Commonwealth Games.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, given that Formula 1 is clearly no longer at the top of the BBC’s priorities, Humphrey swiftly abandons ship and moves across to ruin another of the BBC’s sports (not that there are many left). Or perhaps Blue Peter are looking for a new presenter? In any event, the possibility of half as much Jake Humphrey per year (or even, if we all pray together, none at all) is definitely the silver lining around this particular dark cloud.

So, it’s been clear for some time that the BBC have been losing interest in Formula 1, and their coverage certainly has problems. In that case, are we really losing out on that much with F1 moving to Sky? Well, yes and no. Perhaps Sky will revolutionise coverage of the sport; they did run a well-regarded digital F1 service a decade ago, which was somewhat ahead of its time.

They have at least confirmed that no adverts will be shown during their coverage, and if they could make similar “no James Allen” and “no Jake Humphrey” promises then that would go some way to ensuring their popularity. But the crux of the matter is that F1 fans who do not wish (or can’t afford) to buy subscriptions will, from 2012, be denied the chance to watch their favourite sport live.

People have made comparisons to Premier League Football moving across to Sky two decades ago. The difference is that hardcore football fans can potentially go to the majority of their team’s matches in a season anyway and therefore aren’t missing out on as much as F1 fans who, short of being millionaires, will not be able to fund trips around the world to watch all (or even some) of the Grand Prix, especially as these are increasingly being held in far flung corners of the globe.

The BBC has promised to show the “most interesting” races live, but how are they supposed to guess which races are going to be the best? Of course, the Monaco Grand Prix is an obvious example (although not always an exciting race) which will remain on the BBC, but otherwise it’s down to guess work. In football, it’s easy to predict that (for example) Chelsea against Manchester United is always likely to be a potential title decider. But in a 20 race Formula 1 season there’s no way of knowing where the key events are going to take place.

So overall, this is a sad day for Formula 1, and particularly for the legions of dedicated fans around Britain – the sort who get up at 4am to watch the Australian Grand Prix year in year out and never miss a moment of their favourite sport, as well as those who simply want to tune in from time to time. It feels like a kick in the teeth from a sport which has long been accused of not being a sport at all, and is only interested in making money. Bernie Ecclestone claims the deal is “super for F1”, and in the short-term his pockets will no doubt be lined with Sky’s money.

In the long run, however, the effect of having half the F1 season on subscription based TV will undoubtedly be negative. The BBC’s coverage will inevitably suffer further, with no real incentive to maintain standards and no budget to do so either. If the majority of fans simply switch off, either in protest at the half-hearted coverage or through a lack of access to Sky, sponsors will turn their backs on the sport and in turn advertising revenue will be reduced. Quite frankly such an outcome would serve the increasing out-of-touch Ecclestone, and indeed the whole sport, right.