One of the most intelligent and interesting motor sport blogs on the net is The Fastest Lap; apart from anything else, it's written by a Nice Bloke who, like myself, is a Brit living in the States. He covers all of motor sport and only occasionally glances at F1, as is clear from his article on the Hungarian GP; but when he has something to say, he is invariably worth reading.
This time it was the the comments section to the article that started me thinking, however; in particular this little snippet from Dbt:
There are two F1 fan's in this office, including me. We always have a nice chat about the weekend's racing on Friday PM and Monday AM. But this Monday EVERYONE joined it. It's clear we all love a bit of handbags here in England.
Perhaps I should explain for American readers that "handbags" is an abbreviated way to refer to "handbags (purses, pocket books, whatever) at dawn", stemming from the expression "pistols at dawn" - a cat fight, in other words.
This comment really puts into sharp relief something we have known for years but perhaps have never taken into account in all our long discussions about the sport: F1 has an appeal that ranges far beyond its technical and competitive aspects - the political in-fighting that purists so deplore actually extends the reach of the sport to include those who are fascinated by conflict in any form. It is even possible that a large proportion of those who now consider themselves F1 fans were first attracted to the sport by the scandals so often focused upon by the press.
We are human and love to watch a good fight. And one cannot blame the press for picking up on those stories that they know will sell their product. There can be no doubt that the constant bickering and scandal that seems so much a part of F1 these days has raised the profile of the sport to the point where most of the general public have some idea of what it is.
Whether this is a good or a bad thing depends upon your point of view. Most existing F1 fans give lip service to the idea of greater coverage for the sport but, at the same time, deplore the way it is prostituting itself in the name of "improving the show" - a euphemism for putting more paying customers in seats. The FIA and FOM, however, see their role as maximizing the popularity of the sport (and therefore their profits) and will count increased viewing figures as success. It does not matter to them whether new viewers stay as long as there are always fresh sources of supply to replenish those that are lost.
So the scandals actually become a good thing in the eyes of those who control the sport; from their point of view, anything that keeps F1 in the public eye can only do it good in terms of increased numbers of viewers. All publicity is good publicity, indeed.
Those of us who have been with the sport for a long time talk constantly about how it is going down the tubes, changing into a beast totally different from its glorious roots, and we offer various prescriptions for curing its disease, most of which entail turning the clock back to the golden age that we knew when we first discovered the sport. We long for the days when competition was hard but fair and contrast such great drivers as Clark, Gilles Villeneuve and Fangio with the spoiled brats of today.
Yet is it possible to return to the past? How do we un-invent the science of aerodynamics, how can we exclude the influence of high finance in the fortunes of the teams, how simplify rules that have been made to prevent cheating amongst players who compete for such high stakes? Maybe we are all dinosaurs and the sport cannot do other than develop and change into a creature more fitted for the brave new world of tomorrow.
As one of the dinosaurs, I have to hope that there remains a way to return to an earlier age, that we might yet devise some solution to this wild career into a future so uncertain and so different from everything we have known before. But, at the same time, my eyes are open and I have to admit that it may not be possible to get back what we have lost, that F1 must ready itself for the new world and become something entirely new. All I can do is hang on grimly and watch, hoping that, whatever happens, the actual racing will still be worth watching.
This time it was the the comments section to the article that started me thinking, however; in particular this little snippet from Dbt:
There are two F1 fan's in this office, including me. We always have a nice chat about the weekend's racing on Friday PM and Monday AM. But this Monday EVERYONE joined it. It's clear we all love a bit of handbags here in England.
Perhaps I should explain for American readers that "handbags" is an abbreviated way to refer to "handbags (purses, pocket books, whatever) at dawn", stemming from the expression "pistols at dawn" - a cat fight, in other words.
This comment really puts into sharp relief something we have known for years but perhaps have never taken into account in all our long discussions about the sport: F1 has an appeal that ranges far beyond its technical and competitive aspects - the political in-fighting that purists so deplore actually extends the reach of the sport to include those who are fascinated by conflict in any form. It is even possible that a large proportion of those who now consider themselves F1 fans were first attracted to the sport by the scandals so often focused upon by the press.
We are human and love to watch a good fight. And one cannot blame the press for picking up on those stories that they know will sell their product. There can be no doubt that the constant bickering and scandal that seems so much a part of F1 these days has raised the profile of the sport to the point where most of the general public have some idea of what it is.
Whether this is a good or a bad thing depends upon your point of view. Most existing F1 fans give lip service to the idea of greater coverage for the sport but, at the same time, deplore the way it is prostituting itself in the name of "improving the show" - a euphemism for putting more paying customers in seats. The FIA and FOM, however, see their role as maximizing the popularity of the sport (and therefore their profits) and will count increased viewing figures as success. It does not matter to them whether new viewers stay as long as there are always fresh sources of supply to replenish those that are lost.
So the scandals actually become a good thing in the eyes of those who control the sport; from their point of view, anything that keeps F1 in the public eye can only do it good in terms of increased numbers of viewers. All publicity is good publicity, indeed.
Those of us who have been with the sport for a long time talk constantly about how it is going down the tubes, changing into a beast totally different from its glorious roots, and we offer various prescriptions for curing its disease, most of which entail turning the clock back to the golden age that we knew when we first discovered the sport. We long for the days when competition was hard but fair and contrast such great drivers as Clark, Gilles Villeneuve and Fangio with the spoiled brats of today.
Yet is it possible to return to the past? How do we un-invent the science of aerodynamics, how can we exclude the influence of high finance in the fortunes of the teams, how simplify rules that have been made to prevent cheating amongst players who compete for such high stakes? Maybe we are all dinosaurs and the sport cannot do other than develop and change into a creature more fitted for the brave new world of tomorrow.
As one of the dinosaurs, I have to hope that there remains a way to return to an earlier age, that we might yet devise some solution to this wild career into a future so uncertain and so different from everything we have known before. But, at the same time, my eyes are open and I have to admit that it may not be possible to get back what we have lost, that F1 must ready itself for the new world and become something entirely new. All I can do is hang on grimly and watch, hoping that, whatever happens, the actual racing will still be worth watching.