Sports Personality of the Year list announced
- Thread starter agricola
- Start date
waterloowelshy
Well-Known Member
so hamilton should come above calzhage according to you?hammerette said:
hamilton has not won a title yet, but calzaghe has been undisputed champion for ten years. im not jealous of hamilton i just think his achievements are mere blimp on the crown of calzhagese at the moment.
Nigel Irritable said:
I completely concur. But how often are these things won by the actual best rather than the media darlings...
Boxing does not the appeal, it is seen as a retro to the dark ages when two men fought .. the danger and injuries have reduced its popularity. Hatton's image away from the ring is not the best, not signing autographs, sipping brandy in his private box watching his favourite football team.. appearance and age are seen to influence voters. Joe Calzaghe, who would vote for a man that doesn't even sound British... and have trouble pronouncing his name. Silly but typical of the Brit public.
Hamilton, the young man challenging the establishment and seen to be winning, cheated out of a win by a disaffected team mate. Too much outside influence in the way of politics. Very hi-viz, good model for youngsters. very popular. Tax, who likes paying taxes?
Murray, the youngest entrant for SPOTY, and Rose, sounds silly but wrong time of the year, tennis and Wimbledon and Murray would be in with a shout but..very changeable with his trainers seen as an upstart and blaming his trainers for his own fragile wrists
Rose, same, golf only played abroad this time of the year with little or no coverage on the terrestrial channels.
Robinson and Wilkinson, not seen as winners, already won with the team award, very good within their own sports but ....lost o South Africa in the final. ,, bad impression in the early stages, considered lucky to have not scored against South Africa in the earlier stages.
The ladies, Paula, on the comeback trail and everyone worried that she might fail, Christine, missed drug tests... bad thing to do, too much bad publicity associated with Athletics and Drugs.
Toseland, if only bikes had better TV coverage, but still the bikers image, fabulous sportsman, a winner and very good commodity but.. image of the sport and attitude from car men and women... look down on the bikes...with a more high profile management would be in with a shout.
Hamilton, the young man challenging the establishment and seen to be winning, cheated out of a win by a disaffected team mate. Too much outside influence in the way of politics. Very hi-viz, good model for youngsters. very popular. Tax, who likes paying taxes?
Murray, the youngest entrant for SPOTY, and Rose, sounds silly but wrong time of the year, tennis and Wimbledon and Murray would be in with a shout but..very changeable with his trainers seen as an upstart and blaming his trainers for his own fragile wrists
Rose, same, golf only played abroad this time of the year with little or no coverage on the terrestrial channels.
Robinson and Wilkinson, not seen as winners, already won with the team award, very good within their own sports but ....lost o South Africa in the final. ,, bad impression in the early stages, considered lucky to have not scored against South Africa in the earlier stages.
The ladies, Paula, on the comeback trail and everyone worried that she might fail, Christine, missed drug tests... bad thing to do, too much bad publicity associated with Athletics and Drugs.
Toseland, if only bikes had better TV coverage, but still the bikers image, fabulous sportsman, a winner and very good commodity but.. image of the sport and attitude from car men and women... look down on the bikes...with a more high profile management would be in with a shout.
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Hamilton didn't come across as having much personality on Top Gear, would be a shame if he won.
What about Greg Rusedski, who neither sounded nor was British?
I mentioned Mark Cavendish earlier in the thread, and that brings to mind Nicole Cooke, although her season has been curtailed a bit by injuries. She's still regarded as one of if not the greatest female road cyclist in the world.
Why is it that some sports are accepting of women reaching the heights and are held in acclaim (athletics and tennis most notably), but others get no mention? Our (England's) women's footy team put the men to shame currently, although granted that's not hard.
how's he challenging the establishment? and 'cheated'?
A 22 year old arrives in Formula One and instead of trailing behind, paying his dues and being suitable subservient, he is challenging for the lead, and putting the reigning World Champion under such pressure that it results in Alsono throwing his toys out of the pram. Behaviour that was part of the Alsono’s character from early days, something Renault was more than aware of.
I don’t know if you follow Formula One, the circumstances surrounding the Spy gate scandal, the penalty imposed by the FIA (Ferrari International Assistance) and the most important element the imposition of a FIA appointed scrutineer to ensure Alonso had equality of resources within the team.
Bearing in mind, McLaren are not flavour of the month with the FIA, animosity between Moseley and Dennis has existed for years. What would be the ideal finishing for the Formula One championship? Stop any further rumours, any finger pointing and keep both Ferrari and the Spanish happy.. Remembering that the head of the Spanish Motor Sport association had complained directly to Moseley concerning Alonso’s supposed treatment within the team.
Let Ferrari win, and both McLaren drivers finish on equal points, and wooow… How did they manage that?
The tyre situation in the penultimate GP, someone forgot to tell Hamilton.
No way, the organisation and the number of people involved in monitoring the performance from on-car telemetry to visual to lap times, all very carefully watched by a number of people. The overall command is with Ron Dennis and Lewis Hamilton’s contact, if the order is not given to come in, Hamilton will not come in, the clearly obvious tyres wear to the TV cameras and the outside observer is not so blatantly obvious to the driver until the last minute and can be at any point on the circuit.
Without all the politics, the manipulation, the possible outcome could have been completely different.
However you dress it up, Hamilton is a very talented driver and the effect on his teammate created more problems than was ever envisaged. A consummate manoeuvring of people and events and every one was reasonable happy. The desired result to avoid any further allegation
Hamilton now established as number one in the McLaren team, Alonso still to sign a contract for the 2008 season.
Poetic justice?
A 22 year old arrives in Formula One and instead of trailing behind, paying his dues and being suitable subservient, he is challenging for the lead, and putting the reigning World Champion under such pressure that it results in Alsono throwing his toys out of the pram. Behaviour that was part of the Alsono’s character from early days, something Renault was more than aware of.
I don’t know if you follow Formula One, the circumstances surrounding the Spy gate scandal, the penalty imposed by the FIA (Ferrari International Assistance) and the most important element the imposition of a FIA appointed scrutineer to ensure Alonso had equality of resources within the team.
Bearing in mind, McLaren are not flavour of the month with the FIA, animosity between Moseley and Dennis has existed for years. What would be the ideal finishing for the Formula One championship? Stop any further rumours, any finger pointing and keep both Ferrari and the Spanish happy.. Remembering that the head of the Spanish Motor Sport association had complained directly to Moseley concerning Alonso’s supposed treatment within the team.
Let Ferrari win, and both McLaren drivers finish on equal points, and wooow… How did they manage that?
The tyre situation in the penultimate GP, someone forgot to tell Hamilton.
No way, the organisation and the number of people involved in monitoring the performance from on-car telemetry to visual to lap times, all very carefully watched by a number of people. The overall command is with Ron Dennis and Lewis Hamilton’s contact, if the order is not given to come in, Hamilton will not come in, the clearly obvious tyres wear to the TV cameras and the outside observer is not so blatantly obvious to the driver until the last minute and can be at any point on the circuit.
Without all the politics, the manipulation, the possible outcome could have been completely different.
However you dress it up, Hamilton is a very talented driver and the effect on his teammate created more problems than was ever envisaged. A consummate manoeuvring of people and events and every one was reasonable happy. The desired result to avoid any further allegation
Hamilton now established as number one in the McLaren team, Alonso still to sign a contract for the 2008 season.
Poetic justice?
SpookyFrank
Don't swallow the cap
Never mind all this nonsense, who is going to get the Tim Henman award for outstanding contribution to fail? The current 1/1 favourite is Tim Henman...
Descartes said:
hamilton is a marketing man's dream and the media were going nuts about him even before he took part in his first race. i don't think he had to do too much challenging the establishment. mclaren knew a big draw when it saw one. in terms of alonso's moaning, i don't see how having a scrutineer to monitor equal treatment is such as big deal in terms of affecting hamilton. in terms of the penultimate race, hamilton is on record as saying that he fucked up himself. he's not blaming anyone else for that. also the idea that the whole f1 season was fixed to allow ferrari to win is clearly ludicrous. what decent evidence do you actually have for that? in terms of following f1, i work in the sports media and know several correspondents, and not a single one of them believes or has even suggested that such a thing might have happened. then again maybe they're in on the conspiracy as well
I'm on the other side, involved in the sport, and for a long time. appointing a FIA scrut is pain in the butt.... having him in the garage, watching, watching what's happening back at the factory, the guy hovers and makes notes, any silly incident can be interpretative of several scenarios.
Every thing was to convenient, the tyres blunder is totally against the norm, the watching brief by the tyre guys and the suppliers would have been voiced much earlier,
I have to admit I never see many Press guys in the pits and watching the cars, wandering about before the race start and around the team hospitality tents, special guys to deal with them and give out info. but conspicuous by their absence during the race.
There's also the fact that no reporter wants to fall out with a team, suddenly persona no gratis, kills the feeds and isolates the reporter. The incident with McLaren and the American sports magazine is a classic example.
Have a look at the FIA statement and minutes of the McLaren hearing if you think that these things cannot happen. The fact the ex Ferrari team manager is one the FIA formula one panel cast doubts on any neutrality and the pointed remark by McLaren counsel as to " the respect of silence from the gentleman on the right" clearly addressed to....
The influence of BE, the ultimate ring master and the history of the loyalty of the teams gives doubts to any freedom of choice. The attempt, almost coup-de-ta, by the car manufacturers that was totally undermined by the FOCA and the FIA signing Ferrari to the present formula one and instantly stopping any break away group was just something that happened.
I think not.
The episode of Michael Schumacher signing for Benetton, just yer average events without any outside influence.... The Button, Williams and Honda is another classic.
Yer, right. there is too much money swilling around to leave anything to chance.
We will never know the full influence of what happens behind closed doors. It would be naive to think it all just develops naturally.
Every thing was to convenient, the tyres blunder is totally against the norm, the watching brief by the tyre guys and the suppliers would have been voiced much earlier,
I have to admit I never see many Press guys in the pits and watching the cars, wandering about before the race start and around the team hospitality tents, special guys to deal with them and give out info. but conspicuous by their absence during the race.
There's also the fact that no reporter wants to fall out with a team, suddenly persona no gratis, kills the feeds and isolates the reporter. The incident with McLaren and the American sports magazine is a classic example.
Have a look at the FIA statement and minutes of the McLaren hearing if you think that these things cannot happen. The fact the ex Ferrari team manager is one the FIA formula one panel cast doubts on any neutrality and the pointed remark by McLaren counsel as to " the respect of silence from the gentleman on the right" clearly addressed to....
The influence of BE, the ultimate ring master and the history of the loyalty of the teams gives doubts to any freedom of choice. The attempt, almost coup-de-ta, by the car manufacturers that was totally undermined by the FOCA and the FIA signing Ferrari to the present formula one and instantly stopping any break away group was just something that happened.
I think not.
The episode of Michael Schumacher signing for Benetton, just yer average events without any outside influence.... The Button, Williams and Honda is another classic.
Yer, right. there is too much money swilling around to leave anything to chance.
We will never know the full influence of what happens behind closed doors. It would be naive to think it all just develops naturally.
at the end of the day the absolute marketing dream for the sport would have been for hamilton to win. hamilton or raikkonen in terms of global appeal? no contest. to think that anything would have been done deliberately to stop hamilton winning is unbelievable
THE 2004 Formula One (F1) season has not exactly set pulses racing: with five races to go, Michael Schumacher, a driver for Ferrari, looks certain to win an unprecedented fifth consecutive championship. Behind the scenes, however, there has been a much more exciting battle over who runs and controls the sport. Barring a last-minute settlement, the dispute will become public in a British courtroom in mid-September.
Bringing the case are three large banks—Bayerische Landesbank, Lehman Brothers and J.P. Morgan Chase. Through Speed Investments, these have a 75% shareholding in SLEC Holdings, which in turn owns the cascade of companies that run F1 (see table 1). …
BERNIE ECCLESTONE is a survivor, but it has been a bad week for the British entrepreneur who has run the commercial side of Formula One (F1) motor racing almost single-handedly for nearly 30 years. He must have been mortified to read headlines pronouncing that he had lost a court battle, to which, strictly speaking, he was not even party, for control of the sport.
The case was brought by three banks against Bambino Holdings, which owns 25% of the firms that exploit commercial rights to F1, and two Swiss lawyers who act for Mr Ecclestone's family trust, the ultimate owner of Bambino. (Counsel for Bambino emphasised the “separateness” between Mr Ecclestone and Bambino, which are not synonymous.) …
WHILE the ten motor racing teams that are expected to compete in next year’s Formula One world championship tested their cars at the Jerez track in Spain, a drama of a different kind was unfolding in London’s High Court. On Monday December 6th, Mr Justice Park granted an application by three banks—Bayerische Landesbank, J.Pa Morgan Chase and Lehman Brothers—for a summary judgment against Bambino Holdings, a company owned by Bernie Ecclestone’s family trust. The ruling may be a first step in deciding who will eventually call the shots in one of the few truly global sports, with estimated commercial rights of around $800m.
Since the 1970s, when he spotted the potential to turn it into a lucrative sport, Mr Ecclestone has been Formula One’s ringmaster and the driving force behind grand prix racing. In making his ruling, the judge said that Bambino had “no real prospect” of defending the banks’ claim that the company, which owns 25% of the companies that run the commercial side of Formula One, had wrongly appointed two directors to another firm, Formula One Holdings (FOH), were such a case to come to a full trial. …
AFTER months of apparent posturing, Paolo Cantarella, the chief executive of Fiat, announced this week that the car manufacturers involved in Formula One (F1) will set up a new motor-racing series—apparently to be known as the Grand Prix World Championship—and will pull out of F1 in 2008. Mr Cantarella was speaking for a consortium comprising BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Fiat, Ford and Renault, which back five of the 12 F1 teams. Fiat owns Ferrari, a name synonymous with F1.
The car makers first threatened a breakaway in February when the Kirch Group, owned by Leo Kirch, a German media magnate, bought a big stake in SLEC Holdings, a group of companies that owns a large part of the commercial rights to F1. Mr Kirch gained control of SLEC (he owns 58.3%) in October, when the family trusts of Bernie Ecclestone, a controversial British entrepreneur who has run F1 since the 1970s, gave the necessary approval. The teams are bound to the current championship until the end of 2007 when the Concorde Agreement, a ten-year arrangement governing the relationship between the teams and SLEC, expires. …
THE Australian Grand Prix on March 4th marked the start of another season of Formula One (F1) motor racing. The race was won by Michael Schumacher in a Ferrari. But the event was marred by the death of a race marshal, who was killed by debris from a crashing car. While the race season has started so unhappily, a multi-billion dollar struggle is going on off the track for control of the rights to broadcast the sport. Some teams are even threatening to set up a rival championship.
Broadcasting F1 races has become a hugely lucrative business—each race, it is claimed, attracts around one billion viewers. The money that sponsors and advertisers pay to get their brands and products in front of this audience keeps F1 going. As always, one man looms over the fight: Bernie Ecclestone, a wealthy entrepreneur who over the past 20 years has turned F1 from an amateurish sport, watched mostly by enthusiasts, into a global television enterprise rivalled only by the Olympics and football’s World Cup. …
FEW people, except conspiracy theorists, would have expected so public a spat as the one this week between the two ringmasters of Formula One (F1) motor racing. Bernie Ecclestone, a fabulously wealthy British motorsport entrepreneur, is at odds, it would seem, with his longstanding associate, Max Mosley, president of F1’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA).
…
BERNIE ECCLESTONE, a fabulously wealthy British motorsport entrepreneur, already has an iron grip on broadcast media coverage of Formula One (F1) motor racing. Now he wants to control news and information on websites about F1. Hundreds of sites feature F1 as part of their general coverage, and several are devoted exclusively to the sport. So far Mr Ecclestone himself has done nothing to exploit F1 on the Internet.
After failing to persuade Ms Morris to hand over both domain names, Mr Ecclestone filed a lawsuit against her in California, alleging trademark infringement and misleading promotion of Formula1.com as a site he endorses (despite the fact that the top of every page of the site says it is “unofficial”). Ms Morris is countersuing Mr Ecclestone on antitrust grounds. It is probably no coincidence that Mr Ecclestone is to launch a magazine called F1 next February. He may just be stuck for a snappy domain name for the online edition. …
ON JUNE 28th, in the offices of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) in Geneva, delegates from over 70 national motoring associations around the world, who comprise the FIA’s supreme body, its general assembly, met in extraordinary session and voted unanimously on a single resolution. It was to approve a deal, recommended by the FIA’s senate, to grant the FIA’s commercial rights to Formula One (F1) motor racing until December 31st 2110—ie, for more than 100 years—to one man, Bernard (Bernie) Charles Ecclestone. There was no auction for these valuable rights; Mr Ecclestone was the only bidder. The delegates were sworn to strict secrecy to ensure no leaks.
The price for such a sweeping concession: $360m, payment of most of which the FIA has deferred for many years. With this deal, Mr Ecclestone, through Formula One Management (FOM, the key trading company in his empire), has, in effect, sole rights to negotiate with and collect lucrative fees from the promoters who put on grand prix races. He also has sole authority to sell television rights worldwide for a sport whose 17 races each year pull in an aggregate TV audience of around 5 billion. …
“HE HAS a travelling bus; this bus is rather grander than the word ‘bus’ normally conveys and is, perhaps, more similar to the tent of a medieval king on the battlefield. There are the equivalent of courtiers who control access to the presence.” Thus an English judge in a recent civil case, summing up the style of a defendant, Bernie Ecclestone, who runs Formula One (F1) motor racing. Among those who have been admitted to the presence are the German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, and the British prime minister, Tony Blair. Mr Blair’s Labour Party once received a £1m ($1.5m) donation from Mr Ecclestone (and had to return it after a brouhaha about a concession to F1 on tobacco advertising).
Mr Ecclestone’s dominance of F1 is deeply entrenched. He is a vice-president of the sport’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), and his family owns a company (Formula One Management) that has acquired exclusive commercial rights to F1. The unpaid head of the FIA, Max Mosley, recently noted that “The FIA, in conjunction with [FOM], essentially is F1.” …
Bringing the case are three large banks—Bayerische Landesbank, Lehman Brothers and J.P. Morgan Chase. Through Speed Investments, these have a 75% shareholding in SLEC Holdings, which in turn owns the cascade of companies that run F1 (see table 1). …
BERNIE ECCLESTONE is a survivor, but it has been a bad week for the British entrepreneur who has run the commercial side of Formula One (F1) motor racing almost single-handedly for nearly 30 years. He must have been mortified to read headlines pronouncing that he had lost a court battle, to which, strictly speaking, he was not even party, for control of the sport.
The case was brought by three banks against Bambino Holdings, which owns 25% of the firms that exploit commercial rights to F1, and two Swiss lawyers who act for Mr Ecclestone's family trust, the ultimate owner of Bambino. (Counsel for Bambino emphasised the “separateness” between Mr Ecclestone and Bambino, which are not synonymous.) …
WHILE the ten motor racing teams that are expected to compete in next year’s Formula One world championship tested their cars at the Jerez track in Spain, a drama of a different kind was unfolding in London’s High Court. On Monday December 6th, Mr Justice Park granted an application by three banks—Bayerische Landesbank, J.Pa Morgan Chase and Lehman Brothers—for a summary judgment against Bambino Holdings, a company owned by Bernie Ecclestone’s family trust. The ruling may be a first step in deciding who will eventually call the shots in one of the few truly global sports, with estimated commercial rights of around $800m.
Since the 1970s, when he spotted the potential to turn it into a lucrative sport, Mr Ecclestone has been Formula One’s ringmaster and the driving force behind grand prix racing. In making his ruling, the judge said that Bambino had “no real prospect” of defending the banks’ claim that the company, which owns 25% of the companies that run the commercial side of Formula One, had wrongly appointed two directors to another firm, Formula One Holdings (FOH), were such a case to come to a full trial. …
AFTER months of apparent posturing, Paolo Cantarella, the chief executive of Fiat, announced this week that the car manufacturers involved in Formula One (F1) will set up a new motor-racing series—apparently to be known as the Grand Prix World Championship—and will pull out of F1 in 2008. Mr Cantarella was speaking for a consortium comprising BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Fiat, Ford and Renault, which back five of the 12 F1 teams. Fiat owns Ferrari, a name synonymous with F1.
The car makers first threatened a breakaway in February when the Kirch Group, owned by Leo Kirch, a German media magnate, bought a big stake in SLEC Holdings, a group of companies that owns a large part of the commercial rights to F1. Mr Kirch gained control of SLEC (he owns 58.3%) in October, when the family trusts of Bernie Ecclestone, a controversial British entrepreneur who has run F1 since the 1970s, gave the necessary approval. The teams are bound to the current championship until the end of 2007 when the Concorde Agreement, a ten-year arrangement governing the relationship between the teams and SLEC, expires. …
THE Australian Grand Prix on March 4th marked the start of another season of Formula One (F1) motor racing. The race was won by Michael Schumacher in a Ferrari. But the event was marred by the death of a race marshal, who was killed by debris from a crashing car. While the race season has started so unhappily, a multi-billion dollar struggle is going on off the track for control of the rights to broadcast the sport. Some teams are even threatening to set up a rival championship.
Broadcasting F1 races has become a hugely lucrative business—each race, it is claimed, attracts around one billion viewers. The money that sponsors and advertisers pay to get their brands and products in front of this audience keeps F1 going. As always, one man looms over the fight: Bernie Ecclestone, a wealthy entrepreneur who over the past 20 years has turned F1 from an amateurish sport, watched mostly by enthusiasts, into a global television enterprise rivalled only by the Olympics and football’s World Cup. …
FEW people, except conspiracy theorists, would have expected so public a spat as the one this week between the two ringmasters of Formula One (F1) motor racing. Bernie Ecclestone, a fabulously wealthy British motorsport entrepreneur, is at odds, it would seem, with his longstanding associate, Max Mosley, president of F1’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA).
…
BERNIE ECCLESTONE, a fabulously wealthy British motorsport entrepreneur, already has an iron grip on broadcast media coverage of Formula One (F1) motor racing. Now he wants to control news and information on websites about F1. Hundreds of sites feature F1 as part of their general coverage, and several are devoted exclusively to the sport. So far Mr Ecclestone himself has done nothing to exploit F1 on the Internet.
After failing to persuade Ms Morris to hand over both domain names, Mr Ecclestone filed a lawsuit against her in California, alleging trademark infringement and misleading promotion of Formula1.com as a site he endorses (despite the fact that the top of every page of the site says it is “unofficial”). Ms Morris is countersuing Mr Ecclestone on antitrust grounds. It is probably no coincidence that Mr Ecclestone is to launch a magazine called F1 next February. He may just be stuck for a snappy domain name for the online edition. …
ON JUNE 28th, in the offices of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) in Geneva, delegates from over 70 national motoring associations around the world, who comprise the FIA’s supreme body, its general assembly, met in extraordinary session and voted unanimously on a single resolution. It was to approve a deal, recommended by the FIA’s senate, to grant the FIA’s commercial rights to Formula One (F1) motor racing until December 31st 2110—ie, for more than 100 years—to one man, Bernard (Bernie) Charles Ecclestone. There was no auction for these valuable rights; Mr Ecclestone was the only bidder. The delegates were sworn to strict secrecy to ensure no leaks.
The price for such a sweeping concession: $360m, payment of most of which the FIA has deferred for many years. With this deal, Mr Ecclestone, through Formula One Management (FOM, the key trading company in his empire), has, in effect, sole rights to negotiate with and collect lucrative fees from the promoters who put on grand prix races. He also has sole authority to sell television rights worldwide for a sport whose 17 races each year pull in an aggregate TV audience of around 5 billion. …
“HE HAS a travelling bus; this bus is rather grander than the word ‘bus’ normally conveys and is, perhaps, more similar to the tent of a medieval king on the battlefield. There are the equivalent of courtiers who control access to the presence.” Thus an English judge in a recent civil case, summing up the style of a defendant, Bernie Ecclestone, who runs Formula One (F1) motor racing. Among those who have been admitted to the presence are the German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, and the British prime minister, Tony Blair. Mr Blair’s Labour Party once received a £1m ($1.5m) donation from Mr Ecclestone (and had to return it after a brouhaha about a concession to F1 on tobacco advertising).
Mr Ecclestone’s dominance of F1 is deeply entrenched. He is a vice-president of the sport’s governing body, the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), and his family owns a company (Formula One Management) that has acquired exclusive commercial rights to F1. The unpaid head of the FIA, Max Mosley, recently noted that “The FIA, in conjunction with [FOM], essentially is F1.” …
Excerpts from various articles about the power and resolve of both Max and Bernie, the massive amount of money and power is incredible... give Ferrari a bonus for their loyalty, hold McLaren and Hamilton for a year,,, come uppance for the bid of power together with BMW, Renault, Mercedes etc....
The lessons learnt from Michael Schumacher domination are clearly being used, too much too soon will turn the public away, but, the ongoing Maciavallian plotting... the crowds will be bigger the advertising fees greater and the pulling power of Hamilton in South American even greater..
Well, Bernie has got teh rights for the next, how many years, who wnats to spoil it too early?
The lessons learnt from Michael Schumacher domination are clearly being used, too much too soon will turn the public away, but, the ongoing Maciavallian plotting... the crowds will be bigger the advertising fees greater and the pulling power of Hamilton in South American even greater..
Well, Bernie has got teh rights for the next, how many years, who wnats to spoil it too early?
And:'''
THIS year’s season of Formula One races begins in Melbourne on March 12th. A few weeks later a meeting will take place in Brussels that could dramatically change the face of the sport. The European Commission’s competition authorities will sit down with the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), the sport’s governing body, to hear its objections to the commission’s interim ruling last summer that the sport is organised uncompetitively. In particular, the commission is unhappy with the way the FIA has awarded exclusive broadcasting rights to a company owned and run by one of its vice-presidents, Bernie Ecclestone. It thinks TV rights could be negotiated track by track or team by team, allowing other TV companies to get part of the action.
Max Mosley, head of the FIA, says that the bureaucrats in Brussels don’t understand the reality of motor sport: the racing teams have enough on their hands and prefer to leave it to Mr Ecclestone to handle the broadcasting contracts. Besides, Mr Ecclestone comes round at the end of each season and shares out some of the proceeds from his sale of the pictures to networks round the world. …
THIS year’s season of Formula One races begins in Melbourne on March 12th. A few weeks later a meeting will take place in Brussels that could dramatically change the face of the sport. The European Commission’s competition authorities will sit down with the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), the sport’s governing body, to hear its objections to the commission’s interim ruling last summer that the sport is organised uncompetitively. In particular, the commission is unhappy with the way the FIA has awarded exclusive broadcasting rights to a company owned and run by one of its vice-presidents, Bernie Ecclestone. It thinks TV rights could be negotiated track by track or team by team, allowing other TV companies to get part of the action.
Max Mosley, head of the FIA, says that the bureaucrats in Brussels don’t understand the reality of motor sport: the racing teams have enough on their hands and prefer to leave it to Mr Ecclestone to handle the broadcasting contracts. Besides, Mr Ecclestone comes round at the end of each season and shares out some of the proceeds from his sale of the pictures to networks round the world. …
Zapp Brannigan
Built like a steakhouse, handles like a bistro
Jamie Toseland should win it. In motorsports a good judge of how good you are is by your team-mate; Toseland won the title, Robbie Rolfo was nowhere.
Plus, the guy has personality - by all accounts he's a top bloke and at pretty much every race weekend he's putting on the entertainment with his band.
Plus, the guy has personality - by all accounts he's a top bloke and at pretty much every race weekend he's putting on the entertainment with his band.
1927
Funnier than he thinks he is.
Team of year nominations
1, England Rugby team- who won err....fuck all
2, GB cycling team- who won, well 7 gold medals at world champs
3, Scotland football team- who won err....fuck all
Winners. England Rugby team ffs.
Team of year should have been Team Calzaghe. Right now Britain can boast 6 world champs, 3 of them come from the same small gym in Newbridge coached by Joe's old man. Giving them the prize for team would make up in a small way for JC not winning individual prize. BBC are prize A cunts.
1, England Rugby team- who won err....fuck all
2, GB cycling team- who won, well 7 gold medals at world champs
3, Scotland football team- who won err....fuck all
Winners. England Rugby team ffs.
Team of year should have been Team Calzaghe. Right now Britain can boast 6 world champs, 3 of them come from the same small gym in Newbridge coached by Joe's old man. Giving them the prize for team would make up in a small way for JC not winning individual prize. BBC are prize A cunts.
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
Looks liek you calzaghe fans got your wish so you can finally stop moaning all the fucking time about it.
Meh, was more excited about Sir Bobby Robsons award, thatw as the highlight.
Meh, was more excited about Sir Bobby Robsons award, thatw as the highlight.
FaradayCaged
I like pancakes, do you like pancakes?
well deserved by Joe Calzaghe!
strung out
💩 🤣 🍆 💦 🧐 👻 🐝 🐈⬛
1927 said:
TrippyLondoner
Well-Known Member
err, what? You talk alot of shit dont you.
slowth
same old
Robby Bobson collecting the lifetime achievement award was the highlight for me.Brought a tear to my eye watching him limp to the podium with the music playing, standing ovation,relentless clapping,loved ones surrounding him.Theres something really, really humbling watching a frail old man with a sparkle in his eye getting his just rewards just in time.
(lol @ lennox Lewis going to high five Joe Calzagie,only for Joe to turn and hug
Ricky Hatton first)
(lol @ lennox Lewis going to high five Joe Calzagie,only for Joe to turn and hug
Ricky Hatton first)
