Ta ta Decent F1 Coverage

CyclingBantam

First Aspect wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Not sure that this is the time/place to ask personal questions re political leaning.

This isn't the 70's. Paying to watch major sport on TV is the norm throughout the world. I don't see what should make the UK any different.

Freedom/democracy etc should be available to all, not sport. Besides which, think about how much money the real fans have to spend to watch F1 etc live. But you're not moaning about ticket/travel prices are you? Nope. It's a case of have cake eat cake.

Besides which, you take a trip to any deprived area of the Uk and you will see plenty of houses with SKY dishes. Like it or lump it, those that want to watch sport on TV find the money to pay for it.

And yes you are being naive, ridiculously so.

Even though I understand it as largely accurate, words cannot express how much I disagree with it in principle.

Actually, I think it might be a largely inaccurate sweeping statement from a privilaged prick.

Sky dish doesn't necessarily equal sky sports. It doesn't even indicate sky TV, only that someone at some point had a dish installed.

Alterntaively, if you like football but can't afford £1k a year to watch your team any more, sky sports is about your only option. The grubby masses in their hovels with sky TV are probably sacrificing rather a lot elsewhere in their lives, Il Beautifique. You could ask yourself whether this is entirely fair. Its not like you can get a little bit of live premiership football or test cricket any other way is it? Of course the prolls could save lots of cash reading second hand books to pass the time instead of watching telly, the greedy ba$tards.

Finally, I only really know about north america and south america, but the cost for access to sporting events seems in those places to be more on a par with the TV license. So yes, one has to pay in some other places, but nowhere near as much as we are held to ransom for in the UK.

At the moment, Sky has an effective monopoly, which it can afford because its got that critical mass of sports coverage now. In other countries, there is real competition. NASCAR and baseball, for example, are split between at least 3 networks in the states, two of which are terrestrial. You don't get animosity towards the networks in the states bcause they don't price gouge and the situation seems somehow reasonable. You get objections here because we all know that the situation is intrinsically unfair and as so often happens, it crept up on the affable Brits without anyone noticing until it was too late.

Don't you get tired with that chip on your shoulder.

It does amuse me the theory that anyone poor is simply a damn hard worker struggling through life as best they can. Sure plenty are but also plenty are not.

What the hell are you sniffling on about "sacrificing a lot elsewhere". Does that make people more deserving? I sacrifice something everytime I buy anything. Nobody is forced. It is like I said at the start of the thread, why is TV seen as a 'need'. It is the absolute example of a luxury.

Where are these £1,000 season tickets you are talking about? Is there any club in the country that charges that as a minimum? There are 92 league clubs, not just the premiership you know.

Il P was spot on but you clearly have some issue. Maybe inverted snobbery?

P.s yes I did deliberately take the tone of an arse. I wanted to match yours.

I'm just off to go and burn some of my middle class cash I made from exploiting the poor.

First.Aspect

Well, mine was deliberately inflamatory as well. Alexi Sayle was on the radio this morning.

I do find the initial post somewhat offensive and infuriating though, more so because it wasn't hammed up but rather genuine.

Aguila

Asprilla wrote:

Aguila wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

More people watch F1 on the BBC than watch MOTD and live matches on Sky put together (6-8 million per race).

So what, how many people watch X factor? Its still utter toss.

You asked who cared. If you don't like the answer that's your problem.

Ah, pointless arguments, what the internet forum does best. What you dont seem to have grasped is that I'm right and you are wrong! See?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Aguila wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

Aguila wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

More people watch F1 on the BBC than watch MOTD and live matches on Sky put together (6-8 million per race).

So what, how many people watch X factor? Its still utter toss.

You asked who cared. If you don't like the answer that's your problem.

Ah, pointless arguments, what the internet forum does best. What you dont seem to have grasped is that I'm right and you are wrong! See?

In a matter of judgment, you have once again proved yourself to be a cretin.

Well done! 10/10 for consistency!

tailwindhome

First Aspect wrote:

You could ask yourself whether this is entirely fair. Its not like you can get a little bit of live premiership football or test cricket any other way is it?

Could do what I do and watch it in the pub for the price of a pint.

cloggsy

F1 is crap anyway, more like a precession... Watch some decent racing, like the MotoGP, World Superbikes & British Superbikes... :roll:

First.Aspect

TailWindHome wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

You could ask yourself whether this is entirely fair. Its not like you can get a little bit of live premiership football or test cricket any other way is it?

Could do what I do and watch it in the pub for the price of a pint.

But I don't like it when the other chimps throw sh!t at each other.

Besides, which pub will be open at 4am on a Sunday for the Japanese GP? Wait, what am I thinking, that's a Saturday night, not a Sunday morning isn't it.

tailwindhome

First Aspect wrote:

But I don't like it when the other chimps throw sh!t at each other.

Besides, which pub will be open at 4am on a Sunday for the Japanese GP? Wait, what am I thinking, that's a Saturday night, not a Sunday morning isn't it.

You're an angry little man, aren't you?

Aguila

Greg66 wrote:

Aguila wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

Aguila wrote:

Asprilla wrote:

More people watch F1 on the BBC than watch MOTD and live matches on Sky put together (6-8 million per race).

So what, how many people watch X factor? Its still utter toss.

You asked who cared. If you don't like the answer that's your problem.

Ah, pointless arguments, what the internet forum does best. What you dont seem to have grasped is that I'm right and you are wrong! See?

In a matter of judgment, you have once again proved yourself to be a cretin.

Well done! 10/10 for consistency!

Face...... Bovverred.

First.Aspect

TailWindHome wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

But I don't like it when the other chimps throw sh!t at each other.

Besides, which pub will be open at 4am on a Sunday for the Japanese GP? Wait, what am I thinking, that's a Saturday night, not a Sunday morning isn't it.

You're an angry little man, aren't you?

I am a bit annoyed about this, yes.

EDIT: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/busi ... 107294138/

desweller

cloggsy wrote:

F1 is crap anyway, more like a precession... Watch some decent racing, like the MotoGP, World Superbikes & British Superbikes... :roll:

You're well out of date mate. This and the last two seasons have been brilliant for passing moves. I haven't seen it this year but I understand that MotoGP was struggling a bit for passing last year due to TC?

Anyway, if all I wanted to do was watch overtaking I'd just attend the lower formulae instead. More mistakes = more passes.

Not too bothered about this; IMO it's amazing that it's taken so long for Bernie to make the move.

il_principe

First Aspect wrote:

Well, mine was deliberately inflamatory as well. Alexi Sayle was on the radio this morning.

I do find the initial post somewhat offensive and infuriating though, more so because it wasn't hammed up but rather genuine.

If you need to resort to pathetic ad hominem attacks then I really have no desire to engage with you any further.

:roll:

notsoblue

First Aspect wrote:

Actually, I think it might be a largely inaccurate sweeping statement from a privilaged prick.

Sky dish doesn't necessarily equal sky sports. It doesn't even indicate sky TV, only that someone at some point had a dish installed.

Alterntaively, if you like football but can't afford £1k a year to watch your team any more, sky sports is about your only option. The grubby masses in their hovels with sky TV are probably sacrificing rather a lot elsewhere in their lives, Il Beautifique. You could ask yourself whether this is entirely fair. Its not like you can get a little bit of live premiership football or test cricket any other way is it? Of course the prolls could save lots of cash reading second hand books to pass the time instead of watching telly, the greedy ba$tards.

Finally, I only really know about north america and south america, but the cost for access to sporting events seems in those places to be more on a par with the TV license. So yes, one has to pay in some other places, but nowhere near as much as we are held to ransom for in the UK.

At the moment, Sky has an effective monopoly, which it can afford because its got that critical mass of sports coverage now. In other countries, there is real competition. NASCAR and baseball, for example, are split between at least 3 networks in the states, two of which are terrestrial. You don't get animosity towards the networks in the states bcause they don't price gouge and the situation seems somehow reasonable. You get objections here because we all know that the situation is intrinsically unfair and as so often happens, it crept up on the affable Brits without anyone noticing until it was too late.

*proles

First.Aspect

Il Principe wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well, mine was deliberately inflamatory as well. Alexi Sayle was on the radio this morning.

I do find the initial post somewhat offensive and infuriating though, more so because it wasn't hammed up but rather genuine.

If you need to resort to pathetic attacks then I really have no desire to engage with you any further.

:roll:

You haven't engaged with me at all, actually. Is an attack worse if its directed to a person, or to an entire group of people? I was never that good at maths, so you tell me.

rjsterry

First Aspect wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well, mine was deliberately inflamatory as well. Alexi Sayle was on the radio this morning.

I do find the initial post somewhat offensive and infuriating though, more so because it wasn't hammed up but rather genuine.

If you need to resort to pathetic attacks then I really have no desire to engage with you any further.

:roll:

You haven't engaged with me at all, actually. Is an attack worse if its directed to a person, or to an entire group of people? I was never that good at maths, so you tell me.

As far as I can see, IP observed that there are plenty of satellite dishes in less well off areas, so people obviously do find a way to pay to watch sport. That's hardly an 'attack' on the prolls [sic], is it?

First.Aspect

rjsterry wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

Well, mine was deliberately inflamatory as well. Alexi Sayle was on the radio this morning.

I do find the initial post somewhat offensive and infuriating though, more so because it wasn't hammed up but rather genuine.

If you need to resort to pathetic attacks then I really have no desire to engage with you any further.

:roll:

You haven't engaged with me at all, actually. Is an attack worse if its directed to a person, or to an entire group of people? I was never that good at maths, so you tell me.

As far as I can see, IP observed that there are plenty of satellite dishes in less well off areas, so people obviously do find a way to pay to watch sport. That's hardly an 'attack' on the prolls [sic], is it?

Let them eat cake. That's what it said to me and that's what I reacted to. I stand by the reaction, however you wish to categorise the post.

dreamlx10

Formula ! !!!!!!! Who gives a s***, rich boys wasting petrol sums it up.

Paul E

dreamlx10 wrote:

Formula ! !!!!!!! Who gives a s***, rich boys wasting petrol sums it up.

Please troll somewhere else, footballers aren't exactly poor and what do they do, all buy Bentleys and such like and waste petrol going from their mock georgian mansions to training and back.

Least we get genuine innvoations to car technology filter down from F1, ABS brakes for instance.

tailwindhome

Where were you all when the US Masters moved to SKY?

dreamlx10

footballers aren't exactly poor and what do they do

Football who cares about that either, I wasn't defending football !

Please troll somewhere else

Like where ? I've been posting here five years longer than you, where in my post does it say I like football ?

gtvlusso

Paul E wrote:

dreamlx10 wrote:

Formula ! !!!!!!! Who gives a s***, rich boys wasting petrol sums it up.

Please troll somewhere else, footballers aren't exactly poor and what do they do, all buy Bentleys and such like and waste petrol going from their mock georgian mansions to training and back.

Least we get genuine innvoations to car technology filter down from F1, ABS brakes for instance.

ABS brakes come from aircraft technology - from the 50's

Yes, F1 is just a bunch of premadonnas, as is football. However, Football is very accessable to the masses and F1 is not.

I am not a big fan of F1 as you can tell, I just find it a bit dull now.

When my daughter was very small and awake at night, I used to watch ESPN classics and went through most of the 70's F1 racing (jakie Stewart, Joe Siffert, Nikki Lauder, Pedro Rodriguez eras) and it seemed like a much more edgy and dangerous game - also watching the GT cars was like watching a bunch of guys sitting on bombs waiting to explode! Huge power and huge sideburns.....

real racing car:



Fibreglass, no saffety and a bloody massive engine....I believe that Derek Bell hit 240mph+ at Le Mans in one of these in the early 70's.


I also went through several 70's football seasons.......great because Charlton Athletic where actually quite good then!
[/img]

greg66_tri_v2.0

TailWindHome wrote:

Where were you all when the US Masters moved to SKY?

Please, we're trying to discuss *sport* in this thread.

greg66_tri_v2.0

dreamlx10 wrote:

Please troll somewhere else

Like where ?

Do you expect us to do everything for you? Use your imagination, FFS.

Paul E

gtvlusso wrote:

Paul E wrote:

dreamlx10 wrote:

Formula ! !!!!!!! Who gives a s***, rich boys wasting petrol sums it up.

Please troll somewhere else, footballers aren't exactly poor and what do they do, all buy Bentleys and such like and waste petrol going from their mock georgian mansions to training and back.

Least we get genuine innvoations to car technology filter down from F1, ABS brakes for instance.

ABS brakes come from aircraft technology - from the 50's

Yes, F1 is just a bunch of premadonnas, as is football. However, Football is very accessable to the masses and F1 is not.

I am not a big fan of F1 as you can tell, I just find it a bit dull now.

When my daughter was very small and awake at night, I used to watch ESPN classics and went through most of the 70's F1 racing (jakie Stewart, Joe Siffert, Nikki Lauder, Pedro Rodriguez eras) and it seemed like a much more edgy and dangerous game - also watching the GT cars was like watching a bunch of guys sitting on bombs waiting to explode! Huge power and huge sideburns.....

real racing car:



Fibreglass, no saffety and a bloody massive engine....I believe that Derek Bell hit 240mph+ at Le Mans in one of these in the early 70's.


I also went through several 70's football seasons.......great because Charlton Athletic where actually quite good then!
[/img]

F1 brought the tenchnology down to car level though.

I enjoy le mans too, have been and it was awesome, motorsport is accessable, karting is a great way to experience it, not as easy or cheap as kicking a ball, well it is unless you go out and buy a replica shirt as well, but it's still accessable.

The 917 ended up with over 1200 bhp from it's flat 12 and how they thought it was safe to put the drivers ankles in front of the front axle is beyond me, those drivers had real balls, I have seen one being driven round the old nurburgring too, not flat out but the sound was incredible.

First.Aspect

TailWindHome wrote:

Where were you all when the US Masters moved to SKY?

Good point. My problem is that there is effectively a monopoly, not that you have to pay to watch sport. The same applies to golf and tiddlywinks.

tailwindhome

First Aspect wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Where were you all when the US Masters moved to SKY?

Good point. My problem is that there is effectively a monopoly, not that you have to pay to watch sport. The same applies to golf and tiddlywinks.

Unless I have misunderstood, half of the Grand Prix* will still be show live on BBC plus a highlights package and Radio 5 coverage. I'm not sure how that gives Sky a monopoly.






* Presumably half the total number rather than one half of each Grand Prix.

gtvlusso

Paul E wrote:

gtvlusso wrote:

Paul E wrote:

dreamlx10 wrote:

Formula ! !!!!!!! Who gives a s***, rich boys wasting petrol sums it up.

Please troll somewhere else, footballers aren't exactly poor and what do they do, all buy Bentleys and such like and waste petrol going from their mock georgian mansions to training and back.

Least we get genuine innvoations to car technology filter down from F1, ABS brakes for instance.

ABS brakes come from aircraft technology - from the 50's

Yes, F1 is just a bunch of premadonnas, as is football. However, Football is very accessable to the masses and F1 is not.

I am not a big fan of F1 as you can tell, I just find it a bit dull now.

When my daughter was very small and awake at night, I used to watch ESPN classics and went through most of the 70's F1 racing (jakie Stewart, Joe Siffert, Nikki Lauder, Pedro Rodriguez eras) and it seemed like a much more edgy and dangerous game - also watching the GT cars was like watching a bunch of guys sitting on bombs waiting to explode! Huge power and huge sideburns.....

real racing car:



Fibreglass, no saffety and a bloody massive engine....I believe that Derek Bell hit 240mph+ at Le Mans in one of these in the early 70's.


I also went through several 70's football seasons.......great because Charlton Athletic where actually quite good then!
[/img]

F1 brought the tenchnology down to car level though.

I enjoy le mans too, have been and it was awesome, motorsport is accessable, karting is a great way to experience it, not as easy or cheap as kicking a ball, well it is unless you go out and buy a replica shirt as well, but it's still accessable.

The 917 ended up with over 1200 bhp from it's flat 12 and how they thought it was safe to put the drivers ankles in front of the front axle is beyond me, those drivers had real balls, I have seen one being driven round the old nurburgring too, not flat out but the sound was incredible.

The 917/30 performance is unmatched - this was in unlimited class racing though. So, 5.4 litre flat 12 with twin Turbochargers = 1100 BHP. However, it was run in 2 modes: race mode was 1300 BHP and Qualifying mode was 1600BHP.

I think this is far more exciting than the strict formula we have now; even the old 1.5 litre turbocharged formula back in the 80's was far more fun - at least you knew that the engine was on the edge of exploding and the car was impossible to drive (no power, then full turbo spin up) - see BRM V16 for impossible to use engines.

I prefer motorbike racing though (except motogp) - really stripped down cheaply made racing, shadow class bikes that can be bought at any dealer, then lightened and tuned to buggery. Shame there is not money in it.

dreamlx10

Do you expect us to do everything for you? Use your imagination, FFS

Am I not entitled to an opinion ? Why should i move elsewhere, this is a "Cycling" wesite is it not ? The media give enough biased coverage to so called popular sports without people on cycling websites helping them out. How many people on here go to and from work in a Formula 1 car ?

Jay dubbleU

I have never had Sky - I have always refused to pay money for anything which benefits Murdoch since the cricket farce of the 70s

rjsterry

TailWindHome wrote:

First Aspect wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Where were you all when the US Masters moved to SKY?

Good point. My problem is that there is effectively a monopoly, not that you have to pay to watch sport. The same applies to golf and tiddlywinks.

Unless I have misunderstood, half of the Grand Prix* will still be show live on BBC plus a highlights package and Radio 5 coverage. I'm not sure how that gives Sky a monopoly.






* Presumably half the total number rather than one half of each Grand Prix.

"To find out how this race ends press..."