It’s kids, isn’t it. It’s kids with not enough experience, and they just go and fuck it all up!
At the time, most people — myself included — thought that he was referring to Sebastian Vettel. But my brother brought up an interesting point to me today. He didn’t say “it’s a kid”. He said, “It’s kids.”
Was he laying the blame on Hamilton as well as Vettel?
His most recent comments — that “Hamilton did a shit job behind the Safety Car” — are pretty scathing about Hamilton’s role. As far as I can see, he has made no criticism of Vettel since Sunday.
Given the announcement that Hamilton is now being investigated by the FIA stewards for his role in the crash, Webber’s quote now takes on a new meaning. Isn’t it funny how most of us assumed he was just talking about Vettel when he could have been talking about Hamilton as well?
Firstly — apologies for the lateness of my review of the Japanese Grand Prix. Another busy weekend spilled over into Monday, and is spilling over into Tuesday and Wednesday as well. (I am being very naughty by writing this post.)
There are so many talking points that it is difficult to know where to start.
I guess I should start by noting that it looks as though Lewis Hamilton will be this year’s World Champion. On the basis of his performance in treacherous conditions at Fuji, he fully deserves it. I still think that Fernando Alonso deserves to be World Champion more because I think he has been on balance the better driver. But it’s points that matter.
Hamilton’s drive at Fuji was solid and impressive. In a lot of ways it was a basic pole-to-flag drive for Hamilton. Besides a little run-in with Kubica, he had no real challenges to face. Not much impressive in that, dreadful conditions aside of course. This does not rank alongside, for instance, Senna at Donington in 1993, or even with Alonso at Hungaroring in 2006.
But Hamilton’s race showed firstly that he can drive in the wet. As his engineer noted at the end of the race, he has ticked the “driving in the wet” box that he so conspicuously failed to tick earlier this year at the Nürburgring. It also shows just how quickly he is learning. He made no obvious clangers at Nürburgring, but it was overall a pretty scrappy and unimpressive race. Fuji put that to bed.
It was exactly the opposite for Alonso. It is difficult to know exactly what was wrong with Alonso at Fuji. The conditions should have worked in his favour. Driving in the wet is a major strength of his, as last year’s Hungarian GP demonstrated. At Fuji, though, he was all over the place (certainly in comparison to Hamilton). Seemingly, Hamilton got pole with a heavier car as well.
For another reminder of how well Hamilton is doing, you just had to look from the back of Hamilton’s car on lap 45. Behind the safety car, Sebastian Vettel caused one of the most embarrassing crashes of the season. Mark Webber was running second for Red Bull, and he felt like he was in with a chance of winning. Sebastian Vettel was in third for the Red Bull sister car, Toro Rosso. It would be a historic finish for Red Bull, and for Toro Rosso who were on line for their first ever podium, and their first points of the season.
Then Vettel lost his concentration behind the safety car and slammed straight into the back of Webber. Both cars had to retire from the race. Vettel was distraught — crying in the garage upon his sheepish return to the pitlane. How does he explain to the boss what happened?
Webber was noticeably furious, and threw the steering wheel from his car as though he were an Olympic shot put competitor. ITV reported that early on in the race Webber had been sick in his helmet. Lesser men would give up when their stomachs empty themselves. That’s what separates us from Grand Prix racing drivers. The decision to continue was being paid off in the form of second place.
I bet while he was running in second he had forgotten all about the vomit in his helmet. Being slammed in the rear by a driver of his sister team was probably enough to make him sick all over again. Take a sip of water to calm yourself down. Oh no, you were sick into your straw.
Furious Webber stormed back to the pitlane and blasted Vettel in the strongest possible terms. It provided the funniest moment of the race. On live Saturday morning television, in the same slot where Pocoyo is normally shown, he blasted, voice noticeably trembling with rage:
It’s kids, isn’t it. It’s kids with not enough experience, and they just go and FUCK IT ALL UP!
Vettel has probably lost a lot of his reputation with that moment. Usually it would be forgiven as a rookie mistake, but the problem is that this year there is a rookie who you cannot envisage making that kind of mistake. More evidence of what a good job Hamilton is doing. (Having said that, I can’t think of Kovalainen dropping any similar clangers either.)
Someone else who lost a lot of reputation — as if he had any left to lose — was Ralf Schumacher. During qualifying 1 he was seemingly worried about not making the cut. For whatever reason he felt the need to take an ambitious move alongside a Spyker. Unfortunately, instead of going alongside the Spyker, he just went straight into it and damaged his car so badly that he wouldn’t have been able to go into Q2 anyway. To rub salt into the wound, he qualified for it. Yesterday, Ralf Schumacher was sacked left Toyota.
I suppose this is the thing about wet races. It makes some people look like complete idiots. It makes other people look like superheroes. So many drivers put in amazing performances at Fuji. I have already noted Hamilton, Webber and Vettel (before his boo-boo moment).
But Kimi Räikkönen was probably the most impressive driver on the track. He suffered badly from Ferrari’s strategic (and rule-breaking) blunder to start the race on intermediates while everyone else was on full wets. It was a nonsensical decision in the first place, and after just a few laps behind the safety car both Ferrari drivers had to pit in to change to full wets, relegating them to dead last.
Despite this, and in those crazy conditions as well, Räikkönen and Massa both managed to get themselves into potential podium positions. Räikkönen in particular had a stunning race, with a notable move on the outside of David Coulthard being the highlight. It really is the stuff that champions are made of. I hope Räikkönen’s career won’t finish as a case of “if only” as it has been so far.
Kudos also to Massa who was ahead of Räikkönen which is really inconvenient for Ferrari’s hopes in the Drivers’ Championship. And team orders don’t exist, especially from Ferrari. So it was time for a suspicious “splash n dash” to let Räikkönen ahead of Massa, who dropped straight back to 7th.
I suppose we shouldn’t be so cynical. It did let us see a truly amazing last-lap ding-dong battle between Massa and Kubica. There was an uncomfortably high amount of the run-off areas being used. I feel that Massa’s wide line through the run-off at the final corner is what gave him the edge over Kubica in the end, but they were both guilty of using the run-off areas. It provided some damn fun racing, but you can’t help feeling that they were both… cheating?
Ah yes cheating. What about that business with starting on intermediates when they were told to go on wets? Ferrari didn’t get the email apparently! Hah! Yeah right. All of the other teams and even the commentators knew the deal, but Ferrari didn’t. Likely story. Of course, FIArrari believed them.
I should also mention Jenson Button. After his torrid season in a shitbox Honda, he qualifying performance was truly encouraging and I was hoping that he could get a good result. Unfortunately he lost his front wing early on and had to get it replaced.
Rather alarmingly, though, he ran sans front wing for a few laps without any major drop-off in performance. An illustration of just how bad that Honda is — it can lose its front wing and you wouldn’t be able to tell from the times being set.
Liuzzi almost scored a point for Torro Rosso. It would have been scant consolation for Vettel’s lost podium, but it would have been something. Yup, it would have been, had he not passed Sutil under a yellow flag! Doh!
So instead, Adrian Sutil scored his first point, and Spyker’s first point as well. Just in time to impress their latest new owner (they must have had four owners in as many years!). In seriousness, Sutil is seriously impressing this season. A drive at a better team for 2009 surely beckons.
History also for Heikki Kovalainen, who took Renault’s first podium of the year, and his first podium of the career. Apparently it is also the first time two Finns have been on the podium, so a good day to remember for Finland.
A shockingly awful day for Japan though. On their home territory, all of the teams with Japanese links did awfully. I have already mentioned Schumacher and Button. Barrichello was 10th, Trulli finished dead last of the runners, both Williams-Toyotas and both Super Aguris failed to finish. Sakon Yamamoto was 12th. Who would be a Japanese F1 fan?
This is just a bit of what I have been thinking. I could go on and on and on about that race, but I have to stop somewhere. The championship looks like it’s nearly over, but I can’t wait for the Chinese Grand Prix. Luckily, we only have to wait a few days for it.
Update: As soon as I published this, I spotted this on Sidepodcast. It provides very convincing evidence that Hamilton could have caused the collision between Webber and Vettel. It also backs up Vettel’s post-race comments about how he was being put off by Hamilton. Commentators noted Hamilton’s erratic driving behind the safety car, and it does look a little bit like Hamilton was taking things rather over the line with his excessive start–stop driving.
You can only assume that he was deliberately trying to cause an accident, or rattle his opponents. (As Sidepodcast notes, it can’t have been warming brakes, because that involves abrupt changes in speed, not the gradual halt that Hamilton comes to.) What do you think? Watch quickly, before FOM take it down.
I have to say, well done to the person who took the footage. It’s better than anything the actual TV director took of the incident, and reveals a whole lot more of what was going on in the incident.
Update: The original video has, as predicted, been removed by FOM. For the benefit of the many visitors still reading this post, here is another copy of the video. This will probably get pulled down as well.
Ofcom has said that it is thinking about letting television stations broadcast more adverts. Ofcom are considering allowing nine minutes of advertising per hour. Currently an average of seven minutes per hour is allowed, although a maximum of twelve minutes in any one clock hour is permitted.
I am no fan of television adverts, but I have to say that I feel sorry for broadcasters in this respect. The comments on the article from Times Online are mostly negative, perhaps encapsulated by this one by Harry Taylor.
Surely not! Is there not too much advertising already, mostly purile, repetitive and often misleading?…
With all its faults give me the BBC.
Of course, if Times Online were to write an article about a proposed increase in the License Fee, everybody would be saying the opposite. But, as they say, there’s no such thing as a free lunch.
Commercial broadcasters are expected to pull excellent programmes out of thin air with the minimum of advertisements. And as we’ve seen this year, another major form of revenue for broadcasters — premium-rate phone-lines — has become a bit of a taboo. People must accept that adverts are a necessary evil — but a balance must be struck.
But for all of their (supposedly) good intentions, a lot of Ofcom’s advertising regulations work against the viewer. Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than Formula 1. F1 has the dubious honour of being the only sport event to be broadcast in the UK where adverts are showing during the action. And football fans complain about adverts during half time! Think about how F1 fans must feel!
Once again, it has to be accepted that adverts in F1 are a necessary evil. F1 is almost unique in that a Grand Prix can last anything from 90 minutes to two hours with no break in the action. (The only other sports I can think of that go on for so long with no breaks are long-distance running and cycling, which are usually not shown live by a commercial broadcaster.) Seemingly, this is just too long for ITV to go without showing an advert. This means that they can’t bunch them up at either side of the action as they do with football.
But does it have to be this way? Many F1 fans would be willing to see some form of compromise, but the solutions put forward are currently prohibited by Ofcom (PDF). The main culprit is pesky article 3.1:
Television advertising must be readily recognisable as such and kept quite separate from other parts of the programme service. Breaks containing advertising spots of any kind, including teleshopping spots, must be identified in vision and/or sound, for example station identifications going in and out of breaks.
This means that any way of ITV simultaneously showing both adverts and programming is prohibited. A split-screen solution is often proposed. One part of the screen contains the race action, perhaps as an inset in an advert. But it’s not allowed. Sky Sports News can do it because it is permitted as long as only text is displayed. But even a scrolling text service in this style would not be allowed on ITV, because the rules are stricter for ITV, Channel 4 and Channel Five.
Other reasonable compromises are also prohibited. For instance, ITV would not be allowed to broadcast audio advertisements while race pictures take up the screen. ITV could not even overlay text adverts on top of the race pictures.
All of this is not allowed by Ofcom, probably for noble reasons. But most F1 fans would love to have any one of these solutions over the current situation — where ITV interrupt the race completely and broadcast commercial breaks that last minutes.
Also working against F1 fans is the requirement that ITV must display an ident going in and out of commercial breaks. This prolongs the commerical break for yet more crucial seconds.
Indeed, if you are an F1 fan you might be tempted to suspect that Ofcom’s regulations were specifically designed to get in the way of F1 the most. Because, despite the constant references to how commercials should only appear at “natural breaks” of the programming, one paragraph — which was included specifically with ITV’s F1 coverage in mind — proves that this is all just for show.
In live coverage of long continuous events breaks may be taken at points where the focus of coverage shifts from one point to another of the event for example after a resume of the current placings in a race and before refocusing on a particular section of the race.
So even though there are no “natural breaks” in an F1 race, ITV may show adverts just by giving a run-down of the positions in the race before going to a break, and saying what lap the drivers are on when the adverts are finished.
I also reckon that the rules surrounding the amount and length of commercial breaks also works against F1 viewers. It also works against viewers of football, films, or any other long programme.
Now, my memory of what I am about to say is sketchy. It must have been almost a decade ago and I was still rather young. But I am sure that while I was on holiday in France I watched a commercial break that lasted several minutes. It felt like about fifteen, but it might have been ten minutes. I don’t know. But what I do know is that I would never have seen a commercial break last that long in the UK.
But these breaks were not included willy-nilly in the middle of programmes. The obscenely long commercial break was, in fact, placed out of harm’s way at the end of a football match (or a film, I can’t remember). It was there to make up for the lack of adverts during the programme.* So, while at first a commercial break lasting ten minutes may seem obscenely long, would not most of us prefer this kind of solution? One where the adverts were tucked away where we don’t have to see them?
As such, I would support a liberalisation — or at least a fundamental re-think — of advertising regulations. This is not only for the reasons I have outlined above, but for another reason which is the drive of my liberal view on most things.
Insiders at the regulator are keen to emphasise that they want to avoid coming close to US advert levels, which they believe would be unpalatable to British audiences.
If they were so unpalatable, broadcasters would of course not want to do this for fear of making viewers switch off. No regulations necessary — broadcasters will find the “correct” level of advertising naturally.
I suspect that a few years down the line we won’t have to worry about this at all. Due to the increasing prevalence of PVRs, soon enough we will all be able to record the programmes then fast-forward through the adverts. (I usually already do this when I watch Grands Prix because I am not in a position to watch the races live.)
Advertisers will have to find more and more creative ways to reach viewers. Product placement might be harder to regulate. And soon enough we probably won’t always even realise when we are watching adverts.
* I might actually be completely wrong about this, and the long commercial break may have been caused by some kind of technical mishap or something else. I did not know because I could not speak French, but the scenario I described seems most likely to me.
Something which is sickeningly called “the Lewis Hamilton effect” is good news for ITV, who are currently enjoying F1 viewing figures which have doubled. The Hungarian Grand Prix attracted 4.7m viewers and 48% viewer share. I heard it being described on the radio yesterday as the saving grace of an ITV that has lost approximately sixty million billion squid from the premium rate phone lines scandal alone.
I feel sorry for all of those people who tuned into the Hungarian Grand Prix expecting a good race. Mind you, a lot of people might have thought it was a great race, but only because Lewis Hamilton won. But it was the most boring race of the season so far, and you would expect that because the Hungarian Grand Prix usually is.
It is a circuit that, famously, you can’t overtake on, which is a bit like having a swimming pool that you can’t swim in. But still they plough on with using the circuit year in, year out while bloody awesome circuits like Spa-Francorchamps are in-out-in-out shake it all about, and Suzuka was dropped completely.
Not only was the race itself utterly dull, but the commentary was even worse than usual — and that’s saying something. Martin Brundle, who really is the only decent person on ITV’s coverage, always takes a holiday for the Hungarian Grand Prix. This is because he is sensible and knows what he is doing. This means that the coverage is even more of a shambles than usual.
Martin Brundle’s replacement was Damon Hill, who was commentating for the first time ever. Perhaps you can forgive him for this, but it made for quite uncomfortable viewing. So many awkward pauses, ums, ers, and appeals to James Allen to help him out whenever he ran out of things to say!
For the post-race analysis we have to put up with Mark Blundell. “I have spoken to this bloke what I know what works down the garage there, and he told me that that car what he’s got underneath him will to the job no bother guv.”
In the pitlane there is Ted Kravitz, who must be admired for actually making a viable career out of stating the bloody obvious. “There is a car in the pitlane. And, YES, they are putting in some fuel! And some new tyres as well. They’re softs. No wait they’re hard tyres. Hang on, are they wets? Actually, I think they might be Michelins.”
I exaggerated a bit, but during the Hungarian Grand Prix Ted Kravitz did actually confuse a soft tyre with a hard tyre. This is despite the fact that James Allen feels the need to explain the “white stripe” rule about a dozen times per race. I mean, honestly. He must think F1 viewers are really thick. Imagine if they explained, say, the handball rule every five minutes during the football coverage. It would drive. You. Insane.
Which brings us on to James Allen, a total stain on the entire image of F1. I can only hope that the masses of fairweather F1 fans who are watching due to “the Lewis Hamilton effect” are shocked enough by the standard of his commentary that ITV will be forced to employ somebody who can actually describe a race without sounding like an over-excited twelve-year-old on an extended sugar high.
James Allen: One smug face you’d never tire of punching
After all, the internet is already near-unanimous in its criticism of James Allen, who has now shockingly commentated on over 100 races. He is so unpopular that you can actually buy t-shirts asking him to PLEASE shut the fuck up!
He was bad enough before. I will never forget the time when Kimi Räikkönen’s suspension failed at the European Grand Prix a couple of years back. Instead of describing the action, James Allen decided to beat his chest and say, “See! I told ya!”
And when Jenson Button had a disastrous pitstop last year, James Allen yelped, “Oh no! It’s all gone Pete Tong!” I was so embarrassed just hearing him say that, I wanted to curl up and die.
Now I have some actual video evidence. This is what happened when Jenson Button finally won a race at Hungary last year. It sounds like James Allen got so excited that he actually jizzed in his mouth and was rendered incapable of forming a proper sentence. Mind you, that is what he normally sounds like, but with ‘twat’ levels set at 10 rather than 11.
It was bad enough when the only half-decent British driver on the grid was Jenson Button. Now there is a British driver who is able to win races by means other than sheer luck, and James Allen has now reached the stage where he has become actually unbearable.
I am sure everyone who watched the Malaysian Grand Prix still has ringing in their ears from James Allen’s wails of “WHERE’S LEWIS?! WHEEEERE’S LEWISSSS?!!??!??!!?” when Hamilton was about to cross the line to finish in second place. He sounded like a petulant child on Christmas Eve demanding that he gets to open his presents RIGHT NOW.
James Allen went on to say, “Well he finished third in Melbourne, and second here. What does that mean for Bahrain?” This implied that Hamilton would go on to win at Bahrain. Then he would finish in position 0 in Spain, then position −1 in Monaco (I believe that finishing in −1st position is equivalent to disappearing up your own backside).
Unbelievably, James Allen actually repeated the “WHERE’S LEWIS?!” routine during qualifying for the British Grand Prix. Then, when the director cut to Lewis Hamilton, “COME ON! YES!” Not again! What has James Allen come on this time?
At least when Lewis Hamilton actually won a race James Allen managed to avoid saying something really embarrassing like “YES! GET IN THERE!” There is actually a Facebook group dedicated to James Allen’s embarrassing blurt-outs called I’m Clicking Mute When Hamilton Wins. As they point out there, while James Allen managed to avoid saying anything downright embarrassing, he still completely cocked it up by getting the timing completely wrong.
LEWIS HAMILTON…………… (tea break)…………… WINS!
He repeated the performance, word-for-word, complete with tea break, at the following race in the USA.
The Facebook group also mentions James Allen’s anecdote about his son talking about how rubbish Lewis Hamilton is (I wrote about this already here).
JA’s son thinks Lewis is rubbish. He must have got a smacked bottom for that!
I wonder which of his sons it was — Enzo or Emerson? There is a dream for school bullies if ever there was one. At least James Allen’s children will grow up to be thick-skinned. (And we all know what his next child will be called… James Allen will shit himself if it’s a girl though; what would he do then? Lewisina?)
Other Facebook groups dedicated to ITV’s awful F1 coverage
The Hungarian Grand Prix was predictably predictable; boring as expected. It is just as well that other situations have exploded, meaning that the circus leaves Budapest with plenty to digest.
I was amazed by what Fernando Alonso did in qualifying. It really was a dirty tactic worthy even of King Dirty Tactic himself, Michael Schumacher. But I could not help admiring the genius of it. It was not dangerous like Rascassegate, and Alonso had the brains to work out exactly how long he needed to stay in the box so that he could get a lap in but Hamilton couldn’t. I have to admire the cleverness of it.
While Alonso’s stunt looked bad on television, it has since transpired that it was a kind of ‘tit-for-tat’ payback for Hamilton breaking team policy by leading the train in the fuel burn phase when it was Alonso’s turn. Apparently they take it in turns so that the advantages even out, but Hamilton’s competitive side got the better of him and he became greedy.
The fallout has been nasty in the extreme. It looks as though all kinds of relationships have been ruined. Of course, Hamilton and Alonso seem to have had a proper falling out now. Alonso’s relationship with the McLaren team looks dead and buried, with strong rumours that he has decided he will move to another team for next year. Even the relationship between Hamilton and Ron Dennis has gone sour, with reports of an exceptionally angry exchange of words on the team radio.
It is difficult to know who, or what, to point the finger at. It looks as though Hamilton instigated it, but should it be a surprise when an extremely competitive individual grabs every opportunity he can? Alonso could have risen above it but his “payback” was harsh.
An interesting theory links back to one of McLaren’s biggest weaknesses — the lack of flexibility in their strategies. We have seen some poor strategy from McLaren this season, with notable backfires in Monaco and Canada.
Clive at the excellent Formula 1 Insight blog reckons that McLaren’s undoing was their decision to stick to their original strategy so rigidly when they could have just adapted it to cope with what Hamilton had done. Let’s face it. Asking a competitive driver with the adrenaline pumping to let his team mate through is surely like moving a mountain.
There have even been plenty of people blaming the qualifying format, and I certainly sympathise with that view as well. If it wasn’t for that ridiculous fuel burn-off phase then none of this probably would have happened.
I struggle to understand why McLaren as a constructor was penalised in the way it was. I can fully understand why Alonso was moved back five grid positions. But why McLaren were unable to score Constructors’ points, and suffered the humiliation of being barred from the podium ceremony, I do not get. (Incidentally, does this mean that officially Hamilton won the race in a non-existent car?!)
Some of the commenters at F1Fanatic reckon that McLaren was punished for not acknowledging that Alonso was in the wrong. But if that is so, surely the penalty is rather harsh?
In fact, given McLaren’s large lead in the Constructors’ Championship, and the fact that we are nearing the end of the season, it looks suspiciously as if it was designed to artificially bring Ferrari back into the hunt. After all, even with this penalty, McLaren lead the Championship by 19 points. Without the penalty, that would be a downright intimidating 34 points.
This has further increased the perception that penalties handed out in F1 are inconsistent and unfair. F1 Insight made reference to the random penalty generator, and that was before we learned what the punishment actually was.
This situation is understandable in one sense, because I don’t recall anything like what Alonso did happening before. The closest comparison was Rascassegate, but most agree that this is not as serious as that. Like I said, the five place penalty was probably about right, but where did the FIA pluck the McLaren punishment from? They really do make it up as they go along.
During the commentary, Damon Hill quipped that the FIA were one step away from introducing the Naughty Chair. Michael Schumacher certainly made the podium his personal “naughty step” once or twice in his career. Maybe it would be better just to put the drivers on a stand and let the crowds throw rotten tomatoes as they see appropriate. It would certainly avoid all of this random penalty business.
Perhaps it would be wise for McLaren to take this on the chin, then use the three-week break to lick their wounds and rebuild bridges. When Ron Dennis was interviewed on ITV after the race, he looked absolutely shattered — emotionally drained and fed up with the events of the past few months. I hope he has a good holiday, because he undoubtedly needs it. As Sidepodcast noted:
…you do have to ask what big Ron has to do to catch a break these days? The poor man lurches from crisis to crisis, firefighting at each turn, yet none of it is a result of any wrongdoing by the man himself.
Finally, a word on Pitpass, who have once again completely blown this whole thing out of proportion by yet again predicting the death of F1. They said that after Rascassegate and it was of course nonsense. This is fantastic entertainment, and there is no doubt that recent events have got people interested in F1 like never before.
28 comments