2021 Azerbaijan Grand Prix - Baku, June 04 - 06

[NathanOlder]

@NathanOlder: I did not say anything about a fault. They know that they cover a lot more than a british audience. They COULD do it in another way. For me it is no problem. I am a driver neutral F1 fan. So it does not bother me, if they favor one driver. I mostly don't listen to them. I only wanted to point out the difference here.

Fair enough mate , no worries.

[NathanOlder]

Hamilton's bad luck with having to wait for Gasly has given the race to Max. Perez's "unfortunate" slow stop was perfect for Max. And people moan about Hamilron being lucky.

Bad luck for Hamilton? From time to time, he has a few, isolated, bad luck incidents(like Melbourne 2014, Abu Dhabi 2012 or 2011) but, on the big picture, he has always been massively helped by luck.

The guy has some serious voodoo going his way. It´s insane how lucky he is.

I didn´t watch the race(was watching MotoGP, instead) but heard of what happened and I´m sure Max will not win the title, no matter how good he drives. Hamilton already had 3 pathetic performances this year(Imola, Monaco, Baku. Not to mention the lack of punishment in Bahrain that he got away with) and is still almost tied with Max. This guy can´t lose Max will need some bad luck from Hamilton to counter balance the imense luck LH had yesterday and on Imola. Similar to Sepang 2016 countered the bad luck Rosberg had on Austria where Vettel´s tyre blow out damaged his car and, ultimately, took many points away from Nico on that race.

Not sure you can call Baku pathetic ? He was the only driver on the grid able to push RedBull.

And MotoGP finished plenty before the F1, so you should have watched it live , let alone miss it all together

[sosic2121]

Who got the fastest lap?
Why Lewis finished the race, considering he was last. I'm asking because of gearbox. Is his gearbox due for replacement anyway?

Max set the fastest lap but didn't finish in the top ten so wasn't awarded the point afaik.

+1
What is the reasoning behind that rule? I don't see anything contraversial(since rule is cristal clear) , just "let's say" little bit unfair. At least someone didn't get that point.

[siskue2005]

yeah hamilton won the race

Max lost a 15 point lead in the championship with the crash so now its just 4 points with no flexi wing

RedBull won that race without the flexi-wing. And they were going to finish 1-2 on merit if it was not for the tyre failure.

Red Bull were using their flexwings, its from France that its been monitored more and new test for scrutiny

[NathanOlder]

@NathanOlder: I did not say anything about a fault. They know that they cover a lot more than a british audience. They COULD do it in another way. For me it is no problem. I am a driver neutral F1 fan. So it does not bother me, if they favor one driver. I mostly don't listen to them. I only wanted to point out the difference here.

But they are funded by British viewers' Sky subscriptions. Their primary duty is to cater for a British audience that pays their wages and get more British viewers watching to increase their revenue. So of course they say what British people probably want to hear and concentrate on the British drivers. It's basically incidental and happenstance that their commentary is used elsewhere.

As mentioned, you might as well in the same breath moan at Dutch or Italian broadcasters for hardly being neutral. They are doing just the same job as Sky but for different audiences. It's not Sky's fault that most of the world understands English and not Dutch or Italian.

Exactly this. Sky Sports F1 was created for the UK wasnt it ?

[NathanOlder]

Yes I did, because you said 'They know that they cover a lot more than a british audience. They COULD do it in another way.' and I made the point that don't feel they should have to do things in a different way or adapt things, just because other people also receive their coverage second hand.

By that logic, the Italians shouldn't at all talk more about Ferrari, just in case there's a load of Italian speaking non nationals listening somewhere.

Its on a scale though. At some point F1TV English-speaking audience will be greater than the Sky UK audience and I'd bet that we still get served the same coverage with the same 'excuses' of 'its British TV, what do you expect'.

Another data point - I was in NZ last month and the F1 coverage there is also the Sky Feed (or is it the F1 feed with Sky commentary?).

My point is that its probably not far from being true that Sky UK viewers make up the minority of the people that hear whatever comes out of David Crofts mouth.

It's a genuine question - at what point do you believe neutrality should be emphasized as a stronger priority for Crofty, Ted and Martin etc?

Surely its simple , Brundle, Croft, Kravitz, Herbert, Hill, Button, Davidson, Di Resta, Pinkham, Brookes all work for Sky Sports F1 (UK) if F1 TV want a different / neutral commentary team then they should get their own.

[El Scorchio]

I'd imagine if they ever get to a point where FOM is paying them more than the UK public is paying them. But I don't think that's ever even remotely likely to happen. To contextualise, Sky has nine million customers (at a conservative estimate) in the UK, all paying probably between 30-80 GBP per month. If you assume everyone is ONLY paying 30, that's 270,000,000 GBP income from UK viewers. That doesn't even account for anyone buying sports or movie packages. If you just take 50 GBP as an average to account for sport subscribers, that's 450,000,000 or almost half a billion GBP. You'd then have to add in all the NOW TV customers as well which inflates it more.

Even if FOM gave them 10 million a year for taking their commentary which is realistically probably many times more than they actually do, then it's absolutely DWARFED by the UK revenue. Realistically FOM probably pays them very little, but provides them the best access to all the teams and staff and facilities.

Wait, people pay that much per month for just the F1 in the UK? Jesus, for only $8 you can use the F1 app and get the same commentary team!

Or less snide, how much is the UK public paying them to do F1, compared with just paying for Sky because Sky?

But yes, if I was Sky I'd be looking to offload the commentary team to FOM and buy it back, I guess not all the Sky customers watch F1, so they could sell it back to them as a sports package, like they do in other countries.

Anyway, that's more or less all I wanted to say. I hope F1TV pit lane channel returns to some sense of professionalism next race.

It's not JUST F1- it's their sports packages as a whole. You don't pay for F1 separately. (So the money for F1 comes out of a central pot) But Just a Fan is right. Sky pay a tonne of money to F1 for exclusivity of live coverage (120m GBP a year), so if you want F1, you subscribe to Sky at substantial cost, or you buy day/week/month passes to NOW TV (owned by Sky) to be essentially a Sky PAYG customer.

If you don't want to pay, you either don't watch, watch Channel 4's highlights (which they pay 35m GBP a year for- for highlights ONLY, plus the British GP Live) or you stream it illegally. Those are the options.

[Big Tea]

Yes I did, because you said 'They know that they cover a lot more than a british audience. They COULD do it in another way.' and I made the point that don't feel they should have to do things in a different way or adapt things, just because other people also receive their coverage second hand.

By that logic, the Italians shouldn't at all talk more about Ferrari, just in case there's a load of Italian speaking non nationals listening somewhere.

Its on a scale though. At some point F1TV English-speaking audience will be greater than the Sky UK audience and I'd bet that we still get served the same coverage with the same 'excuses' of 'its British TV, what do you expect'.

Another data point - I was in NZ last month and the F1 coverage there is also the Sky Feed (or is it the F1 feed with Sky commentary?).

My point is that its probably not far from being true that Sky UK viewers make up the minority of the people that hear whatever comes out of David Crofts mouth.

It's a genuine question - at what point do you believe neutrality should be emphasized as a stronger priority for Crofty, Ted and Martin etc?

Surely its simple , Brundle, Croft, Kravitz, Herbert, Hill, Button, Davidson, Di Resta, Pinkham, Brookes all work for Sky Sports F1 (UK) if F1 TV want a different / neutral commentary team then they should get their own.

I suspect that if you polled British fans giving them 3 votes each for favourite driver, there would be way more non British drivers being voted for than British

[Marty_Y]

Who got the fastest lap?
Why Lewis finished the race, considering he was last. I'm asking because of gearbox. Is his gearbox due for replacement anyway?

Max set the fastest lap but didn't finish in the top ten so wasn't awarded the point afaik.

+1
What is the reasoning behind that rule? I don't see anything contraversial(since rule is cristal clear) , just "let's say" little bit unfair. At least someone didn't get that point.

Here's a couple of articles about it, from my understanding it is to stop everyone outside the top ten who are not in contention of points suddenly pitting for new tyres because they've nothing to lose.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/formula-one/f ... ces-407130

"There is one bonus point available for the driver who records the fastest lap of the race. However, they must also finish in the top 10 in order to qualify for the point. This is to stop all the drivers outside the top 10 pitting for fresh tyres in the last few laps in an effort to set a fastest lap, which would compromise the integrity of the race."

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... AkKSP.html

"There is, however, a condition for earning the point. Only drivers who are classified in the top 10 at the end of the race are eligible. If you achieve the feat and finish in 11th or lower (or fail to finish), no point will be allocated."

[NathanOlder]

Its on a scale though. At some point F1TV English-speaking audience will be greater than the Sky UK audience and I'd bet that we still get served the same coverage with the same 'excuses' of 'its British TV, what do you expect'.

Another data point - I was in NZ last month and the F1 coverage there is also the Sky Feed (or is it the F1 feed with Sky commentary?).

My point is that its probably not far from being true that Sky UK viewers make up the minority of the people that hear whatever comes out of David Crofts mouth.

It's a genuine question - at what point do you believe neutrality should be emphasized as a stronger priority for Crofty, Ted and Martin etc?

Surely its simple , Brundle, Croft, Kravitz, Herbert, Hill, Button, Davidson, Di Resta, Pinkham, Brookes all work for Sky Sports F1 (UK) if F1 TV want a different / neutral commentary team then they should get their own.

I suspect that if you polled British fans giving them 3 votes each for favourite driver, there would be way more non British drivers being voted for than British

certainly would, how about this...

if you polled Dutch fans giving them 3 votes each for favourite driver, there would be way more non Dutch drivers being voted for than Dutch.

[NathanOlder]

Who got the fastest lap?
Why Lewis finished the race, considering he was last. I'm asking because of gearbox. Is his gearbox due for replacement anyway?

Max set the fastest lap but didn't finish in the top ten so wasn't awarded the point afaik.

+1
What is the reasoning behind that rule? I don't see anything contraversial(since rule is cristal clear) , just "let's say" little bit unfair. At least someone didn't get that point.

Is that a complaint about Max not getting the point ? Also, surely everyone on a technical forum should at least know the fastest lap point rule ?

[NathanOlder]

Back to the race, was there any chance Max could have got the car back to the pits ? It appeared that he only hit the wall with the nose, a heavy hit, but just the nose. Could he have got that back ?

[sosic2121]

Max set the fastest lap but didn't finish in the top ten so wasn't awarded the point afaik.

+1
What is the reasoning behind that rule? I don't see anything contraversial(since rule is cristal clear) , just "let's say" little bit unfair. At least someone didn't get that point.

Is that a complaint about Max not getting the point ? Also, surely everyone on a technical forum should at least know the fastest lap point rule ?

Maybe there is a interpretation of the rule 3.9 by which Max should get a point, or 2.
Just a bendy joke

As I said before, there is nothing contraversial since the rule is there and it's clear. I just haven't known the rule, so haven't known who got the point (max, lewis...).
So, not a complaint.

[nzjrs]

Surely its simple , Brundle, Croft, Kravitz, Herbert, Hill, Button, Davidson, Di Resta, Pinkham, Brookes all work for Sky Sports F1 (UK) if F1 TV want a different / neutral commentary team then they should get their own.

Well Rosanna works for both FOM and Sky, and Sam guests on Sky, which is how I got onto this topic, that on the PLC they should keep it in their pants.

I try to avoid many of the others you mentioned.

Anyway, this conversation has concluded.

[Deadpool]

I totally see why you got the negative rating.

Because I'm pointing the finger at the ugly truth that St. Pirelli didn't live up to the challenge? It's worth...

No, I think you got downvoted because you sound like you don’t understand what you are talking about.

This is perfectly fine because it is common practice to attribute unpopular opinions to someone "who does not understand what he is talking about" ...