New MSA Chairman

[Peter Mallett]

Agreed K-B but haven't you ever asked the question why? Its not exactly fast, great racing is it? And you get better rubbing and bumping at Wimbledon.

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

Fixture dates always shuffle well into the new year

Or even later in some cases. Wasn't an MGCC (?) meeting bumped by the A1GP at Brands this year and that was well after the season had already started.

I seem to recall BTCC meeting at Donington a couple of years ago getting bumped by a MotoGP/WSB round and don't remember BTCC fans getting as worked up about it as the Britcar fans are getting. As Ian rightly says that is just how it is.

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

Furthermore - the BTCC is the UK's most popular series.

It being successful can benefit the whole of racing.

Sorry mate, I can't agree with that.

I would imagine that very few people who would go to a BTCC event would bother with anything else! The drivers (mostly) won't bother with the lower classes once their contracts have been signed - when was the last time you saw Mr. Plato and friends racing at Mallory Park, Or Cadwell, or Lydenn...

however, I intend to start a poll to find out if this is the case. watch this space.

[Eddy V]

Originally Posted by Alfa Fan

Are you stupid?.....

Not very nice is it?

[Asp]

I know I'm going back a bit, but I just want to return to what Alan Gow said himself about this (see post 43)

Originally Posted by Alan Gow

There are no conflicts of interest with the BTCC....it is, after all, the MSA British Touring Car Championship.

This is actually quite a scary comment, that Alan can't even see the potential of a conflict. If the interest of the MSA as a whole are the same as one MSA series, I'll be surprised.
We've already seen the potential of a conflict in this Britcar date debate. I personally don't believe that anything different to the usual shuffling of dates has happened. However, we are talking about it. This shows that there can be a perceived conflict. And if there's a perceived conflict, surely he should be taking measures to stop it?

This forum is for discussing BTCC issues only, so it is not appropriate for me to address MSA business on this forum.

Maybe true, but what a fob-off!

I have never had much involvement with "club racing" (although that will likely change in the future)

I would hope it will change in the future. Club racing (I also don't see the need for inverted commas, but that's a seperate point) is surely the main % of the MSA nowadays? Surely he needs to get involved in it to be chairman of the MSA adequately he needs to devote attention to club racing.
It also raises the issue, if he's not had much involvement in the past, how can he satisfactorly take on the role? He says he's never been involved in club racing. If he's only been involved slightly, than fair enough, it's still a bit of knowledge, and his skills in other areas will assist. But never?!

I am immensly confident that Alan Gow has a large number of qualities that will suit him to this new role. However, I still have a large number of reservations. And those answers to questions really didn't raise my confidence at all, probably more dented it in fact.

[Ian Sowman]

So Asp, tell me about the background of the previous MSA chairmen and their involvement in club racing.

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by Ian Sowman

So Asp, tell me about the background of the previous MSA chairmen and their involvement in club racing.

and how many major championships they were running at the same time as they were chairman.

[Ian Sowman]

The chances of finding a genuinely neutral candidate for the role is very slim. Anyone who is appointed to such a position is likely to have not only a lot of motorsport experience, but also an ongoing role within some other motorsport organisation. Whether it is boss of TOCA, 750MC or any other organisation is irrelevant.

[Asp]

Agreed Ian - but normally they appreciate that there is the potential of a conflict. I can't remember which committee Robin Knight (750MC) heads up, but I'm sure he appreciates there's a potential conflict, and I've never seen any complaints that he doesn't act in the best interests of whichever capacity he's working in.
If Alan Gow had replied to that question with a "I'm aware a conflict and I'll ensure I keep each issue seperate", then I'd have been happy. But by not accepting there's a potential conflict, I'm concerned that any potential issue of conflict will not be treated in the best interests of whatever hat he happens to be wearing at that time.

And in response to your other question, John Grant as well as his experience in management with Ford also competed in historic racing. That gives him experience both in how to run things, and more involvement in Club Racing than Alan Gow.

[redshoes]

If you are talking about as a competitor then of course Gow has involvement in club racing, he's a regular in the 2CV 24hrs. The question was about his role within club racing, which I suspect he took as meaning from an organisational point of view, in which case his response was correct.

FWIW I believe he has previously stated that he rarely if ever visits a race circuit solely as a spectator (i.e. outside of a TOCA meeting), so perhaps he's not the idea person and I'm not trying to defend him. It's just that some people seem to be reading too much into some comments and making some very wild allegations.

[Woolley]

The problem as I see it is that club racing is a mass of vested interests and narrow minded enthusiats. Nothing wrong with that, even though it sounds like a dig. However the sport in this country needs those people to be guided in a direction which is good for the sport as a whole. On top of that there are people out to make money, and who need regulating for the same reason.

Professional sport - ie the proper National championships, are quite capable of looking after themselves as they are purely commercial. If they're not wither making money or bringing in the right return on investment by way of promotion, then they get pulled.

For this reason, I believe that appointing the organiser of one of those championships is not going to be of benefit to the whole of the sport in this country.

Personally, I'd give it to Marcus Pye or someone of that ilk.

[Eddy V]

The guy who took over in Belgium was heavily involved in motorsport, yet after he took his double role he started slowly knocking several championships out and down.
We all hoped he would improve things and he did, for him and his fellow blazers!
Luckily he was promoted away again, after the harm was done.

[The STIG]

Originally Posted by The STIG

I would imagine that very few people who would go to a BTCC event would bother with anything else!

hmmm. Early indications say that I'm wrong about that...

[Andrew Kitson]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Agreed K-B but haven't you ever asked the question why? Its not exactly fast, great racing is it? And you get better rubbing and bumping at Wimbledon.

I agree entirely Peter.
They do not look like racing cars, the DTM ones do.
Dead slow - slower than FF. Has so much money ever been spent on a contemporary racing car to go so slowly in comparison to other contemporary classes? Disgusting driving standards obviously approved of by the new MSA chairman as little was done about it, good for TV perhaps for the banger racing fans. Boring support programme, the same one-make manufacturer PR exercise, meeting after meeting.

But I agree I'm biased and grew up watching racing in the good old days in the 60s & 70s when cars were loud without noise restrictions, no red flags or safety cars and the racing was clean, sensational, sideways and spectacular.
Lots of variety too in sights and sounds before this industry wrecking one- make era. Times have changed but the modern BTCC generation sadly have no idea what they are missing.

However I am sure Mr.Gow will do a good job at the MSA providing the BTCC banger racing rules are not allowed to filter down, or in my opinion, up, to F3 where world champions come from. Despite the crowd sizes, F3 is still by far the most important series in the UK today.

[Cynic]

As far as how he does in the role, I'll give AG the benefit of doubt until he settles in, but it does seem that there is a potential conflict of interest, and because of that people are going to watch closely to see if he favours BTCC or the other perceived "big" championships over other racing. Unfortunately, I think it is a sign of things to come. The MSA along with circuits and racers for that matter are having to become more commercial in the way they approach racing, so appointing someone with experience in those fields is going to happen more (has anyone forgotten that F3 didn't visit Brands this year because Mr Palmer wasn't prepared to risk making a loss on the meeting?). Yes BTCC cars are slow and the driving standards are appalling but the commercial machinery behind it has enough momentum to overcome that. We will have to wait and see whether effectively giving the fox the key to the chicken coop ends up being a good or a bad thing though.

[ascarmarshal]

Originally Posted by Cynic

(has anyone forgotten that F3 didn't visit Brands this year because Mr Palmer wasn't prepared to risk making a loss on the meeting?).

I thought that the reason was that SRO wanted a discount on circuit hire

[The STIG]

Just wondering, is there a precident for this happening?