[FIA GT Race] FIA GT Rnd 3: Bucharest 19-20 May 2007

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by The Badger

Armchair fans pay for part of your wages through subscriptions ..... mate . I might not renew mine !!!

You woudnt be the first person, or the last Badger who shares that opinion. IMO.

[Sean Edwards]

DSC has been free for ages now

I don't know many people who don't like crashes (deep down), obviously if the driver is hurt, then it's not good. But a lot of people love to watch crashes

Who made the comments about the two M&M commentators on DSC?

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by eddsc

Perhaps Bucharest was the perfect model for armchair 'fans' (who like crashes)..

I sincerly hope that you are not refering to me ?

I never said that I liked crash's ..... If i did , please show me the post .

I said that I understand how they can happen , and some people are quick to jump to conclusion .

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Sean Edwards

Who made the comments about the two M&M commentators on DSC?

How do you mean Sean ?

[renkadima]

Originally Posted by The Badger

I sincerly hope that you are not refering to me ?

I never said that I liked crash's ..... If i did , please show me the post .

I said that I understand how they can happen , and some people are quick to jump to conclusion .

I'm pretty sure that the comment was not aimed at anyone on this forum - in fact the exact opposite. It seems that the traditional sportscar fan has an ever decreasing say in how the sport develops and that GT racing is en route to becoming an exotic touring car series with ever shorter races that remove the endurance element entirely.

For myself, the only time I have ever tuned in to Men & Motors (including when I only had Free Sky and a seriously reduced list of channels) is to watch last weekend's races; so do I not fit the desired demographic?

[tux]

another thing to think about is surely if the fia gt was to go to 1 hour races a number of teams and drivers would not be happy. they might consider moving to the le mans series but then again that is pretty much full meaning that if they wanted to race in europe they really would have no choice but to race in the fia gt. of course this could mean some cars going over to america which wouldnt be a bad thing

[SALEEN S7R]

Originally Posted by The Badger

How do you mean Sean ?

The guys at DSC had a few jabs at the commentry team of Men and Motors, unjustifably too. IMO.

[Sean Edwards]

"The Editor adds (having watched this unfold on Men & Motors) -that Richard Whatever his name is’s commentary was among the most insensitive I have ever heard on TV. Two or three times he made light of (if not jokes about) the dog being on the track. Had that frightened animal bolted across the track, at the wrong moment (it did cross the track, fortunately avoiding cars at racing speed), we could have had more injuries, not just to the dog. Exceedingly crass and insensitive. Oh, and by the way, it would help immensely if Richard (Surname unknown) knew who had started each car, because some knowledge of driver abilities would have made an explanation of this silly race at least make some sense to anyone unfortunate enough to have witnessed it. Richard (Surname unknown) seems to possess a unique combination of failings: unutterably boring, lacking in knowledge of his subject and, as explained, highly insensitive. Janos Wimpffen has now confronted him about his ‘commentary’."



I am talking about that in the FIA GT3 race 1 DSC report...

Was wondering who that was?

I thought that it was a bit harsh and not really their job to go round 40 odd cars and find out who was starting the car. MST should have the proper name on the live timing, so that they can actually tell who is in what car. Even I did not know who was starting the Tech9 cars and got the number 1 drivers swapped around.

About the dog, I thought he only made jokes after it went up the pit lane, what else can you do when somthing bizare happens like that and the dog is fine...

[eddsc]

Trying again (first post vanished somehow)
"some people are quick to jump to conclusion(s)"
Hmm.. as explained above, armchair fans referred to the type of viewer that (I'm told, by someone who really does know) M&M is aiming at - NOT ten-tenths types, who from the interest they show in this kind of racing (by posting here) are not that kind of viewer. Thanks Renkadima for clarifying what I wrote.
Yes, I did write the comments re the coverage of the dog on the track - and stand by them. I found the prospect of a dog being killed on live TV, with all the inherent dangers for he drivers, appalling - and therefore not the right subject for jokes. I'm sure they began with the dog on the track, rather than pit lane. I'm told that the person responsible showed no remorse, and was encouraged that viewers had complained - because it meant that people were watching. Armchair fans or sportscar fans?

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by eddsc

"some people are quick to jump to conclusion(s)"

Was not aimed at you .

It was about the attitude of some people towards drivers having accidents , for example Herr Mücke .
I dont believe that he is a bad driver and in the Fia gt race it just got away from him , as Sean Edwards explained in a post above .

A certain team owner used the term "armchair enthusiasts" awhile back , aimed at me and another ..... on Mücke in the LMS , and i didnt appreciate it . He should remember that we support his team and he probably wouldnt be anyplace like he is now without people like us around . He knows who he is , i like his team , but im gone off him big style !!

Even if i did pick him for 3rd in Ayse's prediction thread .

[eddsc]

Perhaps we all need to take more care with what we post (in haste) here.
Yes, I gather MST is reponsible for the duff captions. Although perhaps teams changed start drivers quite late? Steve Wood, Britcar's PR man, always produces a starting driver list, which he assembles from answers given by each team - it's the only way.
Interesting Aston Martin material just posted on dsc.

[Dani Filth]

I'm going tomorrow to a press conference with the organizers of Bucharest Ring. Anybody wanna ask them something ??

[The Badger]

Yeah ..... who own's the dog !!!

[MikeH]

Has the dog been given an official position within the board of the track organisers?

[Red]

Pfft, he doesn't need that. He's on a contract for 4 years and working in that building. The noise was disrupting his snooz.. I mean work in the office and he went down at the pitlane to file an official complaint.

[Richard Nichols]

Originally Posted by eddsc

Trying again (first post vanished somehow)
"some people are quick to jump to conclusion(s)"
Hmm.. as explained above, armchair fans referred to the type of viewer that (I'm told, by someone who really does know) M&M is aiming at - NOT ten-tenths types, who from the interest they show in this kind of racing (by posting here) are not that kind of viewer. Thanks Renkadima for clarifying what I wrote.
Yes, I did write the comments re the coverage of the dog on the track - and stand by them. I found the prospect of a dog being killed on live TV, with all the inherent dangers for he drivers, appalling - and therefore not the right subject for jokes. I'm sure they began with the dog on the track, rather than pit lane. I'm told that the person responsible showed no remorse, and was encouraged that viewers had complained - because it meant that people were watching. Armchair fans or sportscar fans?

Just for the record, and dealing strictly in FACTS, not unsubstantiated hearsay and dubious personal opinions, there was a dog on track during the GT3 race in Bucharest. It was clearly unable to get off the track, and when it ran into pitlane the marshals chased it back on track. Eventually the TV director (German, not part of the M&M crew) decided to cut away and back to the race, a source of much relief to the commentary team, who were NOT looking forward to seeing it killed on live TV and who had been asking OFF air for the director to cut away.

I know this, because I was one of the 3 commentators.

I also know that I specifically pointed out that although cars often get away with hitting rabbits and hares on rural race circuits (I've seen a rabbit hit by a car at Silverstone, and it was broadcast on TV as well) hitting a dog might have serious consequences for the driver as well as the dog.

This FACT has so far been conveniently overlooked by all those contributors on here and DSC who prefer to give vent to their own prejudice rather than enquire after the truth...

It is sad but true that in the press room when the race was over Janos did indeed "confront" me with my crime. He too made no effort to find out if his allegations had any substance, but judged me guilty on the basis of ill-informed and halfwit hearsay. It is true to say that I was not repentant. He was ill-informed and I was and remain quite happy to lighten the moment, as were my fellow-commentators. But he was quite correct - I did ask him how MANY complaints he'd received and he was strangely reluctant to tell me. I guessed less than 5 and said I'd have been happier if it was over 50 because it least it would have shown that more people were watching. I'd still be happier with 50 complaints about ANYTHING than 5 or even none.

This might be a good moment to point out to those horror-struck individuals who are afraid that M&M is looking for a wider audience than the handful of DSC subscribers in the UK that I believe that to be true; no TV boadcaster wants to limit their viewership to a tiny minority of dedicated fans or they'd be out of business tomorrow.

TV, and sports car racing NEEDS a bigger audience in order to survive, and that means less nuts and blt, more general appeal. They want glamour and excitement, not chassis numbers and intricate detail - tabloids, not boadsheets... you get the idea, I hope. Anyway, back to the dog...

At the time I invited Janos to forward me any complaints he might have received, but thus far no-one has been brave enough to accept the offer - mostly, I suspect, because no-one who has so far complained on here or on DSC actually HEARD what was said - if they had they would know that the possible outcomes of the situation WERE properly dealt with at the time. Which Graham Tyler and myself both pointed out to Janos. Strangely he has made no mention of this fact...

And I also suspect that most (both?) of those complaining are only doing so because it is all they know how to do. Snide remarks from the safety of an anonymous log-in name.

Oh, and PS. Janos says he saw the dog on Sunday morning alive and well. In a city with a major stray dog problem (200,000 at the last count) I wonder how he identified it....

[Dani Filth]

Originally Posted by MikeH

Has the dog been given an official position within the board of the track organisers?

funny that .. Bayer said that if they found the dog . they'll name him Bucharest Ring .. and sort of make him official mascot
other intersting facts .. thickets sold .. about 20.000

[eddsc]

Two main points in response Richard.

1 I think you’ve conveniently glossed over what you did say during the commentary. Nowhere above do you apologise for (or even mention) the jokes you made at a time when viewers were, at any moment, likely to see an animal splattered to pieces. Animals on the track should be taken very seriously eg. at Bathurst, where kangaroos do migrate across the circuit. Hitting a kangaroo or hitting a large dog – not an ideal prospect for any kind of car, but certainly less dangerous for the driver if he has a roof. But what if he swerves to try and miss it? Stefan Johansson hit a dear once in his F1 Ferrari – and emerged unscathed. Tom Pryce hit a marshal and didn’t. The possibility of a car hitting anything sizeable on the track is not a subject for jokes.
2 I don’t know what your viewing figures are. I don’t know what Janos exactly said to you. But my reaction to your jokes / the incident was very similar to that of dsc contributor Mark Howson. I ‘phoned him, and he told me that he switched off the TV at that point. He simply couldn’t bear to look at the screen – because of what he might be about to see. I didn’t switch off, but turned my eyes away – then glanced back, hoping to see that nothing disastrous had happened. And you were joking about it. Graham Tyler told me that he did contribute a ‘flippant’ (for want of a better word) remark, but I have to admit that didn’t register. Logically, I was so concerned / incensed at what I was (half) seeing and hearing, my attention wasn’t on what was said when the dog made its way into (and out of again) the pitlane. Here at dsc I didn’t receive any complaints from M&M viewers – just the above reaction from Mark, and Janos’s reaction, which you know.

In a wider sense, you seem to be suggesting that building an audience for FIA GTs requires you to appeal to ‘lads’ rather than sportscar/GT fans. I couldn’t disagree more…

What happens if there’s a rather routine race, with no accidents or dramas? Anyone seeking a thrill will be remarkably bored, won’t he?

The model for building an audience should, I feel, be based on knowledgeable commentary of events that are far more than just a quick sprint. I’d suggest that Graham should do what he does best (pitlane) and that you get someone like David Addison to lead the commentary. Viewing figures for the ALMS (plus the Radio Web commentary) would suggest that there are sportscar fans who would appreciate a top job – rather than a level of coverage that is aimed at what I can at best call ‘the casual spectator’ (tabloid, in your terminology).

Complaining is all I know how to do? Hmmm. I would strongly argue that a complaint in this case was very much warranted. For my sake (and the teams) I hope that Monza sees few accidents, very little damage and no injuries. What do you want to commentate on at Monza?
Malcolm Cracknell
PS. Bearing in mind your lack of remorse, I feel no need to apologise for my remarks of nearly a week ago – which were not made anonymously. Oh, and it’s not that difficult to recognize a dog…. as Janos would no doubt tell you (as a fellow dog over). My little rescue dog sitting beside me here would be instantly recognisable to another dog lover, a day after first seeing her.

[Bramzel]

Well, I must say I'm on Richards side here.

Originally Posted by eddsc

Two main points in response Richard.

1 I think you’ve conveniently glossed over what you did say during the commentary. Nowhere above do you apologise for (or even mention) the jokes you made at a time when viewers were, at any moment, likely to see an animal splattered to pieces. Animals on the track should be taken very seriously eg. at Bathurst, where kangaroos do migrate across the circuit. Hitting a kangaroo or hitting a large dog – not an ideal prospect for any kind of car, but certainly less dangerous for the driver if he has a roof. But what if he swerves to try and miss it? Stefan Johansson hit a dear once in his F1 Ferrari – and emerged unscathed. Tom Pryce hit a marshal and didn’t. The possibility of a car hitting anything sizeable on the track is not a subject for jokes.

You're overreacting here, a joke is a joke and maybe it's not your taste, but why should somebody apologize for one? It's not like he said something hugely politically incorrect or something. You make it sound like he insulted the world with the worst things thinkable. All he made was a maybe slightly unsensitive joke about a dog. Like it or don't like it, but please get over it. You're blowing it way out of proportion. And I find it inappropriate to badmouth fellow journalists in an official news-item on your website.

2 I don’t know what your viewing figures are. I don’t know what Janos exactly said to you. But my reaction to your jokes / the incident was very similar to that of dsc contributor Mark Howson. I ‘phoned him, and he told me that he switched off the TV at that point. He simply couldn’t bear to look at the screen – because of what he might be about to see. I didn’t switch off, but turned my eyes away – then glanced back, hoping to see that nothing disastrous had happened. And you were joking about it. Graham Tyler told me that he did contribute a ‘flippant’ (for want of a better word) remark, but I have to admit that didn’t register. Logically, I was so concerned / incensed at what I was (half) seeing and hearing, my attention wasn’t on what was said when the dog made its way into (and out of again) the pitlane. Here at dsc I didn’t receive any complaints from M&M viewers – just the above reaction from Mark, and Janos’s reaction, which you know.

Sorry, but the first thought that crossed my mind was 'Geez, talk about oversensitive'. Being nervous over what may happen? Understandable. Turning off the TV to avoid the horrible scene that might happen? Will be a tough time keeping up with the news then, because prime-time news shows grosser things than that these days.

In a wider sense, you seem to be suggesting that building an audience for FIA GTs requires you to appeal to ‘lads’ rather than sportscar/GT fans. I couldn’t disagree more…

And why not? The fans will watch anyways, those people you don't need to reach anymore. It's the people that aren't watching you want to reach as a tv-station, those are the people where you can widen your audience. Note: I'm not saying that the fans should be ignored, but you don't build that audience: you have them already. It then is about keeping them, but also, and maybe even more, about attracting people outside that group. I'm understanding Richards comment perfectly; I'm working in a softwarecompany where we develop racing games (simulations). We have the hardcore of simulation lovers, and the big audience out there. Do we focus solely on the hardcore? No, we appreciate them, we try to please them, we interact with them, we try to keep them happy. But we're not going blind at them, because of that audience alone you can't survive. You simply nééd the attention of those out there in the 'big' group as well, because that's where you widen your market, thats where you build your audience. Hardcore simulator lovers know what to expect, it's up to us to show the 'big' world that simulators aren't too hard and boring. Same with tv: The sportscar lovers know what they have, it's up to M&M to show the world it's an exciting series and not a boring long run.

What happens if there’s a rather routine race, with no accidents or dramas? Anyone seeking a thrill will be remarkably bored, won’t he?

When nothing happens even a sportscar fan will be bored. If there's overtaking then everybody is pleased, even the thrillseeking crash-junkies. Even without accidents or dying dogs.

The model for building an audience should, I feel, be based on knowledgeable commentary of events that are far more than just a quick sprint. I’d suggest that Graham should do what he does best (pitlane) and that you get someone like David Addison to lead the commentary. Viewing figures for the ALMS (plus the Radio Web commentary) would suggest that there are sportscar fans who would appreciate a top job – rather than a level of coverage that is aimed at what I can at best call ‘the casual spectator’ (tabloid, in your terminology).

The model for building an audience should be a mix of them both. You have to supply the viewer with in depth information, but if you solely build your commentary on that John Doe will be bored in no-time because he doesn't understand half he hears. There it comes to the balance again: Keep the sportscar lovers happy with in-depth, but also make it available to John Doe who isn't into sportscars.

[jlw]

Weighing in here--
Since I never heard the commentary I can't vouch for the exact words or tone, only the reaction from those who were watching, and this I explained to Mr. Nichols. I found his response, implying that the number of viewers were all that mattered, to be flippant and in character with the allegations. Moreover, he also commented to me that "wildlife" is a problem at more rural races [we are all aware of this] and that it is the 'low person on the pit crew's job' to clean up the mess--further evidence of callousness.

I was heartened during and after this incident as to how Graham Tyler was quite concerned about any negative comments having gone over the air. In general Mr. Tyler took a very professional approach to the issue while Mr. Nichols did not.

I couldn't agree more that Graham is one of the finest pit lane commentators in the world and that David Addison is a one-of-a-kind action commentator. He can make a one-sided club race sound like Fangio vs. Moss in the title decider. All you'd need is a Paul Truswell who can add just the right amount of technical and strategic knowledge into the mix.

I would never profess to have the Tyler-Addision-Truswell mix of skills. I can argue the big macro-historic picture and have done so in many commentary boxes. I can admirably write the blow-by-blow of a given race and, yes, I am known for the minutiae of the sport. My skills along with those of the above commentating trio are among those requried to entertain and educate true sports car racing fans. This branch of the sport has never been for the unwashed masses but instead has appeal to an admitted elite, who--marketers note--have purchasing power far beyond many multiples of the "lads" that Nichols seeks to reach. Indeed, Mr. Nichols may make a backhanded comment about my penchant to collect chassis numbers, but he may wish to know that there are fair number of collectors about there who have helped me make a living by asking about the provenance of their cars. There are other branches of the sport that do not appeal to any of these approaches and perhaps Mr. Nichols' skills are best served there.

Yes, I'm aware that Bucharest has many strays. I saw a fir number while I was there. But yes, it was quite clearly the same dog that I saw on two different occasions subsequent to the race.

One other thing about the seriousness about animals on the circuit. The now defunct Westwood circuit in Vancouver is near my home. A driver (F Atlantic I think) was killed after striking a deer and the concern was so serious that a special observation post was erected. I worked as a track official there for a season. My duties rotated to that post during one race weekend. I was stationed in a tower at the highest point on the circuit and issued binoculars with which I scoured the neighboring woods for wildlife. There were a special set of lights and signals that I could activate which would immediately result in a red flag situation. That's how seriously they took the issue. Good thing that Mr. Nichols wasn't the chief steward.

[Richard Nichols]

Originally Posted by Sean Edwards

"The Editor adds (having watched this unfold on Men & Motors) -that Richard Whatever his name is’s commentary was among the most insensitive I have ever heard on TV. Two or three times he made light of (if not jokes about) the dog being on the track. Had that frightened animal bolted across the track, at the wrong moment (it did cross the track, fortunately avoiding cars at racing speed), we could have had more injuries, not just to the dog. Exceedingly crass and insensitive. Oh, and by the way, it would help immensely if Richard (Surname unknown) knew who had started each car, because some knowledge of driver abilities would have made an explanation of this silly race at least make some sense to anyone unfortunate enough to have witnessed it. Richard (Surname unknown) seems to possess a unique combination of failings: unutterably boring, lacking in knowledge of his subject and, as explained, highly insensitive. Janos Wimpffen has now confronted him about his ‘commentary’."



I am talking about that in the FIA GT3 race 1 DSC report...

Was wondering who that was?

I thought that it was a bit harsh and not really their job to go round 40 odd cars and find out who was starting the car. MST should have the proper name on the live timing, so that they can actually tell who is in what car. Even I did not know who was starting the Tech9 cars and got the number 1 drivers swapped around.

About the dog, I thought he only made jokes after it went up the pit lane, what else can you do when somthing bizare happens like that and the dog is fine...

Having read this thread with some interest, I think it may be time to put aside almost all of what has gone before on the subject of dogs, since it amounts to little more than half-witted hearsay, and deal in something which appears to be a rarity in this thread - facts.

The first is that there WAS a dog on track during the GT race, and when it finally found its way off track the marshals promptly chased it back on again.

All of this was covered live on TV around the world, not just M&M, thanks to the German director who failed to realise that it could get messy, despite repeated requests from the commentary team to cut away before that happened.

I know this to be true because I was part of the commentary team.

I also know that I pointed out in that commentary the fact that although racing cars usually get away with hitting bunnies, the consequences of hitting a larger animal like a dog - and it wasn't a small one - could be much more serious for the driver.

Amazingly, all (both?) those who complained seem to have overlooked this aspect of what took place, preferring instead to recall only the light-hearted remarks that were. Quite honestly I can't think why that should surprise me, but it does.

On the other hand I couldn't help laughing at the idea of being “confronted” by Janos. He did tell me he had received a complaining e-mail, and I asked him to forward it to me so I could reply personally. So far he hasn't done that.

But I definitely DID tell him I would be happier if we had 50 complaints than if it was only 5. In retrospect I would still rather have 50 complaints about ANYTHING than a measly 5.

If you're going to upset somebody you're better off doing the job properly, and it seems to me you boys need a wake-up call. Have you actually READ any of this thread and considered just how pompous and pretentious you all sound? The dog jokes were the most insensitive remarks you ever heard on TV? Do me a favour.

And here's something you need to remember. In order to survive and prosper, Sports Car Racing needs more than just the anorak audience. If every single subscriber to this thread AND to DSC ALL watched every minute of every race it STILL wouldn't be enough to make M&M consider taking it again next year.

In order to survive, it has to have a wider audience - and by definition that's an audience that doesn't give a toss about chassis numbers and nuts and bolts. Embrace that fact, and make your new audience feel welcome and you'll be making a constructive move forward. Deny it, and pontificate, and you're just part of the problem.

[Richard Nichols]

amazing! not just chassis numbers, but Janos can pick out one stray dog in quarter of a million. legendary abilities like this I canot compete ith.

Oh and PS. Two dogs myself, as a mattr of fact.

3 cats, some goldfish and 2 children

in't this too petty for you yet?

[FIRE]

I didn't see/hear the M&M coverage but I tend to agree with Bramzel.

BTW Welcome on Ten-Tenths.

[courageous]

Originally Posted by eddsc

...you seem to be suggesting that building an audience for FIA GTs requires you to appeal to ‘lads’ rather than sportscar/GT fans.

You seem to have got the cart before the horse here - "men & motors" is trying to build an audience for FIA GT to complement its normal viewers who are mostly "lads".

We are the interlopers & if you can't take a joke about a dog running around a track, what on earth did you make of everyone's cartoons following the HUMANS on the track at Silverstone & Nurburgring/Hockenheim (can't recall off the top of my head).

Piece of advice - don't ever attempt to read Viz, you'll have a stroke!

[The Badger]

I cant understand such a childish and petty arguement over a dog on a race track ..... It happened , got over it !!!

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...267589,00.html

Maybe the above link will put your arguement into perspective !!!