F1 - Some great moments

[Knock-on]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7925005.stm

I thought this had been posted so sorry if it's being duplicated :)

Great moments BBC :up:

[ChrisS]

Cannot play media. Sorry, this media is not available in your territory.

:(

[SportscarBruce]

Unfortunately for the US reader the video is unobtainum, as is apparently the case of all BBC Sport videos.

For a sport that has yet to gather a sufficient audience in the US I find this counterproductive. Perhaps in distribution rights legalese it makes sense, but from the consumer's point of view less availability means less exposure, which leads to less interest and lowered commercial viability.

Formula One Management has a youtube patrol which cherry picks material deemed objectionable to the sanctioning body. Examples; 1998: Michael Schumacher stomping towards David Coultard's pit after a collusion that occurred during a torrential downpour at Spa. No blows were exchanged, just some words. Out of the three videos posted from that race the start (complete with multi-car pileup) and Damon Hill taking the win for Eddie Jordan was not targeted as copyright violation. Also, a portion of the 2000 Speedvision special "United States Grand Prix, A Heritage Reborn", which outlined the history of the sport in the US, was also targeted because someone being interviewed forwarded the notion Bernie Ecclestone made a mistake (gasp) by pricing Long Beach off the schedule. So, the message I get is don't post anything that might color Michael Schumacher or Bernie Ecclestone in a bad light, irregardless of absence of hype or slanted editorializing.

I'll repeat the nod towards copyright legal doctrine, but when this is examined not with a legal magnifying glass but from the full view perspective it doesn't make commercial sense, nevermind the public's right to know position which I happen to favor. If no one is airing historical F1 reviews on television denying the US racing fan access to in on the internet MAKE NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

Sorry about going a bit o/t there but I had to vent. Hopefully the powers that be will reconsider their position on the matter and do what's best for the sport AND the fan. The new US F1 team might agree that far as spreading the F1 word is concerned the more, the better.

[Tazio]

Unfortunately for the US reader the video is unobtainum, as is apparently the case of all BBC Sport videos.

For a sport that has yet to gather a sufficient audience in the US I find this counterproductive. Perhaps in distribution rights legalese it makes sense, but from the consumer's point of view less availability means less exposure, which leads to less interest and lowered commercial viability.

Formula One Management has a youtube patrol which cherry picks material deemed objectionable to the sanctioning body. Examples; 1998: Michael Schumacher stomping towards David Coultard's pit after a collusion that occurred during a torrential downpour at Spa. No blows were exchanged, just some words. Out of the three videos posted from that race the start (complete with multi-car pileup) and Damon Hill taking the win for Eddie Jordan was not targeted as copyright violation. Also, a portion of the 2000 Speedvision special "United States Grand Prix, A Heritage Reborn", which outlined the history of the sport in the US, was also targeted because someone being interviewed forwarded the notion Bernie Ecclestone made a mistake (gasp) by pricing Long Beach off the schedule. So, the message I get is don't post anything that might color Michael Schumacher or Bernie Ecclestone in a bad light, irregardless of absence of hype or slanted editorializing.

I'll repeat the nod towards copyright legal doctrine, but when this is examined not with a legal magnifying glass but from the full view perspective it doesn't make commercial sense, nevermind the public's right to know position which I happen to favor. If no one is airing historical F1 reviews on television denying the US racing fan access to in on the internet MAKE NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

Sorry about going a bit o/t there but I had to vent. Hopefully the powers that be will reconsider their position on the matter and do what's best for the sport AND the fan. The new US F1 team might agree that far as spreading the F1 word is concerned the more, the better. :rolleyes: Nice :up:

[ArrowsFA1]

Sorry about going a bit o/t there but I had to vent. Hopefully the powers that be will reconsider their position on the matter and do what's best for the sport AND the fan. The new US F1 team might agree that far as spreading the F1 word is concerned the more, the better.
On that note, why is it that pre-2000 official F1 season reviews are not available to buy on DVD :confused:

IIRC the first official review appeared on video in 1980 or 1981, so there's a good 20yrs of material there for FOM to make money from.

[Sonic]

I miss Murray!

[V12]

On that note, why is it that pre-2000 official F1 season reviews are not available to buy on DVD :confused:

IIRC the first official review appeared on video in 1980 or 1981, so there's a good 20yrs of material there for FOM to make money from.

I didn't know that, I'm quite shocked actually! I have 1981-1997 on tape but was always thinking of getting them on DVD when I was able to afford it, but hadn't looked into it as of yet - now I know not to bother!

<cynicism>
Maybe they don't want their new audiences becoming aware of how much better it used to be?
</cynicism>

[SportscarBruce]

<cynicism>
Maybe they don't want their new audiences becoming aware of how much better it used to be?
</cynicism>

Chalk it up to the decreasing radius rulebook phenomena that has affected almost every bigtime racing series on the planet.

[BDunnell]

Did F1 begin in 1979 as far as the BBC is now concerned? Given the amount of full race archive material still at the BBC's disposal, dating back to the 1960s at least (for certain races were covered live even then and footage still exists) I would like to see use being made of it.

[SportscarBruce]

"Fast Company" is now uploaded in its entirety.

The year is 1973. The championship battle between Emerson Fittipaldi and Jackie Stewart is the focus of this three part period documentary. Clay Regazzoni crashes and burns in South Africa, Mike Hailwood burns himself while attempting to rescue his trapped F1 comrade. Ronnie Peterson takes his first win. Grand Prix settings; Brazil, South Africa, Monoco, Paul Ricard.

Click "Play All Videos"

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A76CEA7A3648967D

I'll see about posting up a 1966 video celebrating the Cosworth Ford DFV's first victory at Zandvoort, Holland.

[Dave B]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7925005.stm

I thought this had been posted so sorry if it's being duplicated :)

Great moments BBC :up:

Great footage indeed. If you want to see it in better quality, all the clips from the BBC Sport website are playing in a loop under the red button on Sky and Virgin, and on Freeview when capacity allows.

I keep making the point, but it's worth having a nose around their revamped website and looking at the blogs from the likes of Jake Humphrey and Andrew Benson. Ironically, James Allen's personal blog (http://allenonf1.wordpress.com/) has become essential reading too.


Unfortunately for the US reader the video is unobtainum, as is apparently the case of all BBC Sport videos.

No problem. Send me a cheque for £139.50 and I'll see that the BBC gets it, then I'm sure they'll let you have a look. :p

Seriously, the BBC is funded from the licence fee. It's not a universally popular charge, but it does mean that we get some good quality programming free from adverts and sponsorship. And in a time where all the major commercial channels are making major cuts it's good to have a guaranteed minimum quality from the Beeb.

If they were forced to pay for worldwide rights as well as the resources to supply the whole globe with bandwidth-hungry AV content, the licence-fee payer would lose out.

You can't blame the BBC for that.

[Knock-on]

I keep making the point, but it's worth having a nose around their revamped website and looking at the blogs from the likes of Jake Humphrey and Andrew Benson. Ironically, James Allen's personal blog (http://allenonf1.wordpress.com/) has become essential reading too.



Problem is that Allen is a very knowledgable and a good Motoracing Journo. Just a really crap presenter.

[cynisca]

It's difficult to choose the greatest moment. There's a lot of great moments to be honest. :p

But my greatest moments since I had been watching the races was the 1998 Belgian GP (biggest crash in F1's history in the first lap, and the Coulthard/Schumacher brawl), 2000 Japanese GP (Ferrari's first world driver's title for 21 years) and the 2008 Brazilian GP (Hamilton claims the world title in the last lap, the last corner).

[Garry Walker]

Problem is that Allen is a very knowledgable and a good Motoracing Journo. Just a really crap presenter.

A much better one still than that moron Murray Walker ever was.

[jens]

Problem is that Allen is a very knowledgable and a good Motoracing Journo. Just a really crap presenter.

I think JA is kinda underrated. I happened to watch a few Grand Prix's by ITV in the final stages of last season and there wasn't really much annoying in Allen's commentary for me.

[Garry Walker]

I think JA is kinda underrated. I happened to watch a few Grand Prix's by ITV in the final stages of last season and there wasn't really much annoying in Allen's commentary for me.

Most people getting annoyed with Allens commentary are idiot fanboys of Murray Walker, who for some weird reason was popular amongst people, despite the fact that 99% of what came out of his mouth was pure horse manure.

[Knock-on]

A much better one still than that moron Murray Walker ever was.

You just never got MW did you :laugh:

He may not have been everyones cup of tea but as a researcher and commentator, he was superb in my opinion.

OK, he made some "Murrayisms" through being over enthusiastic but better that than some of the dead pan commentators you get.

There was a reason MW was universally respected in Motorsport circles and loved by millions. I'm one of them and if that makes me a "Fanboy", then I consider it a compliment.

A great man and ambassador of the sport.

[Garry Walker]

You just never got MW did you :laugh:

He may not have been everyones cup of tea but as a researcher and commentator, he was superb in my opinion.

OK, he made some "Murrayisms" through being over enthusiastic but better that than some of the dead pan commentators you get.

There was a reason MW was universally respected in Motorsport circles and loved by millions. I'm one of them and if that makes me a "Fanboy", then I consider it a compliment.

A great man and ambassador of the sport.

His understanding of F1 was at the level of guy who has watched a maximum of 2 races in his lifetime, he really did not understand it at all. Hunt and Brundle made the coverage somewhat acceptable, but Murray is truly one of the worst commentators I have ever heard. I don`t think I have ever heard him say anything worthwhile during a race.

I have complete recordings of BBC and ITV races from 1991 (and many from years before) and I have to say that I enjoy Allen FAR more as a commentator than Murray, who completely ruined the coverage for me. I am not saying allen is a superb commentator (very few are), but compared to Murray he is by far better.

I also have never understood the view of many that when Murray makes an idiotic comment then it is enthusiasm, but when allen makes an error it just shows he is idiotic. I think James Allen has proven his love for the sport many times.

[Knock-on]

Lets just disagree then :)

But you are wrong about his knowledge of the sport. I doubt there are many people in F1 with a greater knowledge.

[Garry Walker]

But you are wrong about his knowledge of the sport. I doubt there are many people in F1 with a greater knowledge.

He totally proved that when he took part of that UK quiz show (mastermind?) and answered F1 related questions :D

He sure has been in F1 for long, but apparently hasn`t learned much.

[Dave B]

Good grief, I can't believe that we're even debating Murray's F1 knowledge. I can well accept that he might not be everybody's favourite commentator, but to claim that he lacks motorsport knowledge is akin to saying Stephen Hawking can't add up.

Listen back to some of his commentary and it's clear that he isn't always in trousers-on-fire mode, nor does he make that many mistakes. In fact it's often the understated calmness of his speech which creates far more of an atmosphere than any amount of shouting. True, his gaffes have become the stuff of legend but that's only because they're usually delivered with such a hefty dose of humour and irony, and he always has the good grace to acknowledge and correct them unlike certain commentators I could mention.

Don't take any notice of his - admittedly poor - performance on Mastermind. If you've even been at the pointy end of a TV camera you'll know just how the most confident person can suddenly find their knowledge evaporate when outside of their comfort zone.

If you prefer James Allen to Murray Walker then that's entirely your decision, but don't ever try to suggest that Mr W knows nothing about motorsport - you'll just make yourself look daft :rolleyes:

[Knock-on]

He totally proved that when he took part of that UK quiz show (mastermind?) and answered F1 related questions :D

He sure has been in F1 for long, but apparently hasn`t learned much.

Didn't he get 7 out of 16 under the spotlight and under pressure in 60 seconds.

Wonder how many you would get in similar circumstances.

Not bad for an 81 year old. I'll be lucky if I know my name at that age :D

[Knock-on]

Good grief, I can't believe that we're even debating Murray's F1 knowledge. I can well accept that he might not be everybody's favourite commentator, but to claim that he lacks motorsport knowledge is akin to saying Stephen Hawking can't add up.

Listen back to some of his commentary and it's clear that he isn't always in trousers-on-fire mode, nor does he make that many mistakes. In fact it's often the understated calmness of his speech which creates far more of an atmosphere than any amount of shouting. True, his gaffes have become the stuff of legend but that's only because they're usually delivered with such a hefty dose of humour and irony, and he always has the good grace to acknowledge and correct them unlike certain commentators I could mention.

Don't take any notice of his - admittedly poor - performance on Mastermind. If you've even been at the pointy end of a TV camera you'll know just how the most confident person can suddenly find their knowledge evaporate when outside of their comfort zone.

If you prefer James Allen to Murray Walker then that's entirely your decision, but don't ever try to suggest that Mr W knows nothing about motorsport - you'll just make yourself look daft :rolleyes:

:up:

One of my most cherished moments in Motorsport was meeting him at Thruxton that time thanks to you. Cheers mate :)

[Rodriguez 917]

I have every GP on tape from the start of 1996 and watched a few recently with Murray commentating, I have to say I found him very irritating. I never got the negativity towards James Allen, I thought he was ok!

[Dave B]

:up:

One of my most cherished moments in Motorsport was meeting him at Thruxton that time thanks to you. Cheers mate :)
Stop it, I'm coming over all emotional :D

[UltimateDanGTR]

I have every GP on tape from the start of 1996 and watched a few recently with Murray commentating, I have to say I found him very irritating. I never got the negativity towards James Allen, I thought he was ok!

I also thought james Allen was OK, I dont know why people hate him so much. Fair do's he wasnt as good as Murray, but nobody is ever going to be in my view. I dont think He was irritating either, Just interesting.