Originally posted by ian senior
On the current historic coverage, was it really what you guys want? Race reports were minimal, plenty of nice pictures but not much else,
I'm just a bit curious because, as a recent poster suggested, there is a danger of MS trying to become all things to all men - and no-one will be happy.
And although it's nice to have Bill Boddy around for old time's sake, isn't his kind of stuff more for the pages of The Automobile (which can spend much more time and detail on it)?
Ian, I am with you on most of this.
The length of the so called articles is pitiful, qv Simon Taylor with hardly more than 1000 words, I'll wager. For someone as contentious as Mosely to warrant less than at least 3/4000 words is an insult to him, and to us.
Roebuck should be assuming the new Jenks role, as a fully paid up member of the awkward squad, perhaps extending what Simon used to do vis a vis the current F1 scene.
The Formula Junior article was disappointing, shall we say, since like the rest it seems to be plumbing new depths of shallowness in content, but the writer gets to drive the cars..................but there are more than enough old, period, track tests of the cars by JVB, Paddy McNally, Simon Taylor, MAWP etc etc in their archives to check against, and perhaps crib from.
Interestingly, Sir Stirling recently noted that todays old racing cars, 250Fetc , are not as they were in his day so assessing them has little value.
I know journos are reputedly not paid a lot, so repeat fees for, or rewrites of, original in depth articles by DCN, M Lawrence, Setright etc cannot be too much of a burden. There are also Ray Bell and David McKinney, inter alia, with matchless info from period, and that is before we look to the US of A, Scalzo etc etc. I suspect that it is the "not invented here" syndrome, but you can be sure the readers would like it, and might even buy another copy.
There is so much which Jenks wrote, in period and with total accuracy, that warrants repeating for old stagers, nostalgia being a thing of the past, as well as for new readers who will never discover they are interested in certain cars/eras if the info is not put before them in a knowledgeable way.
I think that if Bill Boddy thought he was being kept on "for old times' sake" he would be mortified, and it is an injustice to suggest that, IMHO. Moreover, Motor Sport must, I suspect, dream of having such a high percentage of really knowledgeable readers to number of sales that the Automobile enjoys or that the VSCC magazine has, but perhaps they are aiming at lower standards, sorry, broader church, of buyer, but at £5 a time or £11.85 per quarter you need a good reason to do so.
With regard to the very old stuff, pre 1920/30 etc, it never ceases to amaze me how much interest and information about that period emerges on TNF, to much acclaim. Motor Sport always covered those periods, look at the old copies. Just because something was in an era/decade which you do not like or know about is no reason to write those periods out of history, otherwise motor racing will only start in 1963, as the poet Larkin said about sex.