24 replies to this topic

[Robertsf]

I have been a reader of Autosport magazine for over 10 years and I am suprised that this kind of Bull.... is printed. 

I have been surprised of the quality changes in your magazine but this is the most stupid article so far.

Leave F1 reporting to those who know the sport! 

[balmybaldwin]

It might be useful to actually point out the content you are so unhappy with?

[learningtobelost]

I assume OP is referring to this: https://www.autospor...t-should-retire

 

I disagree with Codling. But it is important to expose ourselves to viewpoints that oppose our beliefs.

 

Calling for the heads of those that disagree with us is a bit of a slippery slope.

Edited by learningtobelost, 22 August 2017 - 09:12.

[LiftAndCoast]

Kimi fan, per chance?

[MacJack]

It is not just Stuart Codling. Also Nigel Roebuck, Edd Straw, and Ben Anderson all of them, at least, have published deliberate bullshit about Raikkonen in past two years about how Raikkonen is basically waste of any seat in F1 or, generally, waste of free space in paddock. The whole hate campaign against Raikkonen is and have been pretty embarrassing for Autosport magazine.

[pacificquay]

It's hardly "desparate bullshit".

 

The Codling article in particular backs up its argument with explanation.

 

Disagree if you will - but it's a decent piece.

[onemoresolo]

It is not just Stuart Codling. Also Nigel Roebuck, Edd Straw, and Ben Anderson all of them, at least, have published deliberate bullshit about Raikkonen in past two years about how Raikkonen is basically waste of any seat in F1 or, generally, waste of free space in paddock. The whole hate campaign against Raikkonen is and have been pretty embarrassing for Autosport magazine.

 

Can you post any articles in particular to back this up?

 

I'm not sure why people object to articles that disagree with their opinion in this way.

 

Fans of all drivers are guilty of it, but some groups seem to get triggered more easily than others.

 

learningtobelost sums it up well. I don't agree with the article either, but to suggest somebody should be sacked/retired/whatever because their opinion from yours is ridiculous. Contrasting opinions should be challenged and debated, not shut down.

 

His opinion is understandable - Kimi is 37 and is off the pace of Vettel and Alonso before him - so is it unreasonable to suggest he should make way for a new driver with the potential to reach their level? No. I don't agree, but I can understand.

 

It isn't a hate campaign if somebody has a different opinion to you. Most of the articles I've read suggested Raikonnen should retire (including this one) acknowledge he's been a great driver, but that he's not at that level now. I think that's fair and balanced.

 

In any case, this thread should be in the Website Feedback forum, as it isn't about whether or not Kimi should retire but on the quality of journalism on Autosport.com

[Jovanotti]

I have been a reader of Autosport magazine for over 10 years and I am suprised that this kind of Bull.... is printed. 

I have been surprised of the quality changes in your magazine but this is the most stupid article so far.

Leave F1 reporting to those who know the sport! 

Dude, Räikkönen generates clicks, that's why they're milking this topic every year

Edited by Jovanotti, 22 August 2017 - 09:39.

[MacJack]

Can you post any articles in particular to back this up?

 

I'm not sure why people object to articles that disagree with their opinion in this way.

 

Fans of all drivers are guilty of it, but some groups seem to get triggered more easily than others.

 

learningtobelost sums it up well. I don't agree with the article either, but to suggest somebody should be sacked/retired/whatever because their opinion from yours is ridiculous. Contrasting opinions should be challenged and debated, not shut down.

 

His opinion is understandable - Kimi is 37 and is off the pace of Vettel and Alonso before him - so is it unreasonable to suggest he should make way for a new driver with the potential to reach their level? No. I don't agree, but I can understand.

 

It isn't a hate campaign if somebody has a different opinion to you. Most of the articles I've read suggested Raikonnen should retire (including this one) acknowledge he's been a great driver, but that he's not at that level now. I think that's fair and balanced.

 

In any case, this thread should be in the Website Feedback forum, as it isn't about whether or not Kimi should retire but on the quality of journalism on Autosport.com

 

http://classicplus.a...3293.1503392277

 

http://classicplus.a...3293.1503392277

 

http://classic.autos....php/id/120369/

 

http://classicplus.a...3293.1503392277

 

http://classicplus.a...3293.1503392277

 

 

The question is, why they need to write articles at all about when it is time for Raikkonen to retire? They haven't done that for Button, not that extend for Massa, or not for anybody else in past ten years. However, I can remember how Autosport was ranting about how M. Schumacher should retire at the time when he was actually dominating the sport!

Edited by MacJack, 22 August 2017 - 09:46.

[RaikkonenFan96]

If Ferrari would think Kimi's seat is being wasted they would change driver, simple as that.

 

As always people tend to forget the fact that Ferrari doesn't have to give any value of other peoples opinions than theirselves and Kimi's. As always "Kimi should retire" articles are only for generating clicks and that article doesn't have anything noteworthy.

[RaikkonenFan96]

Also I don't know why this journo says Kimi should retire to give his seat for younger driver. Everything in F1 should be earned and F1 ain't charity, not be given out just for somebody because he is younger.

 

As it has been debated for few years, is there any driver in F1 currently that would be better than Kimi without any doubt and Ferrari willing to hire (Alonso)?

[HP]

Imagine this all after the summer break and before Spa, one of Kimi;s better race tracks.

 

In any case I agree that Kimi wasted much of his talent, but he is far from being the only one.

[Rinehart]

I have been a reader of Autosport magazine for over 10 years and I am suprised that this kind of Bull.... is printed. 

I have been surprised of the quality changes in your magazine but this is the most stupid article so far.

Leave F1 reporting to those who know the sport! 

What part of the article do you disagree with and why?

 

I reckon it's a good article backed up with a decent arguement. Perhaps planet F1 would be more your speed.

Edited by Rinehart, 22 August 2017 - 10:09.

[Lennat]

I don't rate Kimi nowadays, and don't even think he was THAT good in his prime either, but that article was pretty crappy indeed.

[cpbell]

Well, with the exceptoion of the implication that Raikkonen underacheived through much of his career, I agree with the article in question.  I find it sad to see someone who was so talented and quick playing a supporting act to Vettel.

[f1paul]

Well unfortunately for the Kimi haters, he's staying for 2018 https://twitter.com/...941164798943234

[LiftAndCoast]

Well unfortunately for the Kimi haters, he's staying for 2018 https://twitter.com/...941164798943234

Expected, but utterly uninspiring.

[MattK9]

I agree with a lot of the article. Sorry kimi but you are clearly not as quick as seb. If you left i wouldnt miss you.

 

I think there are some much more exciting prospects in the junior formula and also some that have not quite made it into F1.

 

The likes of Kimi, Massa and Button should leave F1. Yes i know Button retired but he should have left a couple of years earlier.

[onemoresolo]

 

The question is, why they need to write articles at all about when it is time for Raikkonen to retire? They haven't done that for Button, not that extend for Massa, or not for anybody else in past ten years. However, I can remember how Autosport was ranting about how M. Schumacher should retire at the time when he was actually dominating the sport!

 

Massa: https://www.autospor...et-massa-retire

Button: http://classicplus.a...en-keep-button/

 

People see what they want to see. They've written articles defending Raikkonen also such as: http://classicplus.a...ng-for-ferrari/

Edited by onemoresolo, 22 August 2017 - 11:36.

[Risil]

I've moved this thread to the Website Feedback forum because as Onemoresolo points out, it's about an article in Autosport Plus and only indirectly about whether Kimi Raikkonen has a future in F1.

 

Please keep the tone respectful and focused on the merits or demerits of the article, and not Kimi's career.

[JHSingo]

I'm sure Kimi's a big enough boy now to deal with some criticism without over-defensive fans raging on a forum.

 

If you don't agree with someone's opinion, don't read it. It's really that simple.

 

But, yes, I agree Kimi should retire. He's been a shell of his former self for several seasons now. You can blame the car, the team, the tyres or whatever else as much as you want - if he was still the super talent he once was, he'd be able to get better results than he is doing. It's time.

[RaikkonenFan96]

Feel sorry for writer of this article after todays news. Even though I don't agree on his opinion that Kimi shouldd retire.

[Buttoneer]

What a strange thing to say.

The writer of the article isn't going to have his fee reclaimed because Kimi has been given another year, so doesn't need pity. He has expressed an opinion as to why Kimi should retire, and given sound reasons. That Kimi hasn't does not invalidate his opinions or the article.

[RaikkonenFan96]

What a strange thing to say.

The writer of the article isn't going to have his fee reclaimed because Kimi has been given another year, so doesn't need pity. He has expressed an opinion as to why Kimi should retire, and given sound reasons. That Kimi hasn't does not invalidate his opinions or the article.

Of course not, you understood my message wrong. If this article would have been released lets say month ago it wouldn't be same, but now many might think "he doesn't know what he is writing about", especially if person doesn't have access to full version. However I agree with him that Kimi should have been more successfull during his career.  Also it looks like the full version of the article claims that he sees it likely that Ferrari continues with same lineup, so it saves the day but only if person has full version access.

Edited by RaikkonenFan96, 22 August 2017 - 15:36.

[onemoresolo]

Of course not, you understood my message wrong. If this article would have been released lets say month ago it wouldn't be same, but now many might think "he doesn't know what he is writing about", especially if person doesn't have access to full version. However I agree with him that Kimi should have been more successfull during his career.  Also it looks like the full version of the article claims that he sees it likely that Ferrari continues with same lineup, so it saves the day but only if person has full version access.

 

I'm really not sure what your point is.

 

You say the article is fair - so what's the issue exactly?

 

People jumping to the wrong conclusion without having read the full piece reflects badly on them, not on the author.