2 votes
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 20:16
No, it wasn't. Not unanimously, at least. Just see that many car ads were based on performance and high speed capabilities. Look at the popularity of the "hot hatches" in late seventies and early eighties.
Advertisement
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 20:30
The sales pitch may have been based on selling higher performance cars to young drivers, but their behaviour on the road was just as anti-social as it is now.
I'm not discussing if it was anti social or not, I'm saying there was much more tolerance and even admiration towards it than there is now. Just like smoking was cool.
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 20:34
I'm not discussing if it was anti social or not, I'm saying there was much more tolerance and even admiration towards it than there is now. Just like smoking was cool.
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 20:47
I have to disagree with this. History has shown the draw of spectacles. I think it creates more justification to attend races. Maybe less so in Europe where races are relatively in Europeans backyards and travel is cheap and easy, but for me attending an F1 race also doubles as a vacation. It is easy for me to talk the girlfriend and non motorsport friends into joining me in Montreal or Austin. Convincing said people to travel to the countryside to visit Silverstone, Spa or Hockenheim simply to watch race cars falls on deaf ears. When the host city becomes a spectacle in a manner that is attractive to all sorts of people - most importantly non-motorsports people - you attract people that otherwise never cared. It allows motorsports fans to convince their better/lesser halves (or friends) that going to an F1 race is going to be a great experience - even if they don't go to the race (enjoy your shopping, love).
That's the point that most people here fail to understand. We are all motorsport fans and think that the show should be just about motorsport fans. The fact is, there isn't enough of us and our numbers are not growing much, if at all.
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 20:53
I'm not discussing if it was anti social or not, I'm saying there was much more tolerance and even admiration towards it than there is now. Just like smoking was cool.
There was, perhaps, much more tolerance towards many things that are and were anti-social. It's wrong to criticise people for their historical behaviour when what they were doing was tolerated. Indeed, we should never ask people to apologise for them. But that does not mean they were not anti-social.
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 21:06
No, it wasn't. Not unanimously, at least. Just see that many car ads were based on performance and high speed capabilities. Look at the popularity of the "hot hatches" in late seventies and early eighties.
Yes I did it. And I very specifically said the perception was different, never discussing the behaviour itself. Really, I don't understand what your problem is. I'm saying there was a lot more tolerance towards speed on the roads thirty years ago (just like, for example, there was much more tolerance towards smoking). Feel free to think it was otherwise, but it wasn't.
Member
Posted 05 February 2019 - 21:10
There was, perhaps, much more tolerance towards many things that are and were anti-social. It's wrong to criticise people for their historical behaviour when what they were doing was tolerated. Indeed, we should never ask people to apologise for them. But that does not mean they were not anti-social.
Again, where did I say otherwise it was not anti-social? Please stop killing the messenger, there was more tolerance back then, I think it's an indisputable fact.
Member
Posted 06 February 2019 - 00:55
Again, where did I say otherwise it was not anti-social? Please stop killing the messenger, there was more tolerance back then, I think it's an indisputable fact.
Err, go back and read what you posted in #200 ...
Clatter, on 03 Feb 2019 - 08:23, said:
Driving above the posted speed limit, or too fast for the prevailing road conditions was just as anti-social back then as it is now. But there are still people, young and old, who think its cool.
No, it wasn't. Not unanimously, at least. Just see that many car ads were based on performance and high speed capabilities. Look at the popularity of the "hot hatches" in late seventies and early eighties.
You have highlighted a statement saying it "was just as anti-social back then as it is now" and then started by writing "No, it wasn't". What is that if not saying it was not anti-social. Maybe it was just clumsy wording and you meant that it wasn't perceived to be anti-social or, at least not as anti-social as it is now. But that's not what "No, it wasn't. Not unanimously" means.
Member
Posted 06 February 2019 - 21:16
I don't understand the antipathy to making a show of a GP. It needn't detract from the main event and if you don't want to participate in the surrounding extras, you don't have to. I doubt if Liberty will keep you there at gun-point.
Making an Event out of an event has worked rather well for the Goodwood Revival, now the UK's second biggest motorsport meeting. But it is still about racing when push comes to shove. If Liberty want to have concerts after the race, or hold demo runs and exhibitions in the local town, why not. How does it hurt you? Just ignore it if you aren't interested - that's what I do to all the warm-up nonsense and after GP punditry on the TV. I tune in 5 mins before the off and turn off in the slow-down lap. But others lap it all up, and good luck to them.
Member
Posted 07 February 2019 - 04:13
Allow me to translate...
"When we can't design a car well enough and get trounced after four consecutive WCCs we blame the engine that got us those titles. When we have to implement a rule change for a new wing and it doesn't model as well as we think it should we blame the Americans and ignore that the FIA signed off on the change."
I'll be curious to hear how the teams with less means feel with the cost/complexity reductions. I think that will be the real test and not so much being able to make the racing closer. Making the designs to be closer may not be possible except under a spec rule set with I'd think no one wants to see.
If Horner had a Spice name I think it should be Whingey Spice.
© MOTORSPORT NETWORK 2024. All rights reserved. Community Forum Software by IP.Board
