Mark Webber, Jake Humphrey, Monaco, 2011

Humphrey: ??So many inaccuracies in that article??

F1 Fanatic round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In today’s round-up: BBC F1 presenters criticise the Sunday Times’ claims about the future of Formula 1 coverage saying ??viewing figures at a 10 year high??.


Top F1 links from the past 24 hours:

Jake Humphrey (via Twitter)

??Lots of ‘Sunday Times’ questions. So many inaccuracies in that article. F1 does incredible business on the BBC – its spiritual home!

??I’ve no inside info on its future but I know little else gets the audience share and the millions that we do. #bbcf1 is a huge success. The papers/my followers are welcome to report this… ??the past 3 F1 races have each had viewing figures at a 10 year high?.??

Lee McKenzie (via Twitter)

??Sunday Times claims BBC is to axe F1.The inaccuracies in the article hint that the journalist knows as much as the rest of us! Not much!??

Sauber Confirms De la Rosa Standby (Speed)

??Sauber has confirmed reports Pedro de la Rosa will step in once again this weekend if Sergio Perez is not well enough to race.??

RBS, Lehman Received $1.4 Billion From Formula One, Express Says (Bloomberg)

??Royal Bank of Scotland Plc and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEHMQ) have received $1.4 billion in loan repayments and interest from Formula One owner CVC Capital Partners, the Express reported, without saying how it obtained the information.

Ferrari target Jenson (News of the World)

??Jenson Button is being targeted by Ferrari as McLaren face the break-up of their Dream Team of British world champions.

??The team already fear a three-way scrap to hang on to unhappy 2008 champ Lewis Hamilton. Now 2009 world beater Button has been lined up by rivals Ferrari – three years after he could not even get a test drive with them. A source said: ??There has been a lot of talk within Ferrari about getting Button. They have already checked to see if he would be available.???

Mark Webber (via Twitter)

??Enjoyed the Senna film, toughest moment for me was seeing David Brabham’s reaction to Roland [Ratzenberger’s] crash, he was a brave man to race that car next day. As for Ayrton, I never met him, but feel so privileged to have worked with people that were lucky enough to work with that special man. Legend.??

Read more: ??Senna?? ?ǣ the Ayrton Senna movie reviewed

Pastor Maldonado (via Twitter)

??Already in Oxford, tomorrow simulator in Williams factory. I’ll test some new parts and I’ll get ready for the next week end race Valencia.??

Follow F1 news as it breaks using the F1 Fanatic live Twitter app.

Comment of the day

The Sunday Times has claimed the BBC will drop its Formula 1 coverage after the 2013 season. James Scantlebury says:

??Its contract to screen F1 for five seasons until 2013 will cost ??300m.?? ?ǣ incorrect. It is well known that the contract costs BBC about ??200m over 5 years, with the next contract increased to ??235m. I guess that may factor in production costs, but as far as I know they are minimal and definitely would not amount to an extra ??20m per year.

??At about ??3m per race, it is the most expensive BBC programme being broadcast.?? ?ǣ incorrect. At 19 races, each race costs BBC about ??2.1m. In fact, going on the ??2.1m figure, F1 costs BBC about ??420,000 per hour. I?ve even excluded things like the F1 Forum and Practice with that figure and all the other stuff they do, in reality the figure will be lower than that.

??The source said the BBC did not intend to rebid for the F1 contract when it expired in November 2013.?? ?ǣ in which case, why did you have a scaremongering title saying ??BBC AXES FORMULA ONE?? ??Axes? suggests you?re terminating the contract early. No early termination is being sought here if you are to believe the article.

??The proposal to dump F1 will be among a package of measures to be put to the BBC Trust in the Autumn.?? ?ǣ so only towards the end of the article do you actually tell us that they haven?t axed it, despite the headline saying to the contrary?

In short: The newspaper is pro-Tory. Its F1 editor is openly wanting F1 to go to Sky. Hence, the article is best ignored as it is inaccurate throughout.
James Scantlebury

Read more: Sunday Times claims BBC will drop F1 in 2013

From the forum

The results are in for the F1 Fanatic PS3 championship European GP. Congratulations to ed24f1 for the win!

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Julie!

On this day in F1

Jacky Ickx won the Dutch Grand Prix for Ferrari on this day in 1971.

Ickx finished in front of Pedro Rodriguez, who led 22 laps for BRM, and team mate Clay Regazzoni.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories 2011 F1 season, F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 59 comments on “Humphrey: ??So many inaccuracies in that article??”

    1. Presumably Webber meant David Brabham.

      Jenson to Ferrari…not that he wouldn’t be better than Massa but really, why would Jenson want to leave McLaren?

      1. Well, it was published be News of the World, which makes The Sunday Times look credible. Fun fact: they’re both owned by Rupert Murdoch. Coincidence?

        1. The NotW is drivel. I wouldn’t use that rag to wipe my backside. Mainly because I prefer my toilet paper not to have excrement on it prior to bottom-cleansing…

          1. The NotW is drivel.

            People were strangely quick to jump on it when Mosley’s sexcapades were smeared across it. No doubt this was because they wanted another reason to hate him.

            1. Will the mods be looking at my comment here or has is it gone? Sorry if you feel it’s unacceptable, will re write i guess.

          2. Ned Flanders
            20th June 2011, 0:27

            They may be the lowest of the low, but I will forever be grateful to them for giving Max Mosley his long due comeuppance!

            1. However much Mosley might have deserved it, I think a more appropriate downfall would have revolved around the teams digging him out of his position. Which they did, though not in a vindictive way.

        2. yup, same article to claim lewis hamilton “stormed into the red bull motorhome to vent his frustrations”…i never read newspapers but on the couple of occasions I’ve seen articles, i understand why so many people have odd levels of hatred for various individuals.

        3. PM, what is it with you and denying Murdoch’s newspapers any credibility at every possible chance? Is it just his views that anoy you or do you seriously believe that all his news empire does is create and write stories that aren’t anywhere near credible?

          The Australian is owned by Murdoch, as is ther Herald Sun, yet I wouldn’t put them in the same basket in terms of credibility and quality. The HS is big pictures and usually leads with something based in footy, masterchef or similiar, The Australia is, in my opinion and also that of others even slightly more credible than The Age.

          So surely your not trying to paint all of his papers with the same brush. Otherwise why would you bring his name up to link the two?

          Certain markets want certain types of papers, yes credibility is best, but just because it runs with bottom rank stories and has a tendency to go out on a limb some times doesn’t mean you should paint all the other newspapers with the same brush which the feeling I am getting

          1. PM, what is it with you and denying Murdoch’s newspapers any credibility at every possible chance?

            I’m not denying all of his papers credibility. Just the ones that deserve it. The article that appeared in The Sunday Times is clearly biased and serves an ulterior purpose. News of the World on the other hand, has zero credibility. As someone (possibly here, but I think it was on another forums) put it, “I wouldn’t wipe my bottom with that rag, because I like toilet paper that doesn’t already have [use your imagination] on it”.

            If I’m questioning the credibility of the Murdoch empire, it’s for a reason. You’ve got News of the World, which regularly makes things up, this article in The Sunday Times that is grossly misleading at best, and other Murdoch-owned or -affiliated media outlets (*cough*FOX!*cough*) with a spotty track record for political bias and attempting to manipulate public perceptions towards ideals held by its founders.

            The entire point of journalism is that it’s supposed to be free of bias and inform the public. But Murdoch’s conglomerate is notorious for actively promoting bias in its reporting.

            The Australian is owned by Murdoch, as is ther Herald Sun, yet I wouldn’t put them in the same basket in terms of credibility and quality.

            Are you sure? Andrew Bolt, one of their regular political columnists, is deeply aligned with the Liberal party. He’s now got his own program on Channel Ten called The Bolt Report, which is Australia’s first “talking heads” program anchored by a single personality pitched as a political rock star not unlike The O’Reilly Factor (which is broadcast by FOX). The Bolt Report is little more than a series of attacks on the Labour government; in fact, its entire purpose for existence seems to be for criticisng Labour because Bolt doesn’t actually do anything else on it. I can’t find out any information on who is producing the show, but I can give you good odds that a Murdoch-owned company is bankrolling it.

            1. Thanks PM for the carilfying, but I think you missed my lost point. I’ll explain it again if I was a bit confusing last time.

              All news organistations have a political point. Most are left wing, some are right. If you go back through each election here in Australia you will see that The Age always says that the best party is Labor the day before the election and the TA visa vera. Just from last election,_2010#Newspaper_endorsements SAme thing for the previous election . Infact two of the newspapers owned by Murdoch suggested Labor (Sunday versions compared to their weekday version).

              2ndly, I have seen much of FOX’s programming from O’Reilly to Hannity to Beck (who’s now gone), Gretta van ssustranrannanaaaan and co. (the last being the least political).

              Whiel Bolt is, and I wouldn’t say Liberal party biased, but right wing biased instead, although there is evidence both ways, a talking head I don’t see this as anything new for amazing.

              Bolt, particularly through his court case has been seen by the media and hence the public and where his opinions are pointing. He hasn’t got bias a 13 yr old would miss picking up and his credibility is, apart from the obvious bias about the same level as any other opinion show.

              3rdly, I think you are confusing bias with credibility. Yes many morally want someone who isn’t biased and doesn’t spout anything but the truth, but people tend to like or have a subconcious affection for reading those that ‘speak to them’ or those who have similiar bias.

              Just comparing those in Melbourne. It’s no suprise that
              The average reader of ‘The Age’ votes for the Labor party
              The average reader of ‘The Australian’ votes for the Liberal party

              People aren’t that ‘conned’ into certain opinions, people gravitate that way because of how they originally think. How they wre brought up, etc…

              DavidS, THe Herald Sun is a Melbourne based newspaper and its equivilency around Australia has got the same articles particularly on their website. It’s cost effective and eahc is aimed at the same audience in each different part of the country. THe CM is obvious Brisbane I’m guessing.

              But my point still remains that that article isn’t the same in the HS as in The Australian. The HS = CM = etc… they are all the same just different name for different state/city. The Murdoch empire has several newspapers in Australia and The Australian is different and hence has different credibility.

              mX (not sure if you have it else where, or what name it goes under) is a free thing found around the city in the afternoon. That is also owned by Murdoch yet the quality and credbility difference between taht and the CM/HS is a step in the opposite direction.

          2. …doesn’t mean you should paint all the other newspapers with the same brush which the feeling I am getting

            Funny you should say that, because News LTD will publish the exact same article in all of it’s papers.

            The story in the Herald Sun

            The same story in the Courier Mail

            Painting them with the same brush is easy, because the only difference between each of their bottom rung papers is the code of football.

            PS. I’m hoping these links aren’t mangled

        4. NotW may be a bit of a joke paper with regards to gossip tosh they print but they do have a relatively good track record with getting sporting preditcions such as the movements of sports stars correct.

          1. You do why that is don’t you? Hacking into sports stars and their agents phones/E-mail will get you scoop on transfers.

      2. Yeah :P

        AussieGrit Mark Webber

        @brabsracer I just popped a tweet up about you matey and managed to spell your name wrong!!iPhones and me not a great combo..hello 2 troops

        1. Straightforward as ever!

      3. Jenson Button is being targeted by Ferrari

        I must admit I never rated him highly, more so after 2009. But since 2010 and now also in 2011 I have to say he is a great driver and Ferrari would not be wrong in getting him. But Jenson himself said he will go on only if he is competitive. I think he should end his career at McLaren.

        1. I think he should end his career at McLaren.

          He has said he wants to end his career there.

          1. He has said he wants to end his career there.

            That’s why I think Ferrari should not get him – he does not want to go, he’s not exactly a young promise and they already have a big list of young and current drivers who they’d like to have drive with them.

    2. Why would Ferrari be “targeting” Jenson Button, when they also claim their driver line-up for 2012 is both sorted and stable.

      I suspect they’re playing the psychological game here.

      1. Michael Griffin
        20th June 2011, 0:20

        Perhaps they want him for 2013..

        1. Nah, re-reading the article, it’s written by News of the World and thus has zero redeeming value.

          1. This. Button probably doesn’t want to drive again Alonso, can get a contract if he wants one, wouldn’t want to take any team orders.

            McLaren probably wouldn’t want him going, especially if they stand to loose Lewis.

            Read my comment above if the mods okay it.

            1. After Turkey 2009 – where Button’s only mistake of the entire weekend was to miss one apex – Ross Brawn did say he regretted not looking at Button closer as a potential replacement for Rubens Barrichello. But it’s a different culture in the team now with Brawn out.

              I’m treating this report the same way that I did the reports that Ferrari had been instructed to spare no expense in securing Lewis Hamilton for the 2008 season and beyond. It’s just the British press seeing one of their drivers doing well and linking them to a team that isn’t to try and further drive a wedge into the team. I don’t really understand why you lot do this: the press were really pushing for a Button-Hamilton lineup at McLaren at the end of 2009, but now that they’ve got it, they seem intent on tearing them apart.

              I might not have liked it when the Spanish press kept trying to decide Ferrari’s driver roster for them, but I could at least understand why they did that. But the attitude of the British press is a lot like synchronised swimming, vegetarianism and the appeal of JJ Abrams: a complete mystery to me.

          2. Michael Griffin
            20th June 2011, 1:59

            Aren’t the News of the World behind a paywall? You didn’t actually PAY just to read that article, did you?

            1. I have no idea. All I saw was the “News of the World” and stopped reading.

            2. I don’t know why will Button want to leave Mclaren & go to Ferrari.In Mclaren he is free to work where in Ferrari he may have a situation where he may need to feed Alonso.Secondly Button is doing good in Mclaren why would you leave a home team?

            3. Here’s a link to an article on Yahou quoting Europsort as their source for the same story if you want to read it.

              I saw it copied somewhere else as well yesterday evening.

              I agree with most people feeling that such a move would not fit too well with Buttons aversion of team orders (the team comes first at Ferrari), nor with how happy he feels at McLaren.
              Going to Red Bull might make more sense for him, If he would want to leave.

            4. I can see why Ferrari would be so interested in Button. He is the best number 2 driver that money can buy. He is incredibly consistent in picking up points, and is always there to pick up the pieces when Hamilton fails, and that is exactly the kind of driver Ferrari needs as a number 2.

              Jenson cannot match Fernando or Lewis during the entire length of a season, but he can constantly push them to do better by racking up a strong points total. Not only does this help in the WCC, but he also takes points off other championship rivals. Felipe has been useless in taking points off either of the RBs or Mclarens, so I can see why Ferrari are interested in Jenson. Whether Jenson will leave Mclaren is a different story.. but I dont think Ferrari can target a better driver for the #2 spot at Ferrari.

    3. Does Sauber have no confidence in Esteban Gutiérrez?

      1. I don’t really understand their plan, he is good,showed good promise in the testing session in February but still they are showing to respect to his performance.May be Sauber wants a experience driver who both have knowledge of track & tyres.

        1. He will be racing at the circuit for GP2 and GP2 uses Pirelli tyres.

        2. I think they feel its to early for him, and it would mean he can’t do the full GP2 season.

      2. They have a plan for him. One that will see him climb into a Formula 1 car – but only when he’s ready. Putting him into the car too soon might be a disaster (and they expect Perez will see the season out, anyway).

        There’s no hurry to get Gutierrez into a car. The kid is only twenty years old, and a lot of the recent rookies – Petrov, Kobayashi, Maldonado, di Resta – didn’t get into a car until their mid-twenties. Gutierrez might be billed as the Next Big Thing in motorsports, but he’s still got a long way to go. He set the world ablaze in GP3, but his GP2 (and GP2 Asia) results have been disappointing so far; he’s been out-qualified and out-raced by Jules Bianchi at every round of both championships. Granted, some of his performances have not always been his fault; he was collateral damage in the Istanbul start, for one.

        Sauber have a reputation for being the best team for a rookie driver to start with. Peter Sauber himself is an excellent judge of talent, and it has been their policy to put new drivers in cars only when they are ready for it. It’s been this way ever since 2001; Raikkonen, Massa, Kubica and Kobayashi (the jury is still out on Perez, though iff his performance in the Abu Dhabi GP2 round last year is anything to go by, he’s got it) all joined the team once they had demonstrated their abilities, and not a moment before.

        Gutierrez is signed to Sauber for a reason: to give him the best possible start to his career. Maybe he could get a start on the grid sooner if he joined another team – like, say, Team Fernandes – but Sauber can offer him what no other team can: security. He might spend a year or two on the sidelines, but he’ll learn a lot. He’ll get support in the junior categories. He’ll have plenty of access to the team and its facilities before he officially joins them. That might mean he has to miss out on potential starts if someone like Perez is forced to it out, but a bad run of races early on could kill his career before it even truly starts, and Sauber are smarter than that. The trade-off is worth its weight in gold. If it actually weighed anything.

        1. Alot of what you said there makes good sense PM. The sole thing I find a bit off is that Gutiérrez seemed to be under the impression he would get the nod if either Perez or Kobayashi were unable to race. In Montréal, the use of De La Rosa was explained away by the fact that Gutiérrez was in his home town for some reason or other.

          Now, it appears Sauber have chosen to clarify that De La Rosa is their replacement driver, at least for the time being. I find it unfortunate that Gutiérrez did not appear to be clearly informed of his role within the team.

          It will be interesting to see if he has any sort of public reaction to the announcement.

          1. In Montréal, the use of De La Rosa was explained away by the fact that Gutiérrez was in his home town for some reason or other.

            I’m surprised people actually thought Gutierrez would race in Canada, considering he’s never actually seen the circuit and would have had just an hour and ten minutes (after having Perez’s car re-fit to accomodate him) to learn it and start developing his set-up.

          2. I agree with you on the part where Sauber did not have Guttíerez fully briefed on the reasoning behind putting Pedro in the car.

    4. Atta boy, Jakey Wakey! Tell it straight!

      except…it seems no one has the real story. Even those who disagree with the article only disagree with the stats and “facts” the article cites as a basis of its claim, not the claim itself.

      1. Except that in this universe, effect follows cause. I’ve complained, but nothing has changed.

        The claims made by The Sunday Times are based on those supposed facts, which are presented as evidence of why the BBC will not renew their coverage. The problem is that because those facts have been called into a question – and some even disproved – there is no evidence to support the claims.

        It’s like a murder trial. In this case, the defendant (the BBC) has been found with the murder weapon. The prosecutor (The Sunday Times) has built a case around the defendant being guilty because they were in possession of the weapon. However, the defence attorney (the fans) has demonstrated that defendant found the weapon after the murder. Now, it’s possible that the defendant had the motive, means and opportunity to commit the crime regardless, but the prosecutor’s case hinges on the defendant being in possession of the murder weapon, which the defence attorney has shown to be false. There is no longer anything to substantiate the prosecutor’s claims.

      2. Jake giving us a perfect example of the “non-denial denial”.

        He doesn’t say the story is false, he says it contains inaccuracies.

        F1 does so much “incredible business” for BBC, that Jake spent the pre-season trying to hype up a damp squib of twitter hash tag campaign to try to boost viewer numbers … confirming he saw the same memos and same concerns about value for money that the report is based off.

    5. Why put older news as the headline? Are you hoping it will get you more hits for longer? This place reminds me of the celebrity magazines my ex would read.

      1. Huh? The headline is news from yesterday, and until Keith can start seeing into the future I would imagine the links in every day’s roundup will be from the previous day.

    6. Brilliant analogy! Way to refute that logic…

    7. Oh…, that was directed @PM

    8. The BBC article only mentions costs. Does anyone know how much BBC is likely to be making from selling its commentary and hence the net costs. However I think BBC could do F1 much more cheaply. there is no need to have so many people at each race. Would rather see less people at the track than see F1 go to sky or ITV

    9. @PM. you’re not as good or as witty a writer as you think you are.

    10. Just a note, the James Scantlebury COTD actually originates back to me as I posted it on DS and Autosport.

      Apart from that, great work as usual Keith. :)

      1. Sorry about that – when James wrote that he’d copied it from another forum I took that to mean he had written it originally in that other forum.

      2. So concratulations on your mediated COTD Dave!

    11. British press writing an inaccurate article??
      NO WAY!

      1. What makes you think it only happens in Britain?

    12. in lesser cared for news Hamilton meets my other obsession jpop girl group Perfume at a film premiere

    13. So Button is set to sign an improved deal with Mclaren… see Autosport

    14. Sounds a bit extreme from the News of the World, they make it sound like an inevitability!

    15. One important note for today is that Paul Pietsch became first F1 driver to reach 100 years of age.

    16. Murdoch makes me sick, that man has way too much power and control, I know for a fact I am going to be getting all the average “its in the newspaper must be true” sorts banging on at me about this.

      I long ago realised that nothing in the papers is true. I am sure all of us have seen pieces written about the industry we work in or about something we know allot about and been made to feel sick at how far off the truth, misguided or misleading it was.

      1. Don’t blame Murdoch, blame the system.

    Comments are closed.