Max Verstappen

Commentators should be unbias, just report and not judge, IMO.
They should let the spectators and the viewers make up their own opinion.
When they take a partisan view, that can spectacularly backfire.
It happened in this case.

 

Yeah, they went absolutely nuts fawning over Logan here in the US.

 

Yep, I don't think the media here in the U.S. fawns over HAAS F1 either.

 

The American public likes winners, and neither Logan nor Haas have provided that !

 

Yet they fawn over effing Guenther Steiner wtf

 

Just because someone has won an F1 world championship doesn't mean they are correct in their views or even knowledgeable about F1 at all. It baffles me how so many need to listen someone who has raced or participated in a particular sport to be considered a reliable source, even if that person has skewed views or is even wrong. Someone that has never even been to a race can be smarter about F1 than a driver, and certainly have more factual opinions. Furthermore, anybody has the human nature to be biased and therefore they could be wrong in their biased. Damon's world championship doesn't exclude him from this prejudice and it doesn't make it okay.

You say because he's a Brit working for a British outlet that his British biased is to be expected. Sure it's okay for Sky Sports to be enthusiastic about their fellow Brits and have extra coverage surrounding those drivers and teams. However in the world of journalism, facts always need to trump feelings. When we see two instances that are the same and one driver (usually Max) gets smeared with hate and called awful things by the likes of Damon Hill but then praise, support, or ignore the same situation when it's done by a favored driver (usually Lewis or Lando), that's flat out wrong and disgusting. Especially when Sky Sports is by far the biggest broadcaster of Formula 1 in the entire world. They are not exclusive to British fans, and they need to be aware of it. As you inadvertently pointed out, even if their opinions are biased and perhaps wrong, a lot of people are going to listen to them and believe what they say.

It's funny you mention hypocritical. You defend Damon Hill against Joe. Accusing him of not liking Damon because he says negative things about Joe's star driver and insinuate it's wrong to "berate" the guy. Moments later you throw negative comments against Max. So it's okay for you to berate Max because you don't like him?

 

I would submit that it is not possible for somebody that has won an f1 world championship to not be knowledgable about F1 at all. I would also submit that someone who has never participated in a sport could not be considered an expert in doing it. They could be an expert in the history of it, or the stats of it, but not in actually doing it. Now could the expert be wrong? Sure, all experts are wrong at times - every single one. Could a non expert be right? Sure, but that neither makes the former not an expert nor the latter an expert.

 

Being a world champion doesn't define the knowledge. He certainly has to be considered an expert as a driver in F1 over anybody that hasn't driven an F1 car. It doesn't mean his opinion of driving starts are automatically right though. It absolutely doesn't make him automatically a reliable source for all things F1 just because he drove an F1 car almost 30 years ago.

When you say participated in F1, do you mean as a driver? Or just any employee of F1. Ted Kravitz was never a driver or has ever worked for a Formula 1 team. He's an F1 journalist. Is he an expert or by is he excluded because of your criteria?

My point is their history of involvement with the sport first hand doesn't make someone correct or reliable. There very much is a right and a wrong and all the grey areas should be dissected. Simply saying someone's opinion is more valid or correct because they are or were employed in the sport is ridiculous. That would be like saying anything a police office does is lawful and correct because they are experts in law enforcement, that's what they do. We all know that isn't true at all.

I think Joe's point is that Damon's heavily biased views are often extremely unprofessional for a public figure in his position and supposed "expert". Ignore anything Damon Hill has done, and just look at the stance he takes on a lot of F1 issues and many many people out there do not agree with him, often on the account of his insane bias.

 

Chris, its "possibly" fair to say he knows more about F1 and the inner circle than both of us and for me i dont hang on every word every commentator, team principal or driver makes, unlike some on here. I form my own judgement and based on my opinion DH gives his opinion, if you dont agree then so what. Watch another channel if you dont like it. You can agree or disagree, thats up to you.

According to JG, how does your statement square with Rosberg being correct & more knowledgeable! For me Villeneuve is the more honest specialist commentator.

Perhaps you need to re-read my post, you conveniently missed out the positive remarks i.e. "talented" "great"

Tony
PS - JG surely doesnt need you to wade into the discussion so butt out.

 

When it comes to driving an F1 car, Ted Kravitz has a more informed opinion than a spectator. Damon Hill has a more informed opinion than Ted Kravitz. I don't think you can be an expert in something without doing it - so in terms of driving an F1 car, I don't think Ted Kravitz is an expert, no.

 

I'll add, I think if he had some other high level motorsport driving experience, he could be considered an expert, but his background is journalism, so he could be considered an expert in that.

 

Damon certainly should be more knowledgeable about F1 than you or I. I didn't say he isn't. I just said the default of him being more correct than an F1 follower simply on the basis of being a world champion should have zero bearing.

You said that you form your own judgements. I think that's great. However you made the comment of stating DH knows what he's talking about on the basis of being an F1 champion. How I read it was DH knows more than JG (and any other F1 follower) and you hold more value to anything he says simply because he won an F1 championship.

PS to your PS. Since you made a post on a public forum, there is option for people to throw in their 2 cents on topics being discussed. If you want people to "butt out" to a public conversation, keep it private or don't post.

 

I think it absolutely has bearing - an expert has a more informed opinion. To say that has no bearing means we all should have equally weighted opinions in everything and that's just not true. It's why I got to a doctor and not just webmd or reddit. That stance is the Dunning-Kruger effect manifest.

 

We're going round in circles here. I do grasp some of the point you're making. We listen to the F1 commentators as expects. For the most part we can agree on that. Where I differ, is I am not going to accept their opinions simply on their position of being an "expert" and for past individual accomplishments. I absolutely do not think it makes them right. I hear what they say and occasionally, perhaps often I find that followers of F1 have a more expert opinion of given matters, especially when it's opinions that come from heavily biased commentators. Obviously this all about subjective matters. It's very hard to argue facts, and it sure seems like most of the time facts are left out of the opinions from these "experts". Damon Hill has a bit of a reputation for this (as seen by many F1 followers), where as Nico Rosberg tends to include more facts or at least calls it how it is.

You mention doctors as a good analogy. If I want an answer to a medical problem, I go to a doctor. If I have a hurt shoulder and the doctor says it's because I run wrong when the other guy that also had a hurt shoulder and the doctor said it's because he throws wrong. Doctor recommends foot treatment for me and arm/shoulder treatment for the other guy. In this case I am questioning the opinion of this "expert".

 

Do you all take notice of the commentators, pundits, journos, influencers or social media ?
I try not to, to make up my own mind. I say I try, because it's difficult to get the info without the bias statements.

Damon Hill to me was a good driver who punched well about his weight at Williams, and got one WDC when he deserved 2.

 

Being a runner up on a few occasions and finally WDC then you are misguided into thinking he is a idiot and knows sweet FA about driving these cars, or the dirty tricks that goes on inside the cockpit, so yes he has a little more of my respect than the armchair enthusiast, but please read my post again it may help you understand why you have leapt in without thinking it through. If you want to see passionate (biased) journalism then watch Dutch TV on a GP weekend!!

Sky F! and the circus thrive on whipping up a storm in a tea cup, otherwise the show will be a snooze fest.....dont fall for it.

PS to your PS - I made my remarks and quoted a post by a JG6 and therefore out of courtesy that comment remains between the two of us, but i guess you are his mouthpiece going by the likes you keep getting.

Best
tony

 

Damon Hill needs to keep an un-biased commentary TO WHOMEVER he has issues with or WHOMEVER he talks about to....no matter IF he has an internal bias towards someone he likes or dislikes.

 

Joe, no need for the emphasis I can read!

I see you have singled out Damon Hill for your wrath, I would agree with your comments if you expand that to every journalist, commentator from any nation, but a lot of people on here seem to single out the Brits only as being biased. Think about it mate and reflect on your bias.....

You always have the mute button or turn on Dutch TV, you will get all the sugar you want.

 

My takeaway is how impressive Prost was in his day.

 

As it's already been said, Sky Sports is by far the largest watched broadcast of Formula 1 in the world. In my cases they are exclusive in English speaking regions.

I don't watch the Dutch broadcast. But I certainly would criticize their bias just the same. Martin Brundle has been on the air since I started watching F1, and I don't have too many issues with his words.

So at least for me it's not singling out the Brits as you say. It's pointing out the bias. It just so happens that Damon Hill, Ted Kravitz, Johnny Herbert, and several other Sky Sport employees (current or former) have been heavily biased towards their countrymen.

 

I don't watch the Dutch broadcast either. Spanish one is pretty biased as well.

The British media, and why people have an issue with is, is because as you say they are the default global broadcast to English speaking countries (or indeed countries with no F1 media commentators of their own). There very much is British media bias otherwise it wouldn't be a discussion point for the last 15 years at minimum. A little bit of bias is perfectly fine but the British media has gone overboard for a very long time. They do have a responsibility since they are the default global voice.

Just look at how they started to talk about Piastri when he beat Norris when Norris became a real title contender.
Vettel, Alonso, Schumacher, Verstappen etc all were initially loved, until they went against British drivers, suddenly they were the anti-christ. Eventually once the drivers are no longer a threat the media will slowly turn around again.

A few journo's going against the grain and actually report without bias does not mean the rest of the British media isn't biased.

 

So you are going to pin your whole argument on a few media personal and hatred for the whole British media just because they dont fit into your narrative of supporting your guy or agreeing with his recollection of events...........really. You are casting a very big net. Are Collins, Davidson, Chandhok, Schiff, Button etc included in this or is it just aimed at SkyF1? If you want to see bias watch Sky News!!

For the record I support the team, in my case that is Ferrari and has been for well over 50 years, good or bad I am there but look beyond the politics, its the headlines they want you to swallow and some folks really do take the bait.

There are numerous examples of unbiased reporting. Just look at the Sky F! website to cast a some doubt over your statement, there are plenty of other F1 commentators that share varying views. Its called an opinion and you (and others on here) are entitled to that but to slay all the Brits is ill thought out.......in my opinion!

Best
Tony

 

A request to Verstappen before his F1 title showdown with Hamilton

Remember this ridiculous letter?

It's not just Sky. It's the written media too. Adrian Newey opened up about it too (after his departure from Red Bull).

 

Bloody hell Bas, you drag this up as well. I'll wait and see what Newey says when Verstappen forces a AM driver off the track. Can you quote me some opinions from the Dutch media please in support of Norris ?

Its his opinion mate, nothing else, dont work yourself into a lather over it. For my tuppence worth Verstappen deserves most of it.

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24387/13246117/max-verstappen-damon-hill-says-no-f1-vendetta-behind-red-bull-driver-criticism-as-people-just-want-fair-racing

Watch the video clip from Sainz rear view camera and tell me he didnt do it on purpose! What Hill is saying the calibre of driving needs to be higher, remember he was the recipient on a few occasions from dirty tricks!

Best

Tony

 

LOL