Gotta put my 2cents in on this dust flurry that recently settled.
Y'know, what I find objectionable is the way forum members seem to feel that Bagnaia owes them a personal/public apology, as if they'd been in the car with him at the time. The event didn't occur on the race track, so I can't help but wonder why race fans feel he owes them an amends. Nobody here knows what steps he has taken privately to make things right. This is a weird dynamic I see with fans of sports figures and athletes where fans seem to somehow believe they are entitled to an apology for - whatever - from public figures, for things that have occurred in private moments, as if fans owned said celebrity or sports figure. When I pay down my yearly fee to Dorna, I'm paying to watch racing. Nothing in the contract implies the riders have any obligation to live by my standards of conduct. Lecturing someone about ethics and moral standards is something one is obligated to do with one's children.
People "assume" Pecco is unrepentant, but nobody on this forum has ever personally spoken with him and because he hasn't PUBLICLY Tweeted about it or held a press conference to satisfy the public's voracious need to see him sufficiently abase himself they feel free to make assumptions about him. Its the inverse of hero worship; the flip side of the self-appointed guardians of morality's dynamic of living vicariously through the lives of celebrities.
Amen to this. I've really, really enjoyed your posts on this. Very even-handed.
Speeding anyone? Can we even begin to tally the amount of road deaths where speeding was an important contributor. But then, so many of us engage in it (I was really very stupid as a youngster - now 56yrs and can look back at it), with our main defence being that so many others do it and most importantly .... I never crashed, and if I did, no one got hurt.
We open a serious can of worms taking anyone to task for what may have happened rather than what actually happened. Engaging in risky behaviour to the peril of others would and should be frowned upon and even sanctioned. There seem to be socially accepted thresholds for sanctioning behaviours that detrimentally affect the lives of others and even cause deaths. Even then a death or injury without intent, cannot be sanctioned without it occurring..... (there's attempted injury/killing with intent which carries its own sanction).
I'd bet that Pecco learnt from what happened. I agree that he doesn't owe his fans an apology or public statement for what occurred in a private setting, i.e., not in his official capacity as a MotoGP rider. The FIA and FIM are all too aware of the cancel culture and woke mindset that can run awry if allowed. Same for Jack Miller who wished to nip that in the bud. Pecco said what he had to say.... let's not 'cancel' him for it... let's move on.
And you’re entitled to your opinion. It is however misplaced, in that you make that common mistake of judging users of drugs and alcohol as being immoral. People don’t misuse substances because they’re of “poor character”. Alcoholism and drug addiction or substance abuse of any kind - is a disease, same as depression, schizophrenia etc. The idea of substance abuse as a result of low character is a concept that is as wrong and out-of-date as mistaking schizophrenia for being possessed. It’s been well established for decades in the modern medical community that substance abuse is a medical/pyschiatric disease. To write someone off as “a junkie plain and simple” - is just wrong. This is not the 1950s. We know better now.
Indeed!!
I think we too often take the moral high ground in claiming degrees of error on this issue. We may be addicted to a LOT of different material things with the actual addiction being to pleasure and escape... whatever may provide this. If we each take a good look in the mirror, we will likely admit addiction to something. One may think his addiction to spending is better than another's addiction to alcohol, for instance. Another may think his addiction to forums is better than another's addiction to porn. etc. The only difference with substance addiction is the severe physiologic impact which makes for a potent combination with the psychological impact common to all addictions. Since we may be able to resist substance addiction, does not mean we should judge those who have failed to because they are prone to it, while we are deep in the mire of an addiction all our own with all the negative consequences that go with any addiction, but which may not be socially stigmatised.
......
As to Pecco. I found his behaviour immediately after his championship defeat to be perfectly acceptable and even commendable, IMO. Don't quite get some of the views regarding this but to each his own.......
I've struggled to 'warm' up to Pecco with his quiet personality. He sort of reminds me of the movie 'Anger Management'. He is quiet and tends to come out of his shell during very emotional moments. So his angry moments can be quite unexpected with little to counterbalance this. I personally get it, but am indifferent. It's great to read sentiments that he is his own man and not under the influence of Rossi. I've always felt this way about him.
OTOH