Ok, the post above where you call Anarchist gay and me a ....., it actually had some decent takes in it.(BTW, I'm curious to know why you think Casey has a "good ....".
Anyway...
My point was to reflect on the future of the sport, as the guy who wrote the article also pondered the Rossi centric nature of the sport and implied its folly. (Right, do we agree so far that this was partially the guy's point?) He goes on to say that we don't need short term celebrity interest, which I disagree with because honestly any attention our sport gets to me is good. here in the States, most people don't know GP exist. If 80 pound anorexic Paris Hilton can get some attention, .... it, good. Again, the only quote I posted was this idea that the series revolves around Rossi, and its rare when others in the media say it, but when I say it, i'm just full of crap and a conspiracy theorist. But when somebody else says it, well I'll highlight it, then go on to say, what might this mean for the authenticity of the sport. I can't hardly believe that such a central figure would not be given special consideration (my agenda). But it also lent for a spring board to ponder the future of our sport, since we do have most of our fortunes wrapped up in one man (the article's words).
You contend that this dynamic has not negatively effected others but rather everybody is better for the spoils Rossi brings. Perhaps. But for me, I'm bothered that for example Kenny Roberts Senior has said the opposite. That the willingness of Dorna to brand their success around the Rossi brand made it harder for him to garner sponsorship. And when he did, their logos got little to know exposure because Dorna pushing Rossi TV 24-7. Ok, I accpet that you think I hate Rossi. do this exercise, go check out the pictures that the MotoGP website features from the last 5 years, event to event. One thing you will quickly realize, that Rossi comprises a disportionate entries. Who does the media get its cues from?
Just recently we hear Dovi say basically the same thing, that the series revolves around one man. Certainly they are not saying it like its a good thing, right? Are they hating, or pointing out a reality that has an affect on them? Yes, to a degree its made others richer, and to a degree, there is a flip side to this effect. Is this Rossi's fault? NO. But does he manipulate this dynamic to gain advantage? Well, in my opinion, yes.
Oh, and about your issue with the "scripted nature" of the sport. Ok, let me explain it if I haven't already. I'm NOT saying Dorna sets out to say, ok Rossi needs to win this race or this title. I'm saying that there is power politics and business agenda that manipulates rules in favor or detrimental to some competitors. For example, within the brands, factory teams will withold technology from designated satellites or certain competitors. The three examples that became public I can think of involved Barros, Roberts, and recently Spies. At an organizational level, of course its harder to prove because Dorna isn't gonna go public on itself, but others have alluded to the power plays. the examples I can think of are, the Saturday Nights, formula change, Bridgestone debacle, Spec tire, and the once proposed rev limit (mysteriously withdrawn). The Sat Nites, for a few choice rider(S), the formula change, Honda's brain child, Bstone debacle, decidedly for Rossi. So as you can see, I'm not saying it all is about making Rossi win, as sometimes it was about factories not letting satellites beat them, or Honda thinking they were gonna run the field with their jockey. Dorna's rev limit that would have effected Ducati's unique desmodronic valve technology at a time when this was serving them well and forcing the Japs to come up with a better technology. This is what I mean by the "scripted nature". Its a manipulation of the sport, either by teams or by the governing body to advance or detrimentally effect some honest contestants (not just Rossi, as you like to think I fixate on).
Actually I can agree with some of this, you make a far better point than Mentally. But not all of it as I'm sure you already know
