Well, the irony is deeper than that, because Rossi's extraordinary power to control opinion and Marquez's extraordinary talent to control a motorcycle is beyond what was considered possible when the governance systems evolved. So, even though both are within the existing rules, what they are doing (or perceived to be doing) is offensive to a lot of people and destructive to the sport.
Help Support MotoGP Forum:
Well, the irony is deeper than that, because Rossi's extraordinary power to control opinion and Marquez's extraordinary talent to control a motorcycle is beyond what was considered possible when the governance systems evolved. So, even though both are within the existing rules, what they are doing (or perceived to be doing) is offensive to a lot of people and destructive to the sport.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Friend, Much criticism to RD on both sides, for and against, not sure why Jlo continues to be so singled out. Regardless I see your point, however, Lorenzo's bid to 'join' in the court of arbitration IS in 'reaction' to VR explicitly challenging RD decision. I'd like for all those criticizing Jlo for this supposed awful act to couple it with the fact VR is the lead party in this regard.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 6,292
- Location
- NJ
Contrary to what most folks are thinking, I believe Lorenzo should have said what he did. I think he did it because he knew exactly where the narrative was going to go; "poor Valentino" and what the precedent being set by race direction was.
What was once a black flag offense no longer is.
I watched the 2003 Pacific Grand Prix last night, and on the last lap when Tamada and Gibernau were coming down the hill, Tamada moves over on Gibernau and makes contact with him. Gibernau nearly loses the rear of the bike, and runs wide into the gravel trap because he couldn't make the right hander. Tamada was DQ'd for that move and Gibernau didn't even wind up on the ground. Race direction should have put the black flag out in Sepang. The precedent was already there, and Lorenzo was quite accurate in calling for a DQ.
Fair point. You can remove The reference to Lorenzo then... but on the principle of accepting the umpires decision and not publicly undermining the authority of RD: what's your view on that?
Dr No
SPECTRE
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,994
- Location
- Crab Key
One of the things that I admired about Rossi was that - regardless of his yellow hordes (ooo...racist) - for all his fame, money and undoubted success, he genuinely appeared to have a love for motorcycle racing. The last two weeks have made me wonder whether he instead loves his *position*, his *status*, in motorcycle racing.
A sad POV for a bike racing fan.
.... this.
A sad POV for a bike racing fan.
.... this.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
I grew up as a baseball fan, if you argue strikes and balls you're automatically ejected. You can argue a bit other calls because they have more impact in a game like outs, foul balls, etc., but I've never seen an ump reverse his decision based on that, so it becomes just an exercise in entertainment. Usually the argument is only left up to the manager. Tommy Lasorda had some of the best. I can't recall stuff going to court over a call (though I'm sure at some point something has.) So I'm ok with people voicing their objection to a call, within reason especially if it has a major impact. l. It also seems like everyone got this privilege EXCEPT Lorenzo. He seems to be the only one being nailed for it. Everyone from current racers, to team principals, journalists, former racers, experts, and spectators and everone in between all get a say except for a guy who other than Rossi has the greatest stake in the matter. However the prevailing argument seems to be because he has a great stake in the argument he should keep his mouth closed. I get the 'dignity' argument ( which I disagree with by the way). In addition but irrelevant to the point these folks applying it seem not to be applying the standard to VR with the same rigor. Anyway bro, that's my answer to your question. As you know I've tried to move on from the whole thing but your takes have been fascinating, a pleasure to read, so I thought I'd chime in.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,952
- Location
- In Cider
The problem is Jum, is where Valentino Rossi fans are concerned, the term "Objective" doesn't exist.
They are right, everyone else is wrong. End of.
They are right, everyone else is wrong. End of.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2015
- Messages
- 1,916
- Location
- Texas
It is his love for motorcycle racing that led to his status within the sport. He would've never risen to the level he is at without having a genuine love for what he was doing. Top athletes that have a strong love for competing will go to great lengths to win. Michael Jordan was always said to be an ....... and even punched a few teammates in the face during practice. Not to mention his trash talk and altercations with his opponents on the court. IMO, a very strong desire to win will lead to ".......-like" behavior while competing... but that's a good thing because being nice doesn't win championships. Pedrosa is NICE... he has 0 championships.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,952
- Location
- In Cider
So are you saying all music stars who started out loving the music then became huge stars with enormous wealth, much of which was spent on drugs, still had a love for making music? Or is it more likely they had a love of the status and money?
Not the best of analogies I know, but I personally think Dr No is spot on.
Not the best of analogies I know, but I personally think Dr No is spot on.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2015
- Messages
- 1,916
- Location
- Texas
I guess sometimes that ....... that would of won the championship has enough mechanical failures that a "nice" guy can win if he stays consistent enough.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,952
- Location
- In Cider
Oh dem's fighting words!!
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2007
- Messages
- 6,060
- Location
- Maitland way
Plus, in this day and age of personality driven branding, it is no longer about the sport, but how much money can I elicit from people based on my brand.
Thing I see there Jums is that Rossi does have the explicit right to appeal to the CAS as a decision was made based on his actions and of which he is not happy with the result
JL has potential to gain an advantage if VR’s appeal is not allowed, but he has no direct role in the incident which has caused the penalty to be applied. From my take, that is why I wish he had simply been the better man
Doc, I wrote a few years back in this forum that I had a fear that VR was not continuing for the love of the sport, but for the love of Valentino
At the time the place was very yellow bias and I copped a downright rollicking over it, with some support but in general most did not agree.
I stand by that comment today ………. VR has no concern for the sport or it’s competitors, his only concern is VR the person, VR the team and VR the brand
VR started out of love for the sport ……………….. that died (I suspect) a few years ago when things did not go his way results wise, but even when this occurred the brand continued to grow and so now I fear it is not the sport, but the attention (bit like Richard Branson)
BTW, Pedrosa has 3 championships to his name so to say that he is to nice to win championships is wrong. He just has not YET won a MotoGP title but out of all this, his star has brightened and I reckon he will pick-up greater fan support given the manner he has handled himself and the media circus of the last few weeks
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Lorenzo actually has that same right to be involved according to what I read.
"the CAS rules allow third parties to be involved in the case. Theoretically, that would allow Jorge Lorenzo, or even Marc Marquez to get involved in the case. " Kropo
Btw, regarding the prevailing perception of Lorenzo's involvement, I thought this quote apropos :
"Rossi is the king, the funloving, charismatic, good guy. Pedrosa is boring, Lorenzo sulks and Stoner moaned. For example. Well, all four of quick character bios are both as true as they are false. Rossi is undeniably characteristic. It’s part of why the fans flocked to him in the first place. But I have also seen, first hand, that same man chuck a tantrum with the best of them. But that doesn’t fit the narrative and so it is not covered. When the toys get chucked out of Lorenzo’s pram though, that is covered because that’s the character the media has set him up as. And here in lies the problem." From 'Doctored' the article.
"the CAS rules allow third parties to be involved in the case. Theoretically, that would allow Jorge Lorenzo, or even Marc Marquez to get involved in the case. " Kropo
Btw, regarding the prevailing perception of Lorenzo's involvement, I thought this quote apropos :
"Rossi is the king, the funloving, charismatic, good guy. Pedrosa is boring, Lorenzo sulks and Stoner moaned. For example. Well, all four of quick character bios are both as true as they are false. Rossi is undeniably characteristic. It’s part of why the fans flocked to him in the first place. But I have also seen, first hand, that same man chuck a tantrum with the best of them. But that doesn’t fit the narrative and so it is not covered. When the toys get chucked out of Lorenzo’s pram though, that is covered because that’s the character the media has set him up as. And here in lies the problem." From 'Doctored' the article.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2007
- Messages
- 11,387
- Location
- Pomona NY
Screw charismatic Rossi. This sport existed before him and it won't die when he goes. Doubtless the multitudes of mindless "cult of personality" types will diminish when he retires, but IMHO - the sport won't take the kind of hit that Dorna fear. Premiere class racing is pretty ....... addictive. I'm sure a lot of people thought the sport couldn't thrive after the loss of Hailwood, or Roberts or Rainey or Schwantz etc, yet someone great always comes along to replace these guys.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2007
- Messages
- 6,060
- Location
- Maitland way
As I have said in this place a few times (and been shouted down by some), I do not have first hand experience of the toy throwing but know a number of people who work the international races in Australia (and some work overseas) as officials and have heard many a story.
given that I have known these people for years, worked with them for years and totally trust their experience, I believe them with the stories
Suffice to say that the media presents what they want, in the manner that they want and some people are very good at giving the media the good, whilst displaying the bad elsewhere
given that I have known these people for years, worked with them for years and totally trust their experience, I believe them with the stories
Suffice to say that the media presents what they want, in the manner that they want and some people are very good at giving the media the good, whilst displaying the bad elsewhere
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 6,292
- Location
- NJ
I will keep saying it, I cannot wait till Rossi is gone and his horde of boppers goes with him.
Will be refreshing for the rest of us.
Will be refreshing for the rest of us.
Yes, I agree actually, I included the episode with Lorenzo in an attempt to be non-partisan in making the point but, in hindsight, I realise that I only succeed in (even if only mildly) pissing off twice as many people.
'Nuff said.
As I stated in an earlier post, he was entitled to be pissed off because he had to take more risk, riding with less margin, because the matter was not dealt with during the race. That seems like a reasonable position to me.
My point, which I already posted elsewhere, has nothing to do with individual personalities but everything to do with analysing
- what was the systemic failure that allowed the whole sorry episode to happen,
- what it means in terms of damage to the sport as a whole and
- how to stop it from happening again
My theory on all this is that there needs to be a code of conduct that sets out formal process for internally registering and resolving complaints and disputes between riders and constraining disputing/complaining parties from making public statements prejudicing these issues, unless and until the internal processes have been completed. And that this should have substantial teeth with heavy penalties for non-compliance.
My reasons for suggesting this are nothing to do with morality or unwritten rules or my respect or otherwise for individual riders, it's simply that I like following motogp and I want the opportunity to keep doing so.
If the competition is perceived to be corrupt or biased, it will loose audience numbers and sponsorship. The perceived integrity of the competition impacts the brands of the sponsors as well as the marketability of the media rights.
If participants in the competition are allowed to bring it into disrepute using press conferences hosted by the same organisation that is hosting the competition and to undermine the authority of the internal governance bodies of that same organisation, then it's commercial performance as a whole will be affected.
If I were Lorenzo, or even Pedrosa, I would be considering my options for restitution of damages to my future, potential earnings caused by Rossi putting his own interests above everyone else and rat-shitting the motogp brand, while at the same time gouging another $10 + $10 M out of it on his way out the door. But, on the other hand, I would also be confused, because those guys probably owe half of what they earn to the previously positive impact on the brand value due to Rossi's involvement.
So, yeh... a formal code of conduct for public statements.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,952
- Location
- In Cider
Dr No
SPECTRE
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,994
- Location
- Crab Key
Agree in part to the sentiment.Yes, I agree actually, I included the episode with Lorenzo in an attempt to be non-partisan in making the point but, in hindsight, I realise that I only succeed in (even if only mildly) pissing off twice as many people.
'Nuff said.
As I stated in an earlier post, he was entitled to be pissed off because he had to take more risk, riding with less margin, because the matter was not dealt with during the race. That seems like a reasonable position to me.
My point, which I already posted elsewhere, has nothing to do with individual personalities but everything to do with analysing
- what was the systemic failure that allowed the whole sorry episode to happen,
- what it means in terms of damage to the sport as a whole and
- how to stop it from happening again
My theory on all this is that there needs to be a code of conduct that sets out formal process for internally registering and resolving complaints and disputes between riders and constraining disputing/complaining parties from making public statements prejudicing these issues, unless and until the internal processes have been completed. And that this should have substantial teeth with heavy penalties for non-compliance.
My reasons for suggesting this are nothing to do with morality or unwritten rules or my respect or otherwise for individual riders, it's simply that I like following motogp and I want the opportunity to keep doing so.
If the competition is perceived to be corrupt or biased, it will loose audience numbers and sponsorship. The perceived integrity of the competition impacts the brands of the sponsors as well as the marketability of the media rights.
If participants in the competition are allowed to bring it into disrepute using press conferences hosted by the same organisation that is hosting the competition and to undermine the authority of the internal governance bodies of that same organisation, then it's commercial performance as a whole will be affected.
If I were Lorenzo, or even Pedrosa, I would be considering my options for restitution of damages to my future, potential earnings caused by Rossi putting his own interests above everyone else and rat-shitting the motogp brand, while at the same time gouging another $10 + $10 M out of it on his way out the door. But, on the other hand, I would also be confused, because those guys probably owe half of what they earn to the previously positive impact on the brand value due to Rossi's involvement.
So, yeh... a formal code of conduct for public statements.
But gagging riders will just put this sport further into tge clutches of the corporations.
