YHR

Bias Reporting Becoming Frustrating

75 posts in this topic


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously I disagree. Bourdais' statements above suggest he believed he was in line for the 2006 drive but then BMW found they couldn't break the contract. Thats what SB suggests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. Let me ask how many people who cared about JV (persumably his fans), or indeed anyone else, have found they now think more highly of BMW for dragging the whole process out? I think Senna's argument is the most logical explanation as usual. (In any case it has no bearing on whether the article was biased. Btw this thread has descended into speculation!)

Ah in that case we agree completely. There are too many gullible people the world over unfortunately.

I have said for a long time that JV was going to be drivng for BMW in 2006. I never bought into the spin that was being put on the story. I never once saw a comment directly from BMW that siad they didn't want JV in 2006. The most they said was that the watched his performance on the track very closely, and were pleased that he has closed the gap to his teammate.

It bothered me that they did not offically announce the decision until so late, only because of all hacks spining into a "goodbye JV story".

As the facts are coming out now it seems there was little doubt that JV was going to be driving for BMW. So again Murray why do you think they dragged it out so long? The facts show that BMW knew JV was going to be in the seat in 2006 when they were talking to their potential test drivers. (Weldon and Bordouis stories both indicate this)

Edited by YHR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know for sure but the most likely explanation is that they were checking for loopholes in his contract (your explanation fails because we don't know when SB was told he didn't have the drive, and more importantly the publicity was bad publicity). In any case you have misunderstood the "evidence". What SB says is that JV was always guaranteed his drive (as you say) but not because BMW wanted him. Quite the opposite: he implies BMW were doing their best to replace him but discovered they couldn't break the contract. Finally do we agree the article isn't biased?

Btw I just noticed you didn't answer my question.

Edited by Murray Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. Let me ask how many people who cared about JV (persumably his fans), or indeed anyone else, have found they now think more highly of BMW for dragging the whole process out? I think Senna's argument is the most logical explanation as usual. (In any case it has no bearing on whether the article was biased. Btw this thread has descended into speculation!)

Indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know for sure but the most likely explanation is that they were checking for loopholes in his contract (your explanation fails because we don't know when SB was told he didn't have the drive, and more importantly the publicity was bad publicity). In any case you have misunderstood the "evidence". What SB says is that JV was always guaranteed his drive (as you say) but not because BMW wanted him. Quite the opposite: he implies BMW were doing their best to replace him but discovered they couldn't break the contract. Finally do we agree the article isn't biased?

Btw I just noticed you didn't answer my question.

Sorry

My opinion of BMW has picked up slightly, as I honestly believe they were playing the media, and never really considered skidding JV as they knew his contract was rock solid and he had been performing at a decent level.

The article is absolutely bias ,as it set forth a derived conclusion put forth by the author.

Again I'll agree to disagree with you Murray, We must obviously have different criteria for measuring bias. I believe that anytime an article presents more then the facts then it must be biased in some way. How can it not be???. The author presents the facts and then concludes and reports what they mean to his readers. That is the definition of a bias report. Conversely an unbiased report presents the known facts and does not present any conclusion of those facts to the reader. Instead he allows the reader to form his own opinion. Using that definition the report I quoted is bias.

First line in the oringal quote

"Champ Car champion Sebastien Bourdais has strengthened speculation that BMW only confirmed Jacques Villeneuve's 2006 F1 race seat because it had no choice.'

As I pointed out earlier the print in bold is the opinion of the Author. You and others may share that view, but all that means is you are of the same opinion. It has nothing to do with the facts, and one of those facts is that JV is driving for BMW in 2006.

Edited by YHR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah in that case we agree completely. There are too many gullible people the world over unfortunately.

Yes. Equally there are Australians who feel Webber is a real talent and presumably Japanese who feel the same way about their countryman. Canadians, on the other hand, understand that JV is an immense talent who has been held back by a lack of opportunity ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I refer you to my explanation of 10:44pm yesterday. The whole issue is pure speculation however, unlike what Bourdais actually said. He strongly suggests BMW wanted him but couldn't break JV's contract and thats the main reason why JV is still here. Surely thats all that can be said on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I refer you to my explanation of 10:44pm yesterday. The whole issue is pure speculation however, unlike what Bourdais actually said. He strongly suggests BMW wanted him but couldn't break JV's contract and thats the main reason why JV is still here. Surely thats all that can be said on this topic.

It isn't speculation that BMW told the two guys they were looking to test for them in 2006, the JV had the seat sewn up. That is a fact. We can only speculate as to why BMW took so long to make it official. I believe they liked all the publicity it was drawing to the BMW/Sauber name. You believe it was because they were looking at loop holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bourdais contradicts your picture when he says he was optimistic of driving alongside NH but BMW "found JV's contract harder to break than expected".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Canadians, on the other hand, understand that JV is an immense talent who has been held back by a lack of opportunity ;)

And his own stupidity ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the fact that he couldn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed, indeed..................

And the fact that he was largely considered to be a disruptive influence at many of his teams, especially BAR. I remember one story where, in a debriefing session, JV apparently protested that Jenson should move as he was sitting in his chair. I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the fact that he was largely considered to be a disruptive influence at many of his teams, especially BAR. I remember one story where, in a debriefing session, JV apparently protested that Jenson should move as he was sitting in his chair. I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And his own stupidity ;)

Funny how this very wealthy snot nosed jerk has managed to remain friends with DC, JB, MH, OP and now FM. hmmmmmmmm. Go figure. You'd think if he was such a jerk these guys would be shying away from him. Believe what you want I guess.

Seems this thread has now sunk to slagging JV. Oh well, have at her boys. I'm done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bourdais contradicts your picture when he says he was optimistic of driving alongside NH but BMW "found JV's contract harder to break than expected".

It is not contradicting my position at all. He was optimistic but found out there was not a chance. End of story, at that point, JV was the second driver. I don't care because it was of his iron clad contract. My point is BMW knew much earlier that JV had the seat, and told the drivers they were talking to that this was the case.

So the question remains. If BMW was telling the drivers that JV's contract could not be broken, Oh never mind, it just doesn't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Over the course of the past year with JV back in F1, I truly feel that I have read some very disgusting reporting, especially from British reporters.
tell me about it...! It's weird as they were pretty much trashing JV prior to him leaving, then wrote some positive stories, as if they wanted him back in, then when he returned it only took then 1 RACE before they called for his seat, it's crazy. Oh, welcome to the forum, good to have another JV fan on board.
That statement is a little harsh. I think the team has more faith in JV then you do!!!! I don't think the decision was based purely on JVs contract.

YHR, I can see your point, but in reality, why did it take them so long to confirm JV? He should have been confirmed either before or at the same time as Nick. If not then, then straight after the end of the season if they were analysing him, as it was quite clear he had markedly improved over his early season form. Don't get me wrong, I have faith in JV, but the above led me to believe what I posted. I read an interview with Mario where he says discussions with Seb weren't that serious and they focused on JV for a while. After reading that, I am more swayed into your way of thinking, bit JV's contract played a major role in his confirmation.

We've heard on these pages how bad the US, Spanish and Aussie versions are so I'm yet to be convinced that the quality british press is any worse than anywhere else.
They haven't called for a driver to be sacked after one race. The British have.
Seriously I disagree. Bourdais' statements above suggest he believed he was in line for the 2006 drive but then BMW found they couldn't break the contract. Thats what SB suggests.

Mario Thiessen suggests otherwise in a story on reuters.co.uk.

Canadians, on the other hand, understand that JV is an immense talent who has been held back by a lack of opportunity
I'm not Canadian, but I'll stick to that.
Seems this thread has now sunk to slagging JV. Oh well, have at her boys. I'm done

I'm surprised it took them this long really...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny how this very wealthy snot nosed jerk has managed to remain friends with DC, JB, MH, OP and now FM. hmmmmmmmm. Go figure. You'd think if he was such a jerk these guys would be shying away from him. Believe what you want I guess.

Seems this thread has now sunk to slagging JV. Oh well, have at her boys. I'm done

You can add FA to your list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They haven't called for a driver to be sacked after one race. The British have.

I think you've exaggerated a little, there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed. It wasn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes well, I think we and JV could be forgiven for underestimating the challenge at hand. The cars had markedly risen in speed and performance in the time JV was out, he only had two days testing (three really, but the first was just to get him fitted in the car and the like) however come Brazil he was matching Alonso's times.

His time at Renault should never have entered into the equations for calling for his sacking after the opening race of the year. Different car, different freakin year, whole set of different circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now