Something that you might (not) know is that part from having an immense petrolhead I also like my fair share of Formula One. And if I remember correctly it was a tweet from Dutch F1-commentator Olav Mol that got me hooked with a very special podcast called Box of Neutrals. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that it was made by a bunch of guys not much older than myself and that they managed to avoid much of the seriousness of F1 journalism and show the funny side of paddock life. To the best of my knowledge, Michael, Rob and Peter are probably the youngest (to some extent professional) F1-journalists.....in the world.
Anywho, time passed and so when friend and Box of Neutrals-groupie Tiff (who also happens to write a BLOG every now and then) told me she was doing an interview with Michael, Rob and Peter from the podcast and was looking for questions there was no way I was going to let this chance go by. So now, after intense brainstorming for questions and refining the answers we got back, That Cars Blog presents: Box of Neutrals, the Extended Highlight Edition, the full uncut interview will be published right after this.
Before you start reading, I'd like to thank Tiff for letting my twisted journalistic mind join in, and Michael, Rob and to a certain extent Peter for giving two groupies more attention than they could ever imagine or deserve (we got 16 pages of answers).
Therefore you should definitely listen to Box of Neutrals, every Friday from 3 till 4.30pm Melbourne time on SYN, if you happen to live in a part of the world which makes that a very early breakfast show, listen to one of their podcasts here or in the itunes store. You can also find them on twitter and facebook to liven up that boring procession at the Bahrain GP.
And give Tiff's blog a read, visit http://www.femaleformulafun.blogspot.com
NOTE: This interview might contain references you don't understand at all, I told you you should listen to Box of Neutrals! Now Get It Up You!
Please explain to our millions of readers, who you are, and what Box Of Neutrals is.
Michael: Box Of Neutrals is a controversial Australian News and Current Affairs programme, notorious for its sensationalist reporting, and is an example of tabloid television where stories rotate around diet fads, miracle cures, welfare cheats, shonky builders, negligent doctors, poorly run businesses, and corrupt government officials. For this reason the programme is constantly under criticism and ridicule.
Rob: Michael’s pretty much covered that part, and plus I probably misread the question in my original response so I have a story/Wikipedia entry of how the show came to be, or be to came. Like an old wise tale.
Box Of Neutrals was born in the middle of 2010 when Michael and I were both at SYN Radio in Melbourne and realised we also went to the same university. And the same class - Australian Cinema.
Most of the meetings about what would eventually become Box Of Neutrals were born out of those lectures. I’ve been trying to find my notes where we scribbled down a list of potential names for the show, which I’m willing to say I lost, only to save myself from the disappointment of never finding them!
Michael and I each had separate shows, yet I found out when listening to Michael’s old show that he was into cars and Formula 1. Then we sort of crossed paths and worked out some weird co-incidences.
Speaking of weird co-incidences, Peter McGinley and I went to the same high school. Except Peter was a year level below myself, so I’ve technically known Peter since I was 13. Even though I only spoke to him last year when I joined SYN Radio. So just like most things that have happened on the show, Box Of Neutrals really came to be by accident.
Pete: I like Neil Mitchell.
Michael: Box Of Neutrals is a controversial Australian News and Current Affairs programme, notorious for its sensationalist reporting, and is an example of tabloid television where stories rotate around diet fads, miracle cures, welfare cheats, shonky builders, negligent doctors, poorly run businesses, and corrupt government officials. For this reason the programme is constantly under criticism and ridicule.
Rob: Michael’s pretty much covered that part, and plus I probably misread the question in my original response so I have a story/Wikipedia entry of how the show came to be, or be to came. Like an old wise tale.
Box Of Neutrals was born in the middle of 2010 when Michael and I were both at SYN Radio in Melbourne and realised we also went to the same university. And the same class - Australian Cinema.
Most of the meetings about what would eventually become Box Of Neutrals were born out of those lectures. I’ve been trying to find my notes where we scribbled down a list of potential names for the show, which I’m willing to say I lost, only to save myself from the disappointment of never finding them!
Michael and I each had separate shows, yet I found out when listening to Michael’s old show that he was into cars and Formula 1. Then we sort of crossed paths and worked out some weird co-incidences.
Speaking of weird co-incidences, Peter McGinley and I went to the same high school. Except Peter was a year level below myself, so I’ve technically known Peter since I was 13. Even though I only spoke to him last year when I joined SYN Radio. So just like most things that have happened on the show, Box Of Neutrals really came to be by accident.
Pete: I like Neil Mitchell.
You do an amazing job of delivering serious F1 related content with a comedic twist. How do you decide what makes funny F1?
Michael: If you analyse the show on a really deep level, you’ll discover that it’s mostly Peter McGinley trying to say something funny, then Rob playing a sound effect. Somehow, this works. It doesn’t make any sense to me, but then Two And A Half Men doesn’t really make any sense to me either – and that’s popular, apparently.
Michael: If you analyse the show on a really deep level, you’ll discover that it’s mostly Peter McGinley trying to say something funny, then Rob playing a sound effect. Somehow, this works. It doesn’t make any sense to me, but then Two And A Half Men doesn’t really make any sense to me either – and that’s popular, apparently.
In all seriousness, I don’t really know, I think it’s just that we all get along pretty well.
Rob: Formula 1 is a very funny sport. It features some brilliant personalities, moments and storylines, and to be honest we don’t think a lot of the mainstream broadcasters see this aspect of the sport. Because sport is supposed to be sport, humour isn’t the first thing you think of when talking about Formula 1.
When you see or hear other Formula 1/motorsport shows around the world, they all pretty much do the same thing. Talk about the latest news and happenings, and then cut to the race itself. We knew there was no point trying to be something we’re not, and for that matter doing the same thing as everyone else is doing.
For example, Mark Webber. Everybody else would say he’s Australian, is teammates with Sebastian Vettel and probably isn’t as good as Vettel. Whereas we see him as the guy that licks his face in the press conferences a lot, looks a bit like Don Draper from Mad Men and once vomited inside of his helmet. We also see him as a great racing driver, but who else could even imagine to come up with half of the crap that we come up with for these characters of the sport?
Michael: I think Peter Windsor sums it up pretty well, we are arm-chaired journalists. Like most things we do, Windsor seems to do it better. Like with his blog, he said he wasn’t going to write just another news blog. So, instead, he made a diary-style feature website, which I thought was really cool. IN that way, we didn’t make just an ordinary podcast, we made one that was a little more character-driven, based on what we found funny. I think it comes back to that ‘attention whore’ thing...
Rob: That isn’t to say other shows don’t do a good job, but we actively scour to find the bits in Formula 1 that other people/shows miss. I’d like to think we’ve single handedly bolstered the popularity of Olav Mol in Australia.
Pete: Lefties!
In which countries is your podcast most popular? Do you get surprised by how international Box of Neutrals is getting?
Rob: Michael and Peter have more access to those statistics, but based on the conversations we’ve had, it’s a tie between Australia and Europe. We have a good following in the UK as I man the Twitter feed during the races through the #BBCF1 hashtag, and plus we speak English. I’m more surprised by our reach in places like the Netherlands and even Asia. Maybe less surprised by the Netherlands as we interviewed Olav Mol.
Michael: We don’t have much to tell us where our podcast is most popular, though Facebook tells us it’s in Australia that we have the most listeners. After that comes the UK, then a whole bunch of places like Belgium, the Netherlands, and even Malaysia for some reason.
Rob: Michael and Peter have more access to those statistics, but based on the conversations we’ve had, it’s a tie between Australia and Europe. We have a good following in the UK as I man the Twitter feed during the races through the #BBCF1 hashtag, and plus we speak English. I’m more surprised by our reach in places like the Netherlands and even Asia. Maybe less surprised by the Netherlands as we interviewed Olav Mol.
Michael: We don’t have much to tell us where our podcast is most popular, though Facebook tells us it’s in Australia that we have the most listeners. After that comes the UK, then a whole bunch of places like Belgium, the Netherlands, and even Malaysia for some reason.
I distinctly remember creating this Olav Mol page as a joke, after Rob introduced me to the world of Olav Mol. For a long while it had only a handful of followers, but now there are loads of these Dutch people joining up and leaving comments - one of them even posted a picture of themselves with Olav! I feel a little bit guilty - maybe I should tell him next time we see him. I feel oddly powerful, though - I control his online image. The things I could do...
Rob: I am surprised, yet I’m not at the same time, by our overseas followers. We’ve been quietly chipping away at creating a fan base, and compared to this time last year, there’s been an astonishing increase. I do hope it continues to spiral out of control this time next year. I’m hoping to make Peter McGinley a cult celebrity in Estonia by mid-2013.
Michael: It still baffles me, and puts an incredible grin on my face, that the likes of yourself - and even Martijn from the Netherlands (yours truly, rambling away on this blog) - sat down on your Saturday afternoon or whenever and coloured in a picture of Peter McGinley’s face. The frickin’ Netherlands, that’s just ridiculous. I could never have imagined that happening, ever. It’s like Peter’s face is some sort of trans-continental disease. In a nice way. We love it.
Pete: Go feck yourself to buggery!
To all three of you: Replace a GP on the current calendar with a race at a location of your choice (either existing circuit or new location).
Rob: I would lose the Chinese Grand Prix and stage a race at Imola. I think the Chinese Grand Prix has had its chance to make an impact, and considering China is fast becoming one of the powerhouses of the Western world, Formula 1 stuffed it up. There isn’t a motorsport culture there, and the circuit itself hardly has any redeeming qualities. It’s an expensive fad these kind of races, if I’m brutally honest. They’re not sustainable.
And I know Michael will say France.
Michael: That’s cheating! I wrote my answer to this first!
Rob: I would lose the Chinese Grand Prix and stage a race at Imola. I think the Chinese Grand Prix has had its chance to make an impact, and considering China is fast becoming one of the powerhouses of the Western world, Formula 1 stuffed it up. There isn’t a motorsport culture there, and the circuit itself hardly has any redeeming qualities. It’s an expensive fad these kind of races, if I’m brutally honest. They’re not sustainable.
And I know Michael will say France.
Michael: That’s cheating! I wrote my answer to this first!
...Bahrain for France, easy. That way we get to race in Belgium annually, and we don’t have to go to Bahrain. There are literally no losers... except for Bahrain, I suppose.
Pete:
If you were to design your own track, what parts or corners of other circuits would you definitely put in it?
Michael: It’s going to be difficult to top Rob’s answer. But I’ll say Eau Rouge and Rivage at Spa are the first two that come to my head. I love Eau Rouge - cliché, I know - because it’s such a rare sort of part of a racetrack these days. Rivage is such a pain of a corner because of the way it’s cambered, and so purely just because it’s a bit irritating I’d include it. I’d probably throw the Lesmos in too, from Monza, but just because it’s a bit funny to say ‘lesmos’.
Michael: It’s going to be difficult to top Rob’s answer. But I’ll say Eau Rouge and Rivage at Spa are the first two that come to my head. I love Eau Rouge - cliché, I know - because it’s such a rare sort of part of a racetrack these days. Rivage is such a pain of a corner because of the way it’s cambered, and so purely just because it’s a bit irritating I’d include it. I’d probably throw the Lesmos in too, from Monza, but just because it’s a bit funny to say ‘lesmos’.
Now do read on...
Rob: For all the shit we and others have given to Hermann Tilke, it’s a hard gig. This is my entry.
Circuit du McGinley
Michael: It is pretty tough to design a circuit. Our crazy voiceover man Adam sometimes sits in the studio with us. He had a crack at designing his own racetrack during one episode - it ended up looking suspiciously like a... phallic object. See the dishonourable mention from the Kolouring Kopmetition.
Pete: Nuuuurrrggghhh.
And then, It really turned Box of Neutralesque:
Would you rather host F1 on Australian national TV or co-commentate with Olav Mol in the Netherlands?
Rob: I’d love to tag team the Dutch commentary as an English commentator! I think hosting the Formula 1 coverage is the great dream of ours, especially if we could do it in the current format we do now. F1 in Australia needs a bit more storytelling and personality like the BBC. Then again, the BBC have a monstrous budget. 2012 will be interesting for the BBC if they can maintain their high standards next year with a compromised budget and on-air cast, possibly.
Michael: I would love to commentate with Olav Mol, but I think there’d be a language barrier issue. I’d probably just say ‘fuck’ a lot, and I don’t even like to swear regularly, I just imagine he’d be that infectious.
Rob: I’d love to tag team the Dutch commentary as an English commentator! I think hosting the Formula 1 coverage is the great dream of ours, especially if we could do it in the current format we do now. F1 in Australia needs a bit more storytelling and personality like the BBC. Then again, the BBC have a monstrous budget. 2012 will be interesting for the BBC if they can maintain their high standards next year with a compromised budget and on-air cast, possibly.
Michael: I would love to commentate with Olav Mol, but I think there’d be a language barrier issue. I’d probably just say ‘fuck’ a lot, and I don’t even like to swear regularly, I just imagine he’d be that infectious.
Plus I’d really like to shake up the coverage currently provided by the Australian host broadcaster. I think Ten does very little with the rights granted to them by FOM, and would love to try to change it somehow. While totally appreciating that Ten isn’t willing to spend much money because the commercial return isn’t great, I’d still love to try to provide something a little more unique than the generic panel-style show we have now. Like incorporate more swearing, for example – it seems to work in the Netherlands.
Pete: [My pants] smell like vomit.
'Oh Mark Webber, What the fuck gebeurd daar nou zeg?'
Rob: Huld hulda..
Michael: Fucken-eh.
Pete: Cows are only good for eating, and nothin’ much else.
Lotus-Genii Capital-Eric Booyeah-Vitaly Trololololo Petrov-Lada Renault GP or Lotus-Air Asia-Tony NAAAAAAAGGGHHHHH Feranandes-Caterham-Renault?
Rob: I really admire the way Team Lotus (nee Caterham) have conducted themselves. They’re easily my favourite of the new teams, and I believe they have a bright future ahead of them. Red Bull Racing took over a decade to really show any promise, if you count their spells under Stewart and Jaguar. Even Red Bull had to accept being mid-field for about four years as a constructor.
The way Team Lotus also conduct themselves with the media and the fans is something I admire. They certainly set the trend with leading Formula One into this era of Twitter and new media. For a team that has not scored a point this season and with far less resources compared to the bigger teams, they certainly sell themselves well. Just have a look at the number of sponsors they’ve managed to secure.
Renault (nee Lotus - wow that’s confusing) I respect what they do as a team. They’ve been world champions before, and such is the circle of Formula One, I don’t doubt they will be again if they hang around.
The team is in a different era to that of the Briatore Benetton/Renault days, but it has gone through the highs of being double world champions under both Benetton and Renault, and mid-field stragglers under both establishments. If they hold onto Bruno Senna for 2012, I’ll have a softer spot for that team. I think the whole Lotus versus Lotus affair made them look like the bad guys. Maybe I just really missed their yellow & black livery of 2010!
Michael: If I can say something totally unexpected, I already miss this. Next year we’ll only have one Lotus, and I bet we’ll (probably, maybe) reminisce about the good ol’ days when we had two Lotuses (Loti?) on the grid, and Vitaly Petrov used to get confused as being Jarno Trulli’s team-mate. Plus it’s been fun trying to explain the battle to people and confusing them - and usually me in the process.
Pete: I’m pouring kerosene in my ears.
Rob: I really admire the way Team Lotus (nee Caterham) have conducted themselves. They’re easily my favourite of the new teams, and I believe they have a bright future ahead of them. Red Bull Racing took over a decade to really show any promise, if you count their spells under Stewart and Jaguar. Even Red Bull had to accept being mid-field for about four years as a constructor.
The way Team Lotus also conduct themselves with the media and the fans is something I admire. They certainly set the trend with leading Formula One into this era of Twitter and new media. For a team that has not scored a point this season and with far less resources compared to the bigger teams, they certainly sell themselves well. Just have a look at the number of sponsors they’ve managed to secure.
Renault (nee Lotus - wow that’s confusing) I respect what they do as a team. They’ve been world champions before, and such is the circle of Formula One, I don’t doubt they will be again if they hang around.
The team is in a different era to that of the Briatore Benetton/Renault days, but it has gone through the highs of being double world champions under both Benetton and Renault, and mid-field stragglers under both establishments. If they hold onto Bruno Senna for 2012, I’ll have a softer spot for that team. I think the whole Lotus versus Lotus affair made them look like the bad guys. Maybe I just really missed their yellow & black livery of 2010!
Michael: If I can say something totally unexpected, I already miss this. Next year we’ll only have one Lotus, and I bet we’ll (probably, maybe) reminisce about the good ol’ days when we had two Lotuses (Loti?) on the grid, and Vitaly Petrov used to get confused as being Jarno Trulli’s team-mate. Plus it’s been fun trying to explain the battle to people and confusing them - and usually me in the process.
Pete: I’m pouring kerosene in my ears.
If you were 'Conducteur' i.e. Jean Todt for one day, what would you immediately introduce into F1?
Rob: I would love to see an endurance style Formula One race. I’ve been mocked on several occasions on the programme for coming up with it, but with enough planning and foresight, I think it could actually be done.
I think it would partly eliminate the issue that we have in the sport at the moment where testing days are limited.
Michael: I continue to mock this idea, now in print form. It just wouldn’t work. Formula One cars aren’t designed to run endurance. Some of them *coughVirgincough* can barely make it through the regular distance.
Rob: If you give a non-full time driver a golden opportunity to compete in a race, then I think it can be justified. I think my inspiration is from V8 Supercars where you see a lot of young drivers, and even the ones on the brink of the pension, only racing twice a year the endurance events.
Just imagine Sebastian Vettel & Daniel Ricciardo winning the same race in the Red Bull! It would give another 24 drivers in the world to have a shot at driving in Formula One, even if it’s only for one or two rounds at these crazy endurance events.
It’s a crazy idea I know, but the best decision is my decision.
Michael: I answered this question last, because I couldn’t come up with an answer! I’m still not sure I have one, actually. I would like to see some open architecture when it comes to engines – I think Formula One is becoming a little bit restrictive these days. I mean, I know it’s all to keep costs down, which quite sensible – but I don’t like that we have an engine freeze, and that sort of thing. I’d like to see manufacturers be able to try different engine configurations – within some pre-defined boundaries, of course – but for them to try different stuff, just to mix it up a little bit.
Pete: Why does everything seem to be served with pancakes at the Pancake Parlour?
One country that definitely would deserve a Grand Prix is...
Rob: I’m astonished that Finland, a country rich with racing talent inside and outside of Formula One, does not have a Grand Prix. I’d love to see a race there, but I suspect they don’t have the money like Abu Dhabi, Singapore, India, American behind them to build their own Hermann Tilke super-circuit.
Rob: I’m astonished that Finland, a country rich with racing talent inside and outside of Formula One, does not have a Grand Prix. I’d love to see a race there, but I suspect they don’t have the money like Abu Dhabi, Singapore, India, American behind them to build their own Hermann Tilke super-circuit.
Although I suspect Bernie Ecclestone may have privately pondered the thought of Formula One going around the Ouninpohja stage in Rally Finland.
Oy, saatana!
Michael: Now that France is set to return, I’m not really sure. There’s this place called ‘Sandwich Island’ off the South American coast. There’s only a handful of people living there, so we could pretty much do what we like. It’s be an easy island to conquer, so I think it’s worth a shot.
Uhm... but how about Libya? Or maybe Iran? Both have been touted as future Formula One destinations.
Pete: Don’t talk to me about tolerance.
This is a cool spot. Discuss.
Rob: I love it! It’s not every day that you see teams adopting fake sponsors on their cars just to make it look busy. Not since the days of tobacco sponsorship when they had to obscure it with random phrases like “TEAM SPIRIT” and “DON’T WALK”.
Michael: ‘This is a cool spot’ ranks as one of my favourite ever Formula One things ever, and has ensured that HRT will surely go down with designing one of history’s greatest ever racing liveries. Children will dream of one day racing for the cool spot colours, and I imagine that in around 20 years, the colours will be brought back in all of their glory as HRT attempts to rekindle that magic of its early years.
Rob: My favourite one has to be ‘this could be you’ on the rear wing of the HRT. I found it particularly amusing when I went to the Australian Grand Prix and saw a four car train behind Narain Karthikeyan.
That said, I find it amusing that they’ve now disappeared from the cars. I’d hate to think it was our constant mockery of it that brought it to an end. Only HRT could make a fake sponsor dissolve.
Michael: Undoubtedly the best part about ‘This is a cool spot’ is that it no longer exists. HRT have managed to do the impossible - create a fictional company that went bankrupt. How does that even happen? Oh HRT, how we love you.
Pete: Horrible Racing Team. *dun* *dun* *tsh*
Do you think the F1 organisers (led by Bernie Ecclestone) ask too much from the circuits in terms of money for holding a F1 race?
Rob: To be honest, I’m not entirely certain. By that I mean, I’m not privy to the facts and figures of the circuits and its promoters. From what I’ve observed, I think Formula One has failed to adapt to the change in economic climate in terms of where the races are staged. It has in terms of how teams spend their money, but Formula One appeared invincible during the Global Financial Crisis of 2008/9 Mk 1.
Michael: I think it’s a tough call. On the one hand I think not – purely because there’s a clever business strategy behind it. By charging a lot of money. Bernie can price out some of the ‘pretender’ bids, and assume safely that promoters that can pay large fees up front will be able to continue to pay large fees. On the other hand, the high cost of hosting a race is starting to price out some of the core Grand Prix events. We’re seeing Belgium having to alternate with France just to stay afloat, and it seems only a matter of time before the two German circuits go under – and they’re already alternating.
Rob: The likes of Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and China who have thrown millions upon millions of dollars have set the trend, and the expectation, that other circuits need to match their standards and price. It’s not feasible to expect a long standing circuit such as Spa or Interlagos to mimic the style of Hermann Tilke’s designs and the money the promoters/investors/government/omnipresent forces have poured into it.
Michael: I think it has to be accepted that Formula One is probably the biggest capitalist sport going around at this point, when you consider the vast amounts of money that travels through the F1 banks (and those of Ecclestone’s family trust, and various shifty German bankers). Bernie’s job isn’t to cater to the fans, it’s to make money for his employers at CVC. If he does cater to the fans, that’s by coincidence – in the end it’s all about money.
Rob: Silverstone has done an awesome job of improving its facilities to secure its long term future in Formula One, but Bernie Ecclestone - for whatever reason - appears annoyed that they managed to achieve what they’ve done.
Rob: To be honest, I’m not entirely certain. By that I mean, I’m not privy to the facts and figures of the circuits and its promoters. From what I’ve observed, I think Formula One has failed to adapt to the change in economic climate in terms of where the races are staged. It has in terms of how teams spend their money, but Formula One appeared invincible during the Global Financial Crisis of 2008/9 Mk 1.
Michael: I think it’s a tough call. On the one hand I think not – purely because there’s a clever business strategy behind it. By charging a lot of money. Bernie can price out some of the ‘pretender’ bids, and assume safely that promoters that can pay large fees up front will be able to continue to pay large fees. On the other hand, the high cost of hosting a race is starting to price out some of the core Grand Prix events. We’re seeing Belgium having to alternate with France just to stay afloat, and it seems only a matter of time before the two German circuits go under – and they’re already alternating.
Rob: The likes of Abu Dhabi, Bahrain and China who have thrown millions upon millions of dollars have set the trend, and the expectation, that other circuits need to match their standards and price. It’s not feasible to expect a long standing circuit such as Spa or Interlagos to mimic the style of Hermann Tilke’s designs and the money the promoters/investors/government/omnipresent forces have poured into it.
Michael: I think it has to be accepted that Formula One is probably the biggest capitalist sport going around at this point, when you consider the vast amounts of money that travels through the F1 banks (and those of Ecclestone’s family trust, and various shifty German bankers). Bernie’s job isn’t to cater to the fans, it’s to make money for his employers at CVC. If he does cater to the fans, that’s by coincidence – in the end it’s all about money.
Rob: Silverstone has done an awesome job of improving its facilities to secure its long term future in Formula One, but Bernie Ecclestone - for whatever reason - appears annoyed that they managed to achieve what they’ve done.
He’d love to go to Russia or another country willing to throw money at Formula One to host a race. Turkey did that, and look where they’ve ended up. Formula One should not, and I don’t believe can sustain in the long term, to go to circuits throwing money at Formula One where the market isn’t really there. How could Formula One justify dropping the Belgian, British, Australian Grands Prix to race at Turkey?
Michael: One thing we are seeing, though, is that with things like the Euro debt crisis, and the financial instability pretty much everywhere in the world (the collapse of the US GP bid could be an example of economic conservatism), fewer and fewer places are going to be willing to fork out for a race. I think Bernie will have to cater for this eventually, because while he’s willing to farewell a few European rounds on the calendar, he can’t afford to lose too many, lest it detracts from the sport’s popularity which is, ultimately, what makes the money.
Pete: I don’t really endorse cheap labour, but...
Perez, Ricciardo, Maldonado, Di Resta, Senna (to a certain extent), Hülkenberg, Raikkonen and Grosjean might return to F1 next year, who do you think will impress most?
Rob: I think a lot of these names have enormous potential in the future. Maldonado hasn’t sold me yet, but he did well in GP2 last year. There’s got to be more to him than nerfing into Lewis Hamilton down La Source.
I would suggest Perez has the greatest potential, mostly due to his connections. The Sauber team, despite its rebuilding phase post-BMW, is a solid team to be with. He won’t win a race, but he hasn’t had to win races to show his potential. Not to mention his ties with Ferrari, I would not be surprised if he’s announced as the man who will usurp Felipe Massa.
If anything, my biggest concern would be Kimi Raikkonen returning as a massive disappointment. He entered the WRC with so much hype in 2010, and sure enough with time he could’ve established himself as a regular winner. His two years have been rather unspectacular by all accounts. And less promising than his F1 debut in 2001.
Michael: I’m actually really curious to see Grosjean return to Formula One at some point, just to see how much he has/hasn’t improved. He was pretty disappointing in his first year, but he was clearly overwhelmed by it all – plus the shadow of that whole Flavio Briatore thing was hanging over him a bit, I imagine. And Flavio casts a pretty big shadow. Hulkenberg is another I’d like to see in some competitive machinery. He looked good at Williams last year, and I think he deserves a chance to show what he’s worth, without having the added pressure of supplying a paycheque every fortnight.
Rob: I think a lot of these names have enormous potential in the future. Maldonado hasn’t sold me yet, but he did well in GP2 last year. There’s got to be more to him than nerfing into Lewis Hamilton down La Source.
I would suggest Perez has the greatest potential, mostly due to his connections. The Sauber team, despite its rebuilding phase post-BMW, is a solid team to be with. He won’t win a race, but he hasn’t had to win races to show his potential. Not to mention his ties with Ferrari, I would not be surprised if he’s announced as the man who will usurp Felipe Massa.
If anything, my biggest concern would be Kimi Raikkonen returning as a massive disappointment. He entered the WRC with so much hype in 2010, and sure enough with time he could’ve established himself as a regular winner. His two years have been rather unspectacular by all accounts. And less promising than his F1 debut in 2001.
Michael: I’m actually really curious to see Grosjean return to Formula One at some point, just to see how much he has/hasn’t improved. He was pretty disappointing in his first year, but he was clearly overwhelmed by it all – plus the shadow of that whole Flavio Briatore thing was hanging over him a bit, I imagine. And Flavio casts a pretty big shadow. Hulkenberg is another I’d like to see in some competitive machinery. He looked good at Williams last year, and I think he deserves a chance to show what he’s worth, without having the added pressure of supplying a paycheque every fortnight.
So... I think, in a good car, Hulkenberg may be the one who impresses the most. I feel like the likes of Ricciardo (and Vergne?) have a load of expectation on them, and even when they do really well we’ll all be a little less impressed than we should be.
Pete: I’m not going to try to justify my racism.
Why should people listen to Box of Neutrals?
Rob: So we can sell the show to a commercial network! We don’t claim to be Autosport or Joe Saward with the integrity that they hold. We still take pride in what we do and even amongst our stupidity, behind it is a very strong work ethic. I mean, I had to find FIVE cameras to record a stripper dancing around for 30 seconds and it took two weeks to edit the footage.
One comment that we get quite regularly is people telling us that they’re not really fans of Formula One, or even know what we’re talking about half the time, but they like listening to what we have to say. That’s the thing I’m most astonished by, and gives us hope that we’re hitting the right notes.
Michael: They probably shouldn’t, really. My theory is that too many people are probably listening to our show, and as a result the Euro is in a financial crisis. Plus I’m sure there are other things people could probably spend their time doing. Like watching Antiques Roadshow.
Pete: I’m a cranberry now.
Rob: So we can sell the show to a commercial network! We don’t claim to be Autosport or Joe Saward with the integrity that they hold. We still take pride in what we do and even amongst our stupidity, behind it is a very strong work ethic. I mean, I had to find FIVE cameras to record a stripper dancing around for 30 seconds and it took two weeks to edit the footage.
One comment that we get quite regularly is people telling us that they’re not really fans of Formula One, or even know what we’re talking about half the time, but they like listening to what we have to say. That’s the thing I’m most astonished by, and gives us hope that we’re hitting the right notes.
Michael: They probably shouldn’t, really. My theory is that too many people are probably listening to our show, and as a result the Euro is in a financial crisis. Plus I’m sure there are other things people could probably spend their time doing. Like watching Antiques Roadshow.
Pete: I’m a cranberry now.
Michael: Reading back... we sure do crap on about crap.
For more incoherent answers on semi-journalistic questions, go to the full uncut version of That Cars Blog interviews Box of Neutrals.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten