I think the comparisons with F1 are relevent.
The emerging details of Jenson's accident (HANS device cracked,cockpit protection cracked) really highlighted how if his accident had happened just a few years ago his injuries may have been life threatening.
There seems to be no attempt to address the safety aspects of the TT which is surprising considering the number of deaths.
One reason might be that making the riders feel safer may lead them to taking bigger risks ? Some F1 drivers have been accused of reckless driving in the past which many have put down to the drivers feeling too safe.
You can never get away from the fact motorsport- particularly motorbike racing is extremely dangerous and those taking part have a great appreciation for this and for a lot of them the enjoyment comes from beating the risk element.
Sadly, I'm sure one day it will be banned just like the other great road races.
|
I have a feeling that the riders are aware of the risks and are able to make an informed decision as to whether or not they race there.
Banning it for the riders' own good would obviously be yet more tiresome nannying.
|
Apparently James Hunt once said that people watched F1 to see all the crashes, not the driving.
Is that a big part of the appeal of the IOM TT and the reason why certain obvious and basic safety improvements aren't carried out ?
|
|
On a 37+ mile course you would be very unlucky to see a crash, even if that was what you wanted to see. I think people go to see highly powered versions of the machines that they can buy and ride themselves; at least the Suzuki that races on the IOM looks something like a bike that can be bought in a showroom, even if the racing versioncosts 10 times as much! I also think that people go to admire the skill and bravery of the riders who race there, for pitiful prize money and great kudos within the world of road-racing enthusiasts. At least the commercial and very technical aspects of F1 have not filtered down to a sport that members of the public still enjoy almost for free.
|
|
But surely the bravery element is a function of the danger - more danger = more bravery = more excitement ?
|
= more spectators = more money ?
Is it in the interests of certain parties to maintain a 'dangerous' event because by doing so the crowds, publicity & ££££'s are guaranteed ? If so, are the riders being exploited even if they don't know it ?
|
The overwhelming majority of those who attend the TT are dedicated bikers, and they turn up to the Island every year as much to be part of the event as to watch the racing. No fan of any motor sport turns up to see the crashes - that is the preserve of the casual viewer. Indeed, it is the reason I make sure I always watch the start of an F1 GP, a sport I otherwise find incredably dull. I may be warped, but at least I'm honest about it.
There is in any case little that could be done to make the TT safer. Bikes are not like cars, the riders cannot be surrounded by protective shells and any course that uses public roads has to put up with trees, kerbs, walls and all the other hazards one will find on any road. These cannot be removed for a fortnight and put back again.
All who take part are fully aware of the risks involved, and if they dedicate a large proportion of their lives to making sure they get there, who has the right to prevent them?
|
|
|
|
I don't think there is that much money involved Volvoman. There are stands at the pits/start/finish which I imagine you pay to occupy and for the rest of it you leg it off into the open country with your flask and butty-box and watch for free. Obviously visitors stay in hotels or B&Bs or camp out and they buy food and drink but the cash is spread across the economy and lots of people benefit a little.
|
"Bikes are not like cars, the riders cannot be surrounded by protective shells"
A few years ago on one a tv show (Driven? TG? TW??) I saw a biker jacket which was designed to inflate just like an airbag by means of a type of ripcord attached to the machine which would automatically trigger if the rider was thrown from the bike. It provided a bigger safety cushion along the entire length of the spine and a massive collar around the neck for extra protection against spinal cord injuries, but inflated around the rest of the torso as well, thus protecting all vital organs. It might not be much at high speeds, but it's an awful lot more than what's currently available.
I don't understand why something like this couldn't be brought into use, for everyday riding as well as racing. To my mind, the difference in terms of additional protection this could provide would be akin to wearing or not wearing a seatbelt in a car.
|
Apparently a day or two before the racing starts, spectators with sidecars are encouraged to take local handicapped kids around the course at speed.
The kids, of course, love it. Can you imagine the outcry if something similar happended in the UK...
|
Prophetically, in June's BIKE magazine the late David Jefferies answered as below to the question "In a safety-obsessed culture, wht changes will the TT have to make to secure its long term future?"
"It's a very valid point that. One day some lovely beaurocratic gentleman will decide that driving your car with a t-shirt on will be too dangerous and you'l have to wear a fireproof suit or something. Any extreme sport will come under scrutiny in the long-term - but I can see the TT lasting quite a long time because of its following. Yes, it's dangerous but nobody forces me to go. I go because I want to and that's it. You look at horse riding or rugby statistics and they're dangerous too, but they are society sports so nobody suggests that they should be banned."
I agree with him totally, and believe that an important part of living a fulfilled life is to give rational, intelligent, informed people the chance to take some risk if they wish to.
Why do I like parachuting?
Why do I like riding sports bikes?
Why do I like class 1 kart racing?
Why do I agree with my physically disabled brother and his single handed ocean endeavours?
Because activities like these, conducted with careful planning and awareness, are what satisfy a basic human need in many people that no legislator can suppress. In my own case, this keeps my brain sharp and alive, in good humour, and well motivated to do all the mundane tasks in life. After 300 miles (sweltering!) in full leathers on the bike this weekend, with legal exhaust pipe to minimize my noise intrusion, 'making progress' where safe and sensible, but certainly not behaving like a lunatic, I feel that life just couldn't get better. Sure, statistically I just did the most dangerous thing I'll do this week, but it's all about intelligent balance.
As much as I can within a balanced (that key word again) society, I wish to be able to make my own choices, as much as my friends and colleagues for whom a trip to Tescos is their chosen peak of excitement wish to make theirs.
Likewise, long may those who wish to race in the TT be able to make their choice, too.
|
|
Not too much money actually changing hands on the course Armitage, but think of the advertising and the kudos attached to winning or doing well that may get a rider into a professional outfit. The incentive is to take life or death risks and money is the big motivator at that level, not the love of racing. You can bet it's not the guy who fixes his bike on the kitchen table who benefits most.
Didn't Barry Sheene refuse to take part on the grounds of safety and state that he thought the TT and GP should be banned? You could hardly describe him as nannying.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
