Sports Personality of the Year - Hoy Wins!!!

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:
The same could be levelled at our cycling team surely?

I believe all the bikes have to conform to some Olympic guidelines. Put it this way, I don't think the gulf between a 'good' bike and a 'crap' bike is going to be anywhere near as great as the gulf between machines in Formula One.

hmm, I seem to remember Chris Boardmans bike being light years ahead of his competitors back in Barcelona.

Also that's not counting all the millions that have been plowed into training facilities etc.

They're still RICH though. And those teams have a wealth of experience too. What about the other teams that haven't got a hope, your Minnardis and Team BARs?

Surely comparable to the Stokes of this world.

But, the most important thing in Formula One is how good your car is. You could be the greatest driver in the world, but if you're driving a Minnardi or something, you haven't got a strawberry floating hope.

Surely the same as football? Giovanni has shown he's one of the best forwards in the league yet he will win nothing with the team he is with. Likewise you some very average players in the squad at Chelsea who will win things purely because of the quality of their team.

Albear wrote:
hmm, I seem to remember Chris Boardmans bike being light years ahead of his competitors back in Barcelona.

Barclenona?

Also that's not counting all the millions that have been plowed into training facilities etc.

link?

Surely comparable to the Stokes of this world.

Can you really compare football to formula one?

Surely the same as football? Giovanni has shown he's one of the best forwards in the league yet he will win nothing with the team he is with. Likewise you some very average players in the squad at Chelsea who will win things purely because of the quality of their team.

Chelsea didn't win anything last year. Also, a team with considerably less money and considerably more average players won the league cup.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:
hmm, I seem to remember Chris Boardmans bike being light years ahead of his competitors back in Barcelona.

Barclenona?

Also that's not counting all the millions that have been plowed into training facilities etc.

link?

Surely comparable to the Stokes of this world.

Can you really compare football to formula one?

Surely the same as football? Giovanni has shown he's one of the best forwards in the league yet he will win nothing with the team he is with. Likewise you some very average players in the squad at Chelsea who will win things purely because of the quality of their team.

Chelsea didn't win anything last year. Also, a team with considerably less money and considerably more average players won the league cup.

What's funny about Barcelona? his Lotus Bike was way ahead of the others. Doesnt take anything away from his acheivement. Also I would bet money that the bikes our riders rode were better than their competitors.

A link regarding money spent.

http://debatewise.com/debates/486

Man Utd won the League. They are the richest club in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richest_football_clubs

Maybe you should try peppering your posts with facts rather than just smilies.

Toyota had the biggest budget in Formula One last year...they were rubbish.

Albear wrote:What's funny about Barcelona? his Lotus Bike was way ahead of the others. Doesnt take anything away from his acheivement. Also I would bet money that the bikes our riders rode were better than their competitors.

Barcelona was 1992. Things change

A link regarding money spent.

http://debatewise.com/debates/486

Man Utd won the League. They are the richest club in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richest_football_clubs

Maybe you should try peppering your posts with facts rather than just smilies.

Thing is, Man Utd regained the title from Chelsea who'd won it previous. And what about Arsenal? They spend less than alot of midtable clubs, yet have won things. Acid test will be Man City. Albear, if they win the league, I'll eat my hat. Deal?

Also, how comes I didn't get a response from my last point?

Arsenals wage bill is still the third highest in the league so they are one of the big spenders though.

bear wrote:Arsenals wage bill is still the third highest in the league so they are one of the big spenders though.

Probably because it's in London.

(Sorry Albear).

Champions League is probably a factor. If they weren't in it, it wouldn't be. Fact is, they haven't spunked extortionate amounts in the transfer market, yet have achieved success.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:Only at the individual level. Team success is all about paying for the best players - hence why the rich teams win consistently. And as Football is always played in teams, trying to suggest it is egalitarian just seems wrong

I didn't say football was egalitarian. I just said it was more egalitarian than football [I presume you mean F1]. Money, is more important in Formula One I believe.

I am proposing they have the same importance in both sports. As has been pointed out the richest team won't necessarily win, nor do the richest team always win in football*. Like I said in my previous post (although missed from that quote) is that success follows the money. Neither is egalitarian particularly and I'm not sure how you defend football as being more so.

* - consistently is merely reference to the high times that Arsenal, Manchester United et al are at the top. And the turn around when relatively poorer clubs are bought up and become vastly more successful, ie. Chelsea. Compelling evidence.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:Oh and F1 cars are definitely hard to drive. The computers just make it safer for going up to speeds of 200mph - a virtually impossible speed to control for a majority of people in any vehicle.

Perhaps they ought to reduce the aids, reduce the speed and just make it more about racing and less about technology.

Perhaps, but as I'm not a fan it's not something I am qualified to comment on.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:What's funny about Barcelona? his Lotus Bike was way ahead of the others. Doesnt take anything away from his acheivement. Also I would bet money that the bikes our riders rode were better than their competitors.

Barcelona was 1992. Things change

A link regarding money spent.

http://debatewise.com/debates/486

Man Utd won the League. They are the richest club in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richest_football_clubs

Maybe you should try peppering your posts with facts rather than just smilies.

Thing is, Man Utd regained the title from Chelsea who'd won it previous. And what about Arsenal? They spend less than alot of midtable clubs, yet have won things. Acid test will be Man City. Albear, if they win the league, I'll eat my hat. Deal?

Also, how comes I didn't get a response from my last point?

Would Chelsea have won the Premiership if they didnt have Abromovichs Millions?

The Premiership big 4 comprises of the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 8th Richest clubs in the world. You still don't think money plays a big part? Money doesnt automatically mean success (Look at Spurs spending record) But it certainly plays a large part.

Toyota spent the most, and ended up 5th.

Acid test will be Man City. Albear, if they win the league, I'll eat my hat. Deal?

No deal. As I've said, money isnt the be all or end all, but it certainly plays it's part, that applies to F1, Football and the Olympics and pretty much any sport out there.

You can't use Arsenal as evidence either, firstly because they havent won anything of great importance for a while now, and secondly because one of the largest complaints aimed towards Arsene has been his reluctance to spend money.

what was the point that I keep forgetting to respond to?

Slartibartfast wrote:I am proposing they have the same importance in both sports. As has been pointed out the richest team won't necessarily win, nor do the richest team always win in football. Like I said in my previous post (although missed from that quote) is that success follows the money. Neither is egalitarian particularly and I'm not sure how you defend football as being more so.

Because I have a long memory, being an old 'un I remember the days when teams other than Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal, exclusively won things. A happy time, before SKY.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:I am proposing they have the same importance in both sports. As has been pointed out the richest team won't necessarily win, nor do the richest team always win in football. Like I said in my previous post (although missed from that quote) is that success follows the money. Neither is egalitarian particularly and I'm not sure how you defend football as being more so.

Because I have a long memory, being an old 'un I remember the days when teams other than Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal, exclusively won things. A happy time, before SKY.

And with SKY came a lot more money ... do you see my point now then? Money is at least as important for teams of footballers as for F1 teams?

Albear wrote:
Toyota spent the most, and ended up 5th.

Which is why I said experience was a factor. Mclaren and Ferrari have decades of experience. Eventually, if Toyota carry on spending they'll prevail.

Would Chelsea have won the Premiership if they didnt have Abromovichs Millions?

No, if they'd have stuck with Ranieri.

Albear wrote:
what was the point that I keep forgetting to respond to?

strawberry float knows, I made a throwaway comment about Formula One be more about money than anything else, and I got jumped upon.

Still, made the day go quickly.

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:
what was the point that I keep forgetting to respond to?

strawberry float knows, I made a throwaway comment about Formula One be more about money than anything else, and I got jumped upon.

Still, made the day go quickly.

Aye, that was some nice procrastination.

writereportwritereportwritereportwritereportwritereportwritereportwritereport

I'm confused. What are you guys arguing about?

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:
Toyota spent the most, and ended up 5th.

Which is why I said experience was a factor. Mclaren and Ferrari have decades of experience. Eventually, if Toyota carry on spending they'll prevail.

That's rubbish, there have been years where McLaren have struggled like hell despite their millions, this year was BMW's 3rd year in F1 and they've come 3rd! Their budget is way way less than Toyota who have been in for longer.

Slartibartfast wrote:
And with SKY came a lot more money ... do you see my point now then? Money is at least as important for teams of footballers as for F1 teams?

Yes, I do. But, the point I'm making is, money seems to be even more important in Formula One than it does in football.

Kanbei wrote:

Sam_Seed wrote:

Albear wrote:
Toyota spent the most, and ended up 5th.

Which is why I said experience was a factor. Mclaren and Ferrari have decades of experience. Eventually, if Toyota carry on spending they'll prevail.

That's rubbish, there have been years where McLaren have struggled like hell despite their millions, this year was BMW's 3rd year in F1 and they've come 3rd! Their budget is way way less than Toyota who have been in for longer.

Weren't BMW previously allied with Williams? Or did I just imagine that?

a bad christmas day wrote:I'm confused.

You too?

Sam_Seed wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:
And with SKY came a lot more money ... do you see my point now then? Money is at least as important for teams of footballers as for F1 teams?

Yes, I do. But, the point I'm making is, money seems to be even more important in Formula One than it does in football.

That's contradictory.

Dammit... WRITE REPORT!