TT Miracle: Moffatt says something I agree with

[thesultanofsheight]

Well it had to happen sometime I suppose

 

http://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/bernard-moffatt-slams-tt-on-uk-radio-station/

 

Even I'm starting to feel a bit queasy about our role in sanctioning this sort of thing with ever increasing amounts of public money. Seeing the two black tribute pages pop up in ITV4 this week brought it home to me that it isn't really that acceptable anymore for us to be trying to grow an event like this. Even less likely that we can justify spending millions more of taxpayers funds to expand, license and grow a death franchise.

 

I also don't think we can Police the activity around an event like this anymore hence the public road death toll too. No doubt I'll get shot down but this year has done it for me. Just more forgotten sons. Very sad indeed.

[Monkey boy]

Our annual "defence" contribution to the UK's war chest is in the millions and responsible for far more deaths annually. If your only desire is to stop people doing dangerous things and injuring or killing themselves then there are far more productive places to start than the TT.

[thesultanofsheight]

Our annual "defence" contribution to the UK's war chest is in the millions and responsible for far more deaths annually. If your only desire is to stop people doing dangerous things and injuring or killing themselves then there are far more productive places to start than the TT.

 

Fair comment. But we don't advertise and spend millions of our public money to send 70,000 tourists to Afganistan to watch people get shot. I've actually changed my view on this, this year. I think it's depressing and if the only thing we can look forward to as an economy, and to keep some people's jobs and lifestyles ticking over, is more death next year to top the coffers up then it's wrong. I simply don't think it's ethical to be spending money to grow this event.

[Monkey boy]

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

[thesultanofsheight]

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

I agree a tragedy is a tragedy and I used the phrase forgotten sons first as I chose a military analogy. However, I was referring to death as a tourist attraction which is not the case with Afganistan. We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction. We also broadcast that as entertainment (not news) via the web and TV. That is very unlike a military conflict. It's creating and funding (and employing people to manage) a pure recreational activity; spectating on death. I just don't think it's ethical to spend money growing this event anymore.

[pongo]

We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction.

This is clearly not true. People do not come here specifically to witness death and destruction. People come to watch road racing and to share the atmosphere.

[thesultanofsheight]

 

We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction.

This is clearly not true. People do not come here specifically to witness death and destruction. People come to watch road racing and to share the atmosphere.

It's a residual draw, a by-product, people are most certainly lured by the atmosphere of danger and that atmosphere is conveyed in the media portrayal of the event and the subliminal advertising around the event to get people here.

 

Anyway for once I agree with B Moffatt Esq ..

[notwell]

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

You really cannot compare the two. Armed Forces personnel going to any conflict is part of the paid job. It's what Forces people sign up in the knowledge of. I certainly did and I know everyone I served with felt the same.

 

The IOM needs to pay for defence. That's a fact. it's hardly like we can conduct our own is it?

There is no link to death whatsoever in this context. It's a really poor analogy.

 

Sultan - I agree quite a lot with your opening post. The road and the race are two separate issues IMHO.

 

On the roads a lot of it can be stopped. It is within our control to do so. I think we have to accept that with the huge increase in vehicles on the roads we will see SOME accidents. But the ones (like those up the Mountain) can be stopped.

 

On the track the issue now is technology which has advanced at a rate that has left behind all but about 20% of the riders. When i was younger as bigger a risk (if not more so) was not the speed it was the bikes. They regularly seized, blew up etc.

 

But now we've reached an era where mechanically most of the bikes are bullet proof. And the guy setting off last has a bike that Hutchy, Dunlop and co can put around the course at near course record speeds. This has to be a recipe for disaster given the limited riding skills of most of the field.

 

And of course there is no real stepping stone anymore in Road Racing. A 600 can lap at nearly 130mph these days.

 

Road racing has always been dangerous. It always will be. But as each year goes by the speed at which people crash is increasing and there does not appear to be an answer to it.

[notwell]

 

 

We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction.

This is clearly not true. People do not come here specifically to witness death and destruction. People come to watch road racing and to share the atmosphere.

It's a residual draw, a by-product, people are most certainly lured by the atmosphere of danger and that atmosphere is conveyed in the media portrayal of the event and the subliminal advertising around the event to get people here.

 

Anyway for once I agree with B Moffatt Esq ..

 

I disagree.

No one comes here wanting to see accidents. People aren't booking thinking "with a bit of luck i'll see a huge accident".

[Monkey boy]

 

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

I agree a tragedy is a tragedy and I used the phrase forgotten sons first as I chose a military analogy. However, I was referring to death as a tourist attraction which is not the case with Afganistan. We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction. We also broadcast that as entertainment (not news) via the web and TV. That is very unlike a military conflict. It's creating and funding (and employing people to manage) a pure recreational activity; spectating on death. I just don't think it's ethical to spend money growing this event anymore.

[thesultanofsheight]

On the track the issue now is technology which has advanced at a rate that has left behind all but about 20% of the riders. When i was younger as bigger a risk (if not more so) was not the speed it was the bikes. They regularly seized, blew up etc.

 

But now we've reached an era where mechanically most of the bikes are bullet proof. And the guy setting off last has a bike that Hutchy, Dunlop and co can put around the course at near course record speeds. This has to be a recipe for disaster given the limited riding skills of most of the field.

 

And of course there is no real stepping stone anymore in Road Racing. A 600 can lap at nearly 130mph these days.

 

Road racing has always been dangerous. It always will be. But as each year goes by the speed at which people crash is increasing and there does not appear to be an answer to it.

I agree. Also if they can put a tricked out scooby round and average 128mph then it does ask questions about technical limits for the future as we must be right on the technical limits of what is possible for either cars or bikes. I remember the year ('86?) that Toivenen put a Delta S4 around the Portuguese GP track and theoretically qualified for a place on the front grid. Later that year he was dead. This year has done it for me. I don't have an issue with the event per see; but don't think we should be investing millions of taxpayer money growing it, or investing into further licensing a death franchise. It's a colossal emerging PR liability.

[Monkey boy]

 

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

I agree a tragedy is a tragedy and I used the phrase forgotten sons first as I chose a military analogy. However, I was referring to death as a tourist attraction which is not the case with Afganistan. We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction. We also broadcast that as entertainment (not news) via the web and TV. That is very unlike a military conflict. It's creating and funding (and employing people to manage) a pure recreational activity; spectating on death. I just don't think it's ethical to spend money growing this event anymore.

Nobody comes here to witness death and destruction, nor is anyone encouraged to, and on top of that very few actually do. It seems that it's not the death you object to so much or the perceived public funding of it but that it occurs during a tourist event rather than a political power struggle.

[Mr. Sausages]

Thou shalt not question the TT.

[thesultanofsheight]

 

 

But we do spend millions of public money sending UK troops to Afghanistan every year and thousand of soldiers and innocent civilians do get shot or blown up. A dead body is a dead body - someone's son/ daughter/ father/mother, regardless of the circumstances, tragedy is tragedy.

I agree a tragedy is a tragedy and I used the phrase forgotten sons first as I chose a military analogy. However, I was referring to death as a tourist attraction which is not the case with Afganistan. We spend money to bring people here specifically to witness death and destruction. We also broadcast that as entertainment (not news) via the web and TV. That is very unlike a military conflict. It's creating and funding (and employing people to manage) a pure recreational activity; spectating on death. I just don't think it's ethical to spend money growing this event anymore.

Nobody comes here to witness death and destruction, nor is anyone encouraged to, and on top of that very few actually do. It seems that it's not the death you object to so much or the perceived public funding of it but that it occurs during a tourist event rather than a political power struggle.

I disagree.

[Mr. Sausages]

Monkey Boy - don't forget to say "you shouldn't have moved here" or "your real objection is the inconvenience of closed roads".