If only F1 did off-season taxi races?

So after Jenson's taxi ride to promote crisps.
(See previous post. In the end...)

@duskyBlogF1 Pointed me into another taxi ride advert.
Which got me thinking.
This needs to be the new sport in the F1 off-season.

It would just be like the Race of Champions.
Only a really really poor version.
On motorways and with traffic...

See for yourself.
It could be the future.



Need more F1 ramblings. Follow me on twitter @squiffany

Merry Christmas from FFF.

Female Formula Fun just want to wish all my readers, supporters and friends a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

And in FFF tradition.
Let not only me wish you a happy holidays

But the delightful Mark Webber will has well.


Enjoy.

Don't forget you can follow my F1 ramblings on twitter @squiffany

An anatomy of my F1 crushes...

Now has any regular reader of FFF knows, F1 Fitty of the week has become a regular staple of this blog.
But over the past few weeks I have been thinking of my own F1 crushes over the years.

It doesn't make pretty reading at times.
So I'm going to take you down embarrassment line and show you my F1 crushes over the years.
So let's start from the beginning.

1998
Heinz Harald Frentzen




Yep this is the worse one of them all. I don't have any excuses, but the excuse I will make is that I was very young and I knew nothing of the world of attractive men.
I have no idea how this one even came about. I think in my hatred of Michael Schumacher. I paired up with Frentzen. I think I felt sorry for him. (Back story: Schumacher's wife dated Frentzen and then left him for Schumacher)
I think this story combined with the underdog factor made Frentzen appealing to me.
The worse thing about this story was that I made a sign that sat on my desk at school saying...

Tiffany Kate Fletcher
             <3
Heinz Harald Frentzen

I'm disgusted with myself.
So lets move on quite quickly.

1999-2001
Jenson Button. 


When the boy from Frome first stepped into F1. I knew he would be my first true love.
From the photo of Heat I placed on my bedroom door to the letter I wrote to his fan club.
(I literally had no shame, but I got a nice signed photo back. Still to this day I have no idea if it's real though.)



I loved him for years, then when I was 13 he made some really stupid boyish comments about women in F1, which put me off him for a long time.
In jist saying how could women drive in F1 with big boobs etc etc.
(I didn't bare in mind that at the time Jenson made the comments he was pretty young and less media trained then he is now)

But that was it.
I lost my faith.
But everything changed in 2001.

2001-2007
Fernando Alonso.


Literally this love affair lasted longer then any of my real relationships.
(Which says a lot about the state of my love life.)

In fact because of my Alonso love. I ended up helping out on Fernando Alonso forum for about a year and ended up meeting some of the friends I still have on Facebook and Twitter now.

I used to tell anyone who would listen that I would marry Alonso one day. The day he got married actually was a heartbreaker.
(Fast forward to his divorce this year and the 2006 me would of been jumping for joy. Alas 2011 me wasn't that bothered)

Now I probably would of loved Alonso forever but the year he joined McLaren is when the crush died for me.
Mainly because he insulted British fans, saying we all supported Hamilton and  to be honest in general Alonso was just a bit of a dick.
His smugness was off putting. Forever.

So even though looking back I can't understand why I fancied Alonso. Maybe it was the eyebrows...who knows.
I still think he is an amazing driver. That can never be denied.

So from 2008 onwards there has been a drought in my F1 crush timeline.
I have had the odd dalliance.
There was a brief crush moment in the last few years for Sebastian Vettel, Mark Webber and Nico Rosberg. (Who is on my is on my fridge at the moment. Yeah, long story)

Sometimes I even go back to Button and Alonso.

But I worked out a while a go. That it doesn't matter how pretty the drivers are.
(Even though I blog about that side of F1 constantly. )

It's about the racing.
And it will always be about that.
True story.

Any interesting F1 crushes?
Comment or you can twitter me @squiffany

In the end I forgot it was about crisps...

So my friend Vicky (Follow her here at @F1_Obsessive  and you should. Her F1 tweets are amazing) and me were having a chat about Jenson Button when we started discussing this advert.

Now I forgot all about it but it definitely needs to be brought back into the public's attention.
I have no idea why. I just saw Jenson, went a bit gooey eyed and lost my train of thought....

This advert is a lot more appealing because unlike Jenson's Head and Shoulders advert it's not at all about being bracing.

Jenson is just himself.
A.K.A Comedy gold.

All I am saying is that Jenson can insult the cougars for me any day of the week.
But only if he drives a taxi...



Oh yeah by the way this advert is promoting crisps who would of thought it...
To hear more of my F1 rambles Follow me @squiffany on twitter.

STR's choice.

So this week after much speculation both Jaime Alguersuari and Sebastien Buemi have been given the push by Toro Rosso after two years in the team.


The thing is. Someone asked me a few months ago. If you could only keep one driver out of Toro Rosso who would it be.
And I couldn't have given an answer.

Both Jaime and Seb have given stellar performances at times and were both quite evenly matched on pace and performance in the Toro Rosso
It was a bit like an F1 of version Sophie's choice. Only with two drivers instead of children.

So I can understand why Toro Rosso have given both drivers the push.
It was the easiest if a little slightly cowardly thing to do.

F1 moves so fast and with only 26 places it's so competitive.
(Unless you have money and can buy your way in. *Nudges Pastor Maldonaldo*)
Seeing Jaime and Sebastien drive I never once thought. They are something special. They are going to be champions of the future.
So far I have only done that with Fernando Alonso and Sebastian Vettel on their F1 debuts.

I would like Jaime and Sebastien back in F1 at some point. They weren't awful drivers, they just weren't that memorable.

But with Jaime and Sebastien gone.
New blood can come to the fore.
In the form of the Red Bull junior team programme.

With Daniel Ricciardo finally getting a drive with a better team then HRT and new boy and former Toro Rosso test driver Jean-Eric Vergne also taking the second seat at the team.


I'm hoping that 2012 should be a brighter year for the sister Red Bull team.

You can also follow my ramblings on twitter @squiffany

Retro. No Current F1 Fitty of the week. Kimi Raikkonen

So it has been a while since I have done a Fitty of the week post.
Mainly because I have been so busy.
Mainly because I struggled to find a retro fitty of the week.

So in true FFF style.
I decided to go for someone who is back in the F1 news.

Kimi Raikkonen.


Now Kimi may be a man of few words.
Very few words.
Unless those words come out of his mouth at karaoke.

But aside from that.

Kimi is a very pretty boy to look at.
It's definitely the Blonde hair, blue eyes thing.

I literally can not stop myself from looking at his eyes. They are literally intoxicating.
*Swoon*

Plus not only is he pretty damn hot.
He also has tattoo's.

That alone up's the hotness factor for me a notch.


So I'm glad that Kimi is coming back.
Well for comedy value. Yes.
For beautiful-ness...

What do you think? *Swoons*


P.S If you would like to do a guest post for FFF and do a Retro F1 Fitty of the week.
Then email me at squiffany87@gmail.com

And you could have a guest post just like Susie did a few weeks ago.
Retro F1 Fitty of the week. Francois Cevert. 

Interview with Box of Neutrals. Part Two.

So you came back for part two of the Box of Neutrals interview. 

Of course you did.

Now enjoy.

In case you missed part one. You can catch it here.
http://femaleformulafun.blogspot.com/2011/11/interview-with-box-of-neutrals-part-one.html

Do you think teams like HRT are worthy of F1, or just comedy gold?

Rob: Again, like the drivers that I don’t particularly rate in Formula One, any team to make it and be able to sustain an existence within Formula One is astonishing. When you know when you’re competing with the likes of Ferrari and McLaren with their wealth of experience and budget, it must be daunting to enter the sport and telling your sponsors you might get through the year without scoring a single point.

HRT’s existence is amazing. For a team that’s mostly self-sufficient and relies on a handful of sponsors, it should have folded months ago. 2012 will be their third year, amazingly, but they’re definitely not out of the woods.

I do feel guilty sometimes having a go at these teams, because if HRT or Lotus/Caterham offered me a job, I’d take it in a heartbeat. I don’t deny that even the slowest teams on the grid have an insanely high work ethic and put 110% into their job. Which must be crushing if even your best doesn’t go very far.

But that’s the nature of what we do! It’s all in jest. It’s hard not to find ‘This Is A Cool Spot’ funny.

Michael: Tough questions, but fair call. Personally, I find it a little difficult to have a real go at HRT beyond the confines of what could loosely be described as ‘comedy’ on our show. Mostly because I feel that the way the FIA handled the entry of HRT - and Virgin, USF1, and, to a lesser extent, Lotus - was pretty poor, and I think it’s a near miracle that these teams have survived up to this point. Lotus - or whatever the freak it’s called these days - was a really solid application, so I think that team will go on to be successful to some degree. But the others were given less time, and on top of that were significantly less organised. While that’s not the FIA’s fault, it is the FIA’s fault for approving them, and giving them the go ahead to burn millions of dollars almost pointlessly. The FIA, in a somewhat cowardly fashion, admitted that it did the wrong thing without actually admitting it - by which I mean it made significant changes to the way it assessed applicants for the 2011 season, and as a result allowed no new entries. Had the same proper tests been applied a year earlier, we would have had a stronger field of new teams, or at very least a smaller, but more solid, list of debutants joining Formula One.

I haven’t really answered you question. I suppose they are a bit funny, yeah.

Pete: Get my cow, I need some pleasure.


Was there ever a Crazy Bernie idea that you actually liked and thought feasible?

Rob: I wish I had a list of all of his crazy ideas with me so I could find one with a degree of validity. I can only really think of the ones that are ludicrous likes his medals system and artificially watering the track at random intervals during a race. I’d gladly support him if he mooted the idea of V10s and/or V12s returning to Formula 1.

Michael: Needless to say, Bernie’s plans have generally been a bit mental on the most part. Medals make no sense to me as points system on so many levels, while sprinklers defy the point - though I do think it would be a potentially hilarious addition to racing. Maybe if we had some non-championship rounds we could do it, but I would never want to see it during the season proper. However, his ideas aren’t all bonkers - although most engineers disagree with his conclusions, I think it was right for him to put emphasis on engine noise when deciding on a new engine formula. I also like some of his ‘romantic’ ideas about racetracks - setting up a circuit in New York, for example, is brilliant idea. So some of uncle Bernie’s ideas can be good - just keep him away from the technical regulations.

Pete: The FIA know that they would be screwed if...


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.

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.


Mark Webber or Daniel Ricciardo?

Rob: I have, sort of, followed Mark Webber since his first race in 2002. I remember vividly watching that race when I was about 12 years old, and thinking how I’d never heard of this person before. Then again, I was 12 so I was hardly in tune with motorsport - apart from rallying. He finished fifth and I understood that it was a pretty big deal.

Once I got into Formula One a bit more when I was about 15, I was constantly singing the praises of Webber. I was always saying ‘this year will be his year!’ and constantly defending him. By the time I was in my second year of university, he won his first race. He sure took his bloody time!

That said, his journey into Formula One certainly wasn’t easy and his time in the sport has been just as challenging. To have seen him win the championship last year would have been sensational. It would have been good for Formula One, and very good for Formula One in Australia.

Webber’s hard nosed, and perhaps mildly cynical personality probably doesn’t make him the household name that he should be. Not that it’s a bad thing, but he lacks that happy-go-lucky persona that Daniel Ricciardo possesses. He’s a fiery competitor and is certainly well respected, but I think Australia having a cheeky sort of character representing Australia will be good. If the hype surrounding Ricciardo has an element of truth, he will skyrocket into notoriety in Australia. I certainly hope so, it’ll be good for us I hope!

Webber = great competitor and would love to see him win a championship.
Ricciardo = the future of Formula One in Australia. He needs to be as good as everyone’s made him out to be.

Michael: Tough choice. I think they’re both great guys - I’m going to give a boring answer and say we’ll wait to see what Ricciardo’s like once his career really starts to move. But I think he’s got a load of potential, and seems like he’ll be a great addition to the paddock, too.

I think Rob’s answer was probably more interesting.

Pete: AUSSIE PROIDE!


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 growing number of buttons and levers drivers have to monitor and adjust while driving could become a safety risk?

Rob: I don’t think it’s safety risk. I think after what happened to Mark Webber last year in Valencia, I think there was a bit of an overreaction with the thought of drivers being too distracted while driving. This year hasn’t really demonstrated any serious incidents caused by drivers dialling in their front wings, KERS, DRS and engine maps. It’ll play into the strengths of the drivers that can multi-task and think on their toes. Then again if you do something long enough, you do get better at it. This kind of stuff is just second nature to these guys.

Michael: I think it could, but we’re not there yet. Last year, safety concerns were raised over the way the f-duct was being activated - and rightly so. Drivers were taking their hands off the wheel at some of the most dangerous parts of circuits. However, generally all of these gadgets inside the cars are switched on and off using buttons on the steering wheel, and there’s stacks of research that goes into where they should be placed for ease of use. So right now I’d say we’re doing all right in that sense.

Pete: Ohhhh, fack! I try to make a fucken joke and it fucken doesn't work because you guys are fuckheads.


Lotus-Genii Capital-Eric Booyeah-Vitaly Trololololo Petrov-Lada Renault GP or Lotus-Air Asia-Tony NAAAAAAAGGGHHHHH Feranandes-Caterham?

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. The signs look promising, and with time they will be a success. 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.


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. 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...


What’s your favourite track on the current F1 calendar and favourite track that no longer hosts F1?

Rob: My favourite track on the current calendar would be Monza. It wasn’t an easy choice as I adore Spa, but Monza is the last of the real bonkers tracks on the calendar. Turn one is such a comically Italian corner, whereas Spa is like a celebrity with maybe one or two attempts of plastic surgery gone too far. Suzuka was certainly my favourite on computer games, particularly in the advent of the race there in 2005!
My favourite non-F1 track would be old Hockenheim. It’s so sad to see pictures of where the old track used to live covered in trees and grass. Who would have thought nature could be so depressing to see?

Michael: I have a bunch of favourite tracks. My top five would have to include Monza, Spa, Monaco, Suzuka... and India. I don’t know why I like India – it could end up being an appalling racing circuit – but my first impression seems to be that it’s a sound track to race on. I think I love all of these places because there’s a real buzz about them – and that’s coming from someone who endures nothing more than television coverage for all but one race. There’s a real sense of excitement in the build up to these races, and there’s an epic sense of history attached to them, too. Well, not India, but still. I think India qualified on the ‘atmosphere’ ground – I watched all of the Indian GP coverage, and really wanted to visit there afterwards. There’s a sense of character to the place, and I think that’s what I find attractive about it.

To be honest, I haven’t seen very much racing on any particularly great tracks that are not longer hanging around. The A1 Ring in Austria would be one, though. And I also hear that the Kyalami circuit in South Africa was pretty exciting. I’d actually really love Kyalami back on the calendar – I feel like that would be one of the events on the calendar that has real character about it. An event with character, with some personality that has an impact on you– that’s the sort of thing Formula One needs to look for. They’re the ones I love, it stops Formula One losing some of its soul, and I think it sells the brand better, too.

Pete: I want to cover John Howard in pasta sauce.


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.

The young guys in the sport are great, and absolutely deserve their time in Formula One. I think Kamui Kobayashi, despite 2012 being his third and a half year, deserves more recognition. Nothing would make me happier than to see him in a Ferrari or whatever car is the flavour of the month.

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.

If he’s stuck with a less than impressive Williams machine next year and doesn’t fit in with the team as a leader all that well, it’ll be a disaster for both parties. I’m more worried for Williams’ sake than I am for Raikkonen’s. Certainly based on some of the notorious stories floating around of Raikkonen’s extravagant lifestyle! Which isn’t a bad thing though, as long as it doesn’t affect his ability to drive a racing car.

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.

As for Raikkonen, I’d love to see him back to see how he stacks up against what has become one of the most epic F1 fields we’ve had in a long time. It’s just a shame he’ll probably be back with Williams, and be relegated to some dark part of the midfield.

Perez I look forward to seeing mature, and I’m also pretty excited to see Ricciardo in a decent car. I’ve not really answered your question (again) I realise – I’ve more just listed all the names and said they’re all alright.

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.


Michael and Rob: Would you rather have Eddie Jordan or Peter McGinley as your third musketeer?

Rob: Decisions, decisions! I suspect Eddie Jordan isn’t as experienced as Peter McGinley in terms of pressing the buttons on a radio show. Eddie’s wealth of experience in Formula One would be handy to have on tap, even if he’s notorious for being an odd ball.

The show was born with Peter McGinley along for the ride, so I’d want to keep him along. He’s like our warm up act. Sometimes we’ll be a bit flat during a recording, but the three of us mucking around and being idiots sometimes gives us that boost to go into the podcast sounding like excited school boys. Importantly, McGinley keeps us in check whenever we go too obscure. He represents the People. Which is a frightening responsibility and I can only apologise for this.

Michael: Personally, I wouldn’t feel as comfortable hiring Eddie Jordan a stripper. And it’s questionable whether he’d be less offensive during recordings anyway. He does have a better accent, though.

Pete: I’m the definition of sophisticated.


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.


What's the aim for Box of Neutrals in five years time? Where do you all plan to be?

Michael: Alive is my primary aim. It’s difficult to predict beyond that. But I suppose in a paddock somewhere - preferably a Formula One paddock - and a healthy distance away from Peter McGinley. Not because I don’t like him or anything, just because his odour can sometimes be a little offensive.

Rob: I really do hope we’re still doing what we’re doing, albeit in a far greater capacity. The plan is to get paid for what we do at the moment, and to do even more than what we do now. A lot of effort goes into the show already, and a lot of our ideas and Formula One is inherently expensive to cover. The dream is the three of us sticking together and doing bigger and better things. It may not happen! This is something I have to harshly accept as a possibility, but that’s years of cynicism talking there. I don’t want that to be the case though.

Michael: I think it’s fair to say we’d love to do Box Of Neutrals professionally – or something similar, at least. We’d all love to be paid to do Formula One stuff, and if we could get a real paid gig doing this sort of F1 news/light entertainment/stripper hiring thing, that’d be pretty cool.

Rob: I don’t think we’ll have a Beatles-esque sort of incident where Yoko Ono will get involved and screw around with our dynamic. It hasn’t affected us before!

Hopefully in five years, I’ll be able to look back on what we’re doing and be pleased that we got somewhere with it. We’ve come so far in the year and a half we’ve been doing this for, I’m nervously excited for what the future awaits.

Even if we don’t get to stick together, I’d love to spend the rest of my life working in motorsport. But how sweet would it be if we managed to still do what we do, and get paid for it, in five years time?

Pete: Vote #1, Penis MaGinley - elect your local member!

Michael: Reading back... we sure do crap on about crap.

So there you are. The longest ever interview for FFF.
Now to get all the in-jokes and references.
Go to

So check out the boys podcasts/radio show because you should. It's amaze. 

Online. http://boxofneutrals.com/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/boxofneutrals

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/BoxOfNeutrals 

Kimi's back. Errrmm I think so.

So after weeks of speculation Mr Kimi Raikkonen is coming back into Formula One, but not in the team we all expected. After weeks of rumours that Kimi was going to Williams. (Mainly due to that factory visit) We now know that Kimi will be back for Lotus Renault (Or whatever they have named themselves this week).



Now for me Kimi returning to F1 is a neutral thing for me personally. I never thought he was amazing but he had flashes of brilliance when it was on his terms.
However one thing I did adore about Kimi was his way with words and his mannerisms.
Kimi pretty much didn't give a flying fuck what anyone thought about him.
It's why secretly I love him.

That's why to celebrate Kimi's return to F1.
I give you Kimi's comedy moments.

When Kimi's car failed, he did what every person does in a crisis.
Picks up the ice cream.


When Kimi missed the Schmacher presentation, he didn't need to make an excuse.


Quite frankly who hasn't knocked over a child?


Quite frankly who hasn't nearly fallen off a boat?


And finally who hasn't been a bit too pissed and thought karaoke was a good move.


So of course I am looking forward to the 2012 F1 season but now Kimi Raikkonen is back.
I'm looking forward to it a bit more.

The Lewis Hamilton approach to dealing with Ex-Girlfriends.

Secretly has much as I am not the biggest fan of Lewis.
It's pictures like this that tell the biggest story.

Sadly it seems just like on track, Lewis Hamilton just can't seem to deal with real world.
That includes his relationships.

So now it seems finally official that Nicole and Lewis are finally over it means I am going to have to actually have to find a new F1 couple to mock and make fun out of.
Balls.

Interview with Box Of Neutrals. Part One.

Now this interview of the month with the Australian radio show Box of Neutrals is a little different then the others I have done before. 

Let me explain why.

Well firstly this is a joint interview. So me and Martijn from That Cars Blog collaborated on the questions. A first for FFF.

Secondly we haven't personally met Michael, Rob and Pete from Box Of Neutrals (Mainly because Australia is a long way from the UK and the Netherlands) but they have been very generous with their time to answer our insane and yet sometimes serious questions.

So generous that Box of Neutrals were. That we decided to reward them with a two parter interview special. Another first for FFF.

So check out the boys podcasts/radio show.

Online. http://boxofneutrals.com/

On Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/boxofneutrals

And on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/BoxOfNeutrals

And enjoy part one of the Box of Neutrals interview. 

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 community issues i.e. 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. Michael probably knew me first as a listener that would occasionally message into his show. 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.

Why did you decide to release the radio show as a podcast?

Michael: Mostly because we’re what some in the industry would describe as ‘attention whores’, although we prefer to think of ourselves as ‘multimedia producers’. The podcast mostly came about because we decided to do 2010 off-air to figure out exactly how the show would work - sort of like practice. Then people started to listening to that - I can only assume accidentally - so the podcast actually became our core product. Even though we love the on-air stuff we do today, I think that this is probably still the case - the podcast is still the central part of Box Of Neutrals.

Rob: Box Of Neutrals didn’t start off initially as a radio show. Last year was really supposed to be a really drawn out pilot for us. To use a Formula 1 analogy, like when Toyota spent the entire of 2001 testing before their debut in 2002.

Even though I’d occasionally bumped into Michael, we didn’t really know each other that well. He knew I was a font of knowledge with Formula 1, and he was keen to do a show about Formula 1. I seem to recall Michael become an even greater fan of Formula 1 due to Box Of Neutrals. I’d like to think now he’s surpassed me as the font of knowledge because of the show.

So we spent the remainder of 2010 just to find our feet quietly, build up a rapport and find out an identity for Box Of Neutrals.

I still remember the very first time myself, Michael and Peter got into the studio and recorded something. We had put off doing this show for weeks, I seem to remember. So we finally busted each other to find a time when we were all free and spend an hour in an off-air studio to record it.

That pilot is still available on iTunes and our website. It’s only 11 minutes long, but the recording itself was about an hour. Sadly, the remainder of that podcast went into ether due to a technical problem.

Towards the end of 2010, most of the legwork was done with the show. We actively put off having a radio show on SYN Radio until the first season of broadcasting in 2011, so we could start off as a “brand new” programme about Formula 1.

So by the time we had our first live episode on the radio, we had spent around 22 weeks together making Box Of Neutrals. We already hit the ground running by the time we got onto the radio, and it was really up to the listeners to determine whether they liked it or not.

Michael: It’s probably worth mentioning at this point how stupidly seriously we take the podcast. The way the radio station at SYN works is that we’ll do our thing in the broadcast studio, and it’ll be recorded to an audio log, which we’ll the scan through, find our show, edit it up and upload to the website. Sometimes, however, the audio log fails, and the recording is unusable. On the handful of occasions this has happened – and we normally discover this at about 10PM at night, some five hours after the show finished going to air – we trudge over to the station’s production studio, sit down, and do the whole show again. That’s some serious dedication – especially when you consider the fact we were probably all on the way out for a Friday night at that point. I’m usually tired because I’ve done something stupid like stay awake for 45 hours just to see if I can, and Peter has at least once been drunk. But, dammit, we soldier through just so we can punch out that episode.

Hire us, BBC.

Rob: I’m the one who edits them every week. My record is staying up until 3.30am the following morning. On average, I’m done by about 1-2am - depending how distracted I get. We actually remembered and used a lot of the same gags from our radio show earlier in the day, but at least we had a chance to refine it this time around!

Michael: Rob does edit the podcasts. We initially had an argument over who would do it, as we each edited the podcasts for our previous, separate radio shows. I’m kinda glad Rob won in the end - it mean I get to go out on Friday night, or go to bed. Then I wake up in the morning, see the podcast in my inbox tagged at 4AM, and do all the uploading based stuff - writing MP3 tags, formatting pages, writing those one-line quips attached to each episode that no-one reads - mostly because they aren’t that good anyway.

Pete: Vote Liberal.


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.

In all seriousness, I don’t really know. I think it’s just that we all get along pretty well, so the ‘comedy’ (if you can call it that) happens naturally. What you hear when you listen to the show isn’t far from what you’d hear if you eavesdropped on one of our regular conversations. Sometimes we even use sound effects in them, too. The soundboard is ultra-portable.

Rob: Joe Saward, who also features as one of the in-jokes of our show, does make a valid point about how the advent of Twitter and the internet have created so-called “arm chaired” journalists. We didn’t want to pretend we had any credibility. Instead, we embraced that we’re a little bit green and it helps that all three of us have a stupidly wicked sense of humour.

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. 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 because there are loads out there for fans to choose from. 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!


Do you have a plan/script for every show? If so, do you stick to it religiously or do you ad lib?
Michael: We do, actually. Or we do when we’re on live radio. When we’re podcast only, it’s far more relaxed and we only bring talking topics with us. On radio we have intrinsically planned running sheets that count our show out to the minute so finish bang on time. Then, when the show starts, we ignore it almost completely and lose track of time, which normally makes the show after us quite angry. But I have learnt that if I take them to the pub beforehand, they’re much nicer to us. True story.

Rob: When we first started, it was very ad-hoc. We just booked an hour in the studio, had a couple of dot points, maybe printed an Autosport article and off we went. To be honest, not a lot has changed since.

We’ve got some notes, a list of news headlines and the discussion is off the top of our heads - with prior research/knowledge obviously. We’ve got other stimulus material for the longer segment topics, the calendar, championship/race standings and track maps. I actually have the 2011 Formula 1 Sporting Regulations & 2014 Technical Regulations in the boot of my car, only because it’s too heavy to carry around in my bag everyday!

Michael: We don’t use scripts, I should say. The only scripted parts are our introduction lines and Kit Harvey’s alphamale reports. The rest is all us – which is probably why we make so many mistakes, and also why we keep accidentally disrespecting Sizzler. I shouldn’t have said that. I shouldn’t have even brought it up, not since Sizzler closed down.

Pete: Show some bloody respect!

Rob: In terms of scripting, there is very little apart from the intro to the show where I say ‘we play Flavio’s mailbag’, for example. Michael actually does his intro off the top of his head, maybe referring to his notes to see what we’re talking about. But I have to come up with the absurd headlines, so I have to write them down! Ditto for the “I’m Peter McGinley and I got pulled over by the cops...[insert sound effect here]” bits of the show.

Apart from that, everything that happens on the show is spontaneous. Apart from the time we hired a stripper for our first episode back on the radio. At least Peter McGinley didn’t know that was going to happen!

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: If you go on Facebook and like the Olav Mol page, we actually created that! It has more likes than our own Facebook page oddly enough. A lot of Dutch people write on the Olav Mol page, none of them would dare think it’s run by a couple of Australians!

Michael: I distinctly remember creating this 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 - 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!


You have spoken to some amazing F1 personalities for the show, including Peter Windsor, James Allen, and Olav Mol to name but a few. Who has been your favourite person to interview? Who's next for the Box of Neutrals grilling?

Michael: It’s difficult to play favourites, it’s a bit like trying to choose a favourite child - if none of your children really identified with you and were all somehow far superior in intellect and social standing compared to you. Peter Windsor is one of my favourites, if not just because he normally gives us so much time to talk to him. Craig Scarborough was also a great guy to chat to, I think we had a lot of fun talking to him. Olav Mol may just top the list, though - but I think that’s just because he was happy to catch up in person during the Australian Grand Prix. But I really can’t say I have an absolute favourite.

Rob: It’s hard to pinpoint one. I know it’s very cliché. We do interview Peter Windsor a lot, which we do purely out of self-indulgence as it’s hard not to be fascinated by his stories and wealth of experience. We’ve had some great chats with these F1 personalities, and an honour to do so. I never expected to have a conversation with someone like Peter Windsor, Craig Scarborough, Ben Edwards, Ross Stevenson from Ross and John on 3AW (that’s another story) or James Allen in my life.

Michael: Wait, I changed my mind! Ross Stevenson is my favourite!

Rob: Hands down, it has to be Olav Mol. Probably because he was the first, and only, one we’ve met face-to-face. We wrapped to talk to him, and his editor Eric, at the end of 2010 over the phone. Imagine how giddy we got when we had the chance to meet him!

His interview in Australia was quite easy to organise with. He liaised with us personally, so we didn’t have to wrangle through PR people like if we were to interview, say, Sebastian Vettel.

It almost didn’t happen because we realised we never had his mobile number while he was in Australia after we confirmed our interview with him via email. We knew when he would be arriving in Melbourne, and we knew the hotel he was staying at too.

Earlier that day, we had gone to pick up our own media accreditation, so we were hoping we could bump into him then. I remember I had to handle it because after we picked up our media passes, Michael had to retreat back to his civilian life for a few hours as a media studies teacher at a high school. Too long to explain that story though.

So Peter contacted Melbourne Airport to find out whether his flight had arrived, I contacted Olav’s hotel to see if he’d checked in. We ascertained by about 2pm that he had neither landed nor checked in. We planned to interview him later that evening, so we started to stress out a little.

I almost wrote off the interview, until we managed to find out he’d checked in to the hotel and was actually waiting for us for some time. Except, the hotel never bothered to call me back to tell me that Olav had actually arrived.

Michael: I would like to interrupt this monologue here and point out that it was up to me to get to Olav at this point. I arrived back at the station after teaching a bunch of kids who, while knowing nothing about Formula One, were mildly impressed with Olav Mol’s grasp of the more colourful parts of the English language to find that Rob had gone home.

He went home, I should say, because his house was rather close to the hotel Olav was staying at. But Rob had called the hotel something like three times, and ‘didn’t want to bother them anymore’.

The reception lady gave me the phone number to Olav’s room, which I read aloud to Peter so he could write it down on the computer. I hung up and asked for the number back so I could dial, but Pete had closed the window and erased the number. Genius.

Luckily, we remembered most of it. It took two wrong numbers, but we got him, and sorted for him to be picked up.

I now return you to your scheduled programming.

Rob: So I organised my brother-in-law who was nearby to play chauffeur in his swanky Range Rover to pick him up. We went to the wrong hotel, in peak-hour traffic on a Wednesday night in Melbourne.

Finally found his hotel, thankfully Olav was there. I tried to keep as calm and composed as I could, as I’m naturally a bit hyperactive, and I confirmed with Michael and Peter back at the studios that we were in fact on our way.

Even getting a studio to record in was an absolute pain! For whatever reason, another booking had taken time in the studio so we had no radio studio to record in. So we had to shuffle Olav, and three separate handheld recorders in our General Manager’s office to conduct this interview. It was Box Of Neutrals amateur hour at its finest!

We only had a limited window of time to speak with Olav before he had to go for another engagement, but he was keen on the interview and happily let us run late. He was an absolute joy to have interviewed and met, a very grounded individual.

When Michael and I ferried him back to his hotel, we gave each other a very eager high-five when Olav was out of sight! And just like the media moguls that we thought we were that day, we took the train back to the radio studio and then drove to see An Audience With Joe Saward.

We’re hoping to interview Olav once again, albeit in a far more organised manner. But the dream interviewee would have to be Murray Walker. That was, and still is, the original #1 mission for our show to achieve. So if Mr. Walker happens to read this, mail@boxofneutrals.com

That was a very long answer to your question. Peter Windsor-esque, if I dare say so.

After reading that, I think it’s worth saying that if Box Of Neutrals was some sort of dysfunctional family, I’d see Peter Windsor as our uncle – like the kind of uncle that talks a lot, mostly about the war. And Olav Mol would be like that wacky family friend you have who you call uncle even though you’re not related to him. And he swears a lot.

Pete: They should all be sent to French Island and made into compost.


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!

...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:

Who is, in your opinion, the worst driver in the current grid, or who would you most like to replace?

Michael: That’s tough one, really. When it comes down to it, all drivers are really closely matched. If you gave them all the same machinery to use, they’d be within less than a second of each other.

Rob: I wouldn’t say I see a particularly bad driver on the grid. There are some that don’t particularly inspire me, but if I had a one-on-one race with any driver on the grid, I think I know I’d have to bow down to any active Formula 1 driver. Plus Michael will just vomit.

Pastor Maldonado is one of those drivers that hasn’t particularly inspired me. He does remind me a bit of a new age Pedro Diniz. A lot of backing behind him, has some pace behind him, but hasn’t really shone through this year.

Michael: Agreed. The driver I see the least reason to keep is Pastor Maldonado. He hasn’t really sold himself that well this season, and I feel like that horribly impetuous move on Hamilton at Spa didn’t have the markings of a future star. But, having said that, I think he could be doing significantly better if the car beneath him was up to scratch.

Rob: If Nick Heidfeld were still kicking around, I would’ve said him hands down sadly. He’s had a myriad of chances, he’s been in the sport for a while and sadly I think that’s the last we’ll see of him. Then again, who would’ve thought Narain Karthikeyan would come back this year?

I think Formula 1 is quite lucky to have the calibre of drivers it enjoys this year. Even the ones that aren’t doing particularly well aren’t really disgracing themselves. We haven’t had a Yuji Ide in a long while.

Pete: I’ve got a new enema tool.


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 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, 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.

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. We’d certainly do things a little bit differently, which is probably what Formula 1 needs in Australia. It 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.

Don't forget to come back on read part two of the Box Of Neutrals interview, where we talk about HRT, Crazy Bernie and Pete talks about tolerance. 

So check out the boys podcasts/radio show because you should. It's amaze. 

Online. http://boxofneutrals.com/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/boxofneutrals

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/BoxOfNeutrals 

You can also follow me at twitter @squiffany and Martijn @martijn_kosters