Poll: Should the TT date be moved
This poll is closed.
Move it
26.67%
12 26.67%
Leave it
73.33%
33 73.33%
Total 45 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

FAO Paul Phillips
oatssi Offline
Junior Member
**

Posts: 24
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 0
#41
RE: FAO Paul Phillips
thewitch Wrote:The Billown races a poor spectacle.. what rubbish!smilie
Call them TT or not that 250 was epic

No it wasn't. The first 8 laps were a decent race but you'll see plenty of decent races on the same circuit next week with a much better class of entry.

thewitch Wrote:Oatssi... what you on today, boy, or are you doing an FC and winding us up!?smilie

It was steak pie, mashed potato and carrots. I could ask you the same question. You agree with just about everything in my post and then tell me off. Bizzare and confusing to say the least.

thewitch Wrote:the 250 list is a waste of time...

Have to disagree with you there. The race doesn't necessarily need to be a grid of two strokes. The point is there are bikes and riders out there to improve the specticle. It just needs to idea floating (e.g., on here) and someone to take it forward (Paul).

...and by the way the vast majority of fans want to see racing not practicing. I can see the attraction of practice though - the riders start in pairs!

Good luck with the change of focus for 2009 Paul. I am not sure what was needed to make the event more defensible. We have seen things like a change in organiser, an increase in prohibited areas, charging for car parking and grandstands, no real increase in safety defenses. Most of these things caused the head sratching but you mention that all of these things are not your responsibility? Also, does your statistic of 9 podium riders include the Billown TT races? They were 'TT races' after all.

Back to the case in point, I suspect there was more chaos caused by the amount of emergency road closures this year than would be caused by an afternoon practice session which is planned months in advance. I think everyone needs a rethink on that one.

My other point was that most of what is suggested will never happen. The reason is that more time is spent pleasing health and safety and local people and there is no appetite to take these parties on or even negotiate with them. The next bow will be to the tree huggers who only want to see clean emission races!
PaddockGossip.com
30-06-2008, 02:35 PM
Website Find Reply


Messages In This Thread
FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 26-06-2008, 10:31 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Tom Loughridge - 27-06-2008, 11:24 AM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by cargo - 27-06-2008, 12:04 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by DCLUCIE - 27-06-2008, 12:48 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 27-06-2008, 01:17 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 27-06-2008, 01:58 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by DCLUCIE - 27-06-2008, 03:44 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 27-06-2008, 04:31 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by DCLUCIE - 27-06-2008, 08:50 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by The Bag - 27-06-2008, 04:11 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by ali - 27-06-2008, 04:22 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Ben Oates - 27-06-2008, 04:26 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 27-06-2008, 04:38 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Ben Oates - 27-06-2008, 05:27 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by sticky - 27-06-2008, 07:52 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 27-06-2008, 05:40 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by DCLUCIE - 27-06-2008, 09:05 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by hilary R - 27-06-2008, 05:46 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by missbiker - 27-06-2008, 05:47 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 27-06-2008, 06:50 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by missbiker - 27-06-2008, 08:57 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 27-06-2008, 09:15 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 27-06-2008, 09:42 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Ben Oates - 27-06-2008, 11:15 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by sticky - 27-06-2008, 11:23 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by chris - 27-06-2008, 11:45 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Chris Thackeray - 28-06-2008, 12:09 AM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Don Simons - 28-06-2008, 02:06 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Michael - 28-06-2008, 08:06 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 28-06-2008, 08:31 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by HermioneGranger - 28-06-2008, 11:55 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by oatssi - 29-06-2008, 02:12 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 29-06-2008, 02:41 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Ben Oates - 29-06-2008, 07:29 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by scruffy - 29-06-2008, 07:56 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by oatssi - 30-06-2008, 02:35 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by jasjas - 29-06-2008, 05:25 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 29-06-2008, 06:29 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 29-06-2008, 09:00 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Paul Phillips - 29-06-2008, 10:13 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by samwise - 30-06-2008, 02:50 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 29-06-2008, 11:47 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 30-06-2008, 05:20 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by oatssi - 30-06-2008, 10:51 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by ian huntly - 30-06-2008, 05:54 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 30-06-2008, 06:10 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 30-06-2008, 11:16 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by oatssi - 30-06-2008, 11:32 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 30-06-2008, 11:39 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by thewitch - 01-07-2008, 08:14 AM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by cargo - 01-07-2008, 08:24 AM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Arthur Lawn - 01-07-2008, 05:42 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 01-07-2008, 05:46 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by Arthur Lawn - 01-07-2008, 07:48 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by FC - 01-07-2008, 08:34 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by degsy24 - 02-07-2008, 08:52 PM
RE: FAO Paul Phillips - by alf885 - 02-07-2008, 09:04 PM



Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)