Danger is not 'part of the game'

One of the most striking aspects of the aftermath of any motorsport tragedy, including that of Jules Bianchi, is the number of Monday morning quarterbacks who instantly have all the safety answers.

All the 'obvious' things that should have been done, the clear safety 'failings' and what they would have done differently.

As has been the pattern for several decades now, it's right and proper that the lessons are learned and changes implemented. By definition, such accidents are 'freak' and all efforts should be made to ensure that - within reason - action is taken to prevent a recurrence.

And yet, sometimes when safety changes are implemented in anticipation, rather than in reaction, to an accident we hear complaints about drivers wrapped in cotton wool. 'Health and safety gone mad' is the usual gripe.

But the need to ensure drivers are not endangered and ensuring that there is a punishment for mistakes in terms of performance are not, as some would argue, mutually exclusive.

This should be the objective that not just F1, but motorsport as a whole, works towards to ensure its ongoing appeal.

First and foremost, simply writing off any further safety changes (especially the ones that garner most criticism that are put in place before something goes wrong) is not the right course of action.

Before Bianchi's accident, changes at Monza's Parabolica were criticised © XPB

It's easy to have some sympathy with the argument drivers do have it too easy compared to those of the past and that they should be satisfied with the safety as it already is. Had you asked me a decade ago, I'd probably have shared that opinion.

There is, after all, a certain romance about the heroic racing driver risking their life in the pursuit of excellence.

Drill down into that position a little more; what conclusion do you draw? Well, that injury and death is part of the entertainment.

Some of you are probably railing against that statement. You could argue that it's the risk of serious injury that must be conquered rather than the reality that is the appeal. The heroic drivers do that and live to tell the tale.

But sadly, you cannot have risk without the consequences of it. Embrace the risk that others are taking and you also embrace the consequences.

Is grand prix racing any more entertaining or exciting because Bianchi is no longer with us? No.

It would be wrong to say that, on a visceral level, there is not a certain appeal to knowing that the worst could happen. But that kind of thing is best left in the Colosseum in the days of bread and circuses.

You could argue that it takes more skill to tiptoe that fine line between triumph and disaster without an infallible safety net, and it is a valid position.

The romance of racing of yesteryear is tempered by the driver fatalities © LAT

But the fact is that, contrary to popular belief, to excel in current F1 cars is phenomenally difficult. The standard of drivers in F1 is extremely high and to listen to some of the comments that have been thrown around over the past 18 months you would think any idiot could do it.

They can't. Anyone who thinks that needs to spend a little more time trying to understand the demands of the job and the skill and attention to detail that the best drivers bring to their art.

It is true that it's going to be easier to hone your skill if you know you will be in a fit state to 'get back on your bike' after you have had a fall. But the best will still be the ones that excel.

There are complaints that today's drivers are not heroes anymore. In a way, they aren't - not as they might have been 30, 40, 50 years ago. We know too much about them, they are too immediate, too human.

Perhaps what we need is a more modern definition of heroism; where the real heroism is excelling in an endeavour rather than some mythical bravery of dicing with death.

There's nothing wrong with an individual taking risks. If you want to go and climb a mountain without safety equipment as your own personal challenge, absolutely that should be permitted.

But the frame of reference is a little different when you are participating in a sport that is, fundamentally, an entertainment.

Through the work of individuals such as Sid Watkins, F1 safety has improved © LAT

For an activity that is so indelibly linked to death and injury (Niki Lauda is, after all, venerated as much for his incredible recovery in 1976 as his brilliance behind the wheel) it is difficult to argue too strongly against the idea that drivers know the risks. Of course they do.

And many of them would still excel were 1950s safety standards still in place, but it is the responsibility of motorsport as a whole to implement procedures and facilities that minimise the risk.

The key is that this is not about stopping people doing things; it's about making it possible to show their skill behind the wheel and to pay a proportionate price for errors.

One area that motorsport really needs to get a handle on is the use of run-off area behind the track limits. It's too easy to gain an advantage by running off the track.

How often do you see reigning world champion Lewis Hamilton using this facility? Not a great deal in the course of a normal lap.

This is not just about F1. Last weekend, I went to a club meeting at the excellent Castle Combe circuit in Wiltshire (if you've never been, and you are in the United Kingdom, it's a must for your bucket list).

But in a number of races, drivers received time penalties for using run-off beyond exit rumble strips, in some cases distorting results.

Stewards took a hard-line approach to track limits at Silverstone © LAT

There has to be a halfway house. As argued before, the focus should be on track technology to create something that both satisfies the safety and sporting criteria.

That way, drivers can pay for mistakes in terms of performance without any increased risk of bodily harm.

This is a very taxing question, one that there is no easy answer for, but there are avenues for research that motorsport as a whole needs to pursue to ensure it retains its appeal.

That is what Bianchi's death is a reminder of. Safety standards are dramatically improved and it takes an unusual set of circumstances for the worst to happen.

With each new accident, more is learned about how to avoid them. But no matter how much people complain about mollycoddled modern drivers, you are never going to make hurtling round a track at 100mph or 200mph completely safe.

There will be fatalities again, both in F1 and motorsport as a whole. The key is that the frequency is minimised and that people don't fall into the trap of thinking safety measures are ever perfect.

That certainly won't undermine my enjoyment and appreciation of a great sport.