Skip to content

Gearing Up for the 2013 F1 Season

Screen shot 2013-03-07 at 6.13.19 PM.png

The 2013 F1 season begins on March 17 — a week from this Sunday. The bad news is that I don’t know jack about F1; the good news is that readers Carlos and Omar Jalife know plenty about it. They’ve written design reviews for each of the 11 F1 teams, and I’m going to be rolling them out over the course of the next week. We begin today with the first three of their reviews. Carlos and Omar, take it away….


By Carlos and Omar Jalife

Caterham Racing Team

The Livery: Caterham has decided to go with two major changes in this year’s livery. The first is using a lighter tone of green than the ones they had been using for the past three years, which is also the original green used by English teams back in the ’60s, when each country had an assigned color. The second change is that the yellow line on the nose is now gone, which drastically alters the green-to-yellow ratio. Too bad, since the yellow was part of the team’s identity and now the livery looks more like the Jaguar team from last decade.

The front spoiler, as you can see in those last pictures, is being invaded by BFBS. There’s no apparent reason for this, as the sponsors don’t seem to be part of the change. The same thing is happening on the rear wing and the sidepods, which are now half black. In addition, the rear wing lost its yellow line, which now goes on the side wing.

Vanity panel: No vanity panel for Caterham.

Fire suit: Surprisingly, the green tone of the fire suits has not changed at all. In fact, nothing about the fire suit design has changed. However, you can see that the shoes now have gray instead of black on the inside.

Helmets: Charles Pic and Giedo van der Garde have made minor changes to their helmets. In the case of Pic, it is a shame to see him change the red letters in his design to yellow, which means the helmet no longer resembles the French flag as much as it did last year. He’s also made both Ps merge in the back. For those of you with a keen eye, you’ve probably noticed the coolest detail in all F1 helmets: the Eiffel Tower behind the letters.

Van der Garde is using the same helmet he has used since arriving to the team (he used to be the test driver). However, we preferred when he used to include the Dutch national flag colors on it.

Carlos’s Verdict: The nose and fire suit look awful without the yellow stripe. C+

Omar’s Verdict: They changed from copying a winning car’s scheme to copying a lousy car’s scheme. B-

Scuderia Ferrari

The Livery: Okay, everybody knows Ferrari is red and this will never change. Yes, you can throw them lots of money and have the sidepods painted yellow with your logo, but that’s as much as you’re going to get. Among the changes in the livery is the BFBS arrival, which can be seen on the exhaust area (#4 in this picture), on the lower part of the rear wing (#7), and on the upper part of the front wing where it joins the nose. The color change to a brighter red is due to HD TVs. In the past, Ferrari has used an orange/red tone that translates to Rosso Corsa on TV. However, with the arrival of HD transmissions, Ferrari can now use their real red.

On that same picture, you can see they added a white line on the lower part of the car that reaches all the way to the front wing. On the rear wing, instead of having the upper half painted white, they decided to just paint a white line in the middle of it. The floor of the front wing is now red instead of white.

Last but not least, Ferrari has normally used a small Italian flag on the front of the nose. This year they have decided to extend such motif almost to the driver’s cockpit, and it looks really nice.

Vanity panel: Ferrari was strongly against the platypus noses last year and has stayed true to that principle by using a beauty panel for 2013.

Fire suit: There are four changes in the 2013 fire suit, but only one of them is major. Ferrari has decided to add white sleeves (compare to last year), which looks rather odd. They have also extended the Italian flag on the side so that it reaches the ankle instead of being cut at shin level. The shoes are slightly different, but I’m guessing that’s not Ferrari’s choice and it is completely done by Puma. Finally, just below the chest sponsor, two white motifs have been added.

Helmets: Alonso’s helmet is virtually unchanged, except that the Spaniard is now using gray on the back, instead of white. He has also added a bluer panel on top, for no apparent reason. The Victory Cross — he is from Asturias — is missing on the lower part but we will probably see it in the inaugural race.

Massa made no changes except for darkening the top green panel.

Carlos’s Verdict: Ferrari should always be red, but the white and black details don’t look so bad. A

Omar’s Verdict: The red Ferrari is always a beauty, but every year is less red. B+

Lotus F1 Team

The Livery: Don’t fix it if it ain’t broken, right? In Lotus’s case, last year’s livery was one of the best in the F1 grid (based on the old JPS colors that ran from 1972 to 1986). So the hope here was that they’d stick with it.

Unfortunately, it’s not to be. For 2013, Lotus has scrapped the red rearview mirrors (old) and lateral front wing limits (old) and instead chosen to put red in the side pods (old) and add a red section on top of the car to put their driver’s name (not the first time a team has done this). They also reduced the amount of red in the back wing (old) which counts as a plus. And, finally, the front wing is stylized with red and gold elements when you look it from the front view. All these changes basically turn one of the best cars in the grid into, well, an awful mix of black, gold, and red.

Also, the legendary Lotus logo, which adorned the back of the cockpit, is now gone. But they’ve kept the one on the tip of the nose. The three stars that symbolize each of the titles obtained by the team will remain in front of the driver’s cockpit.

A small detail: Just above the top red part of the livery is the hashtag #imsexyandiknowit.

Vanity Panel: Not for Lotus for now (although they said they could change their mind).

Fire Suits: Some minor changes. As you might guess, some red accents are involved. The red is now on the front part of the shoulders and under the arms through the length of the sleeve. Also, no more fangs below the waist (which were present in the old design), since the golden line is now straight and sectioned at the end, with no red accents until the ankle.

Helmets: Grosjean was spotted with a whiter helmet with possibly minor changes from last year (here’s his old version). Raikkonen changed his helmet number, as he will no longer be in car number 9, and also made minor changes in the design.

Carlos’s Verdict: Certainly the E20 wasn’t as clean as the JPS liveries, but the E21 further distances this design from Lotus history. B

Omar’s Verdict: Red, black, and gold: You can mix two but not all three together. C

+ + + + +

Uni Watch News Ticker: The federal trademark challenge to the Redskins’ team name went back to court yesterday. ”¦ Meanwhile, there’s more about the Cooperstown School District dropping the team name “Redskins” here and here (from Rick DiRubbo and Eric Hawkins). ”¦ The Knicks wore Noche Latina jerseys last night. Note that the chest lettering included white outlining that isn’t used on their standard jerseys. “It made the wordmark nigh-illegible,” says Robert Silverman. ”¦ There are convenience stores, and then there’s a convenient store. Heather McCabe’s brother Richard spotted that in Chicago. ”¦ “Found this photo of my company softball team from 1985,” says Ronnie Poore. “That’s me on the front row, far right, kneeling. Looks like high stirrups were the style at the time. I believe we later got logos on the caps.” ”¦ NYC pay phones will be getting a design makeover (thanks, Phil). ”¦ Oklahoma baseball went G.I. Joe the other day (from Dayne Lawson). ”¦ Whoa, check out the amazing letterhead used by a 1920s telegraph pole company (big thanks to James Ashby). ”¦ Here’s more about the controversy regarding the Team Canada women’s hockey team wearing Livestrong-themed uniforms. ”¦ This is pretty great: A White Sox fan who prefers not to be named was looking at some 1993 footage and spotted a decal of the Chicago city flag on Carlton Fisk’s brimless catcher’s helmet. ”¦ Hmmm, Bill Russell wearing “Celtics” and a teammate wearing “Boston.” What’s that about? (From Tyler Kepner.) ”¦ Before last night’s Leafs/Bruins game, the Bruins celebrated the 95th birthday of former player Milt Schmidt, who did for the ceremonial pregame puck drop and wore a pretty rad sweater for the occasion. “I searched the internet for pictures and couldn’t find any shot of him with the captain’s C between the numbers,” says Bobby Pinkham. “In fact, when the Bruins wore that particular jersey, they did not have any captaincy patch.” ”¦ Here’s a video clip showing how Arizona State decided to update Sparky (from Chet Gole).

Comments (134)

    Lotus, not “Fotus”.

    Also, was so rad seeing Milt in the NOF sweater last night. I love the current Bruins identity, but they had some absolute beauties back in the day.

    It’s too bad they didn’t do it right. The outlines on the numbers and the sleeve Bs should have been bolder, and cramming a C between the 1 and 5 on the front was just dumb.

    Then I scroll down a couple of comments to see that it DID happen where he had a C between the numbers at some point…

    … but it still looks dumb.

    I can’t express how disappointed I am that those were Latino heritage jerseys with pretend Spanish, rather than Latin jerseys. You know, in honor of the Pope’s retirement/Vatican conclave/whatever.

    The White Sox had the Chicago flag on their helmets for the first couple of seasons they wore the current black and silver set. For some reason, I keep thinking that the flag disappeared when the MLB logo began to appear on the helmets.

    Good call on the White Sox wearing the Chicago city flag on their helmets in 1990. A supposedly authentic Robin Ventura helmet from that season shows not only the Chicago flag, but also the American and Canadian flags:


    This very picture appeared in Uni Watch several years ago.


    “This is a is a 1937-1938 photo of Milt Schmidt wearing a crude mask. Here’s a later photo of Schmidt – look how his captain’s C is between the two numerals. Both photos ran in Sport magazine in 1948.”

    The Bruins went to the “middle C” after the war. They also ditched a gold “road” uniform they were wearing in 1944. The uniforms pictured were worn from 1940-1948. Schmidt was part of the Kraut Line, named for their German names, from 1940-42 before the line enlisted in the Royal Canadian Air Force from 1942-1945. The line returned to hockey action during the 1945-46 season.

    The problem is that Dit Clapper was the Bruins’ captain from 1939-1946. In 1946-47, Jack Crawford wore the “C” for 58 games after Clapper was named as player-coach (the only one in Bruins history) before Clapper stepped down as coach with six games to play and was renamed as captain. Crawford was again named as the captain in 1947-48 after Clapper retired, and he held this title until 1950.

    Milt Schmidt became captain in 1950-51, but the Bruins were wearing the spoked-B at that time. Therefore, I can’t see how Schmidt was pictured wearing the captain’s C in any picture because (a) he wasn’t the captain when the Bruins wore that style of sweater and (b) he was captain long after that sweater had been retired.

    Just as an aside, Crawford, who was the alternate captain while Clapper was the captain, wore his “A” on the left side of his #6.

    So when did Schmidt wear the “C” from ’45-48? I can’t find any proof of him being the captain anywhere.

    By the way, I’m not saying he didn’t wear the “C”. Clearly, that photo of him in the captain’s sweater against the Red Wings with a very young Gordie Howe in the background would place the image in either the ’46-47 or ’47-48 season – the only two seasons the Bruins’ sweaters of that style were worn with Schmidt in them.

    Based on the eBay find, maybe Schmidt was the captain in 1947-48 despite the internet not knowing?

    The Toronto Maple Leafs were the first team to wear the Captain’s “C” beginning in 1946-47. If other teams followed the Leafs then so be it. But the Blue & White did it first. Period.

    As true as that may be, Terry, the Boston Bruins matched Toronto in wearing a letter on their uniforms in the same season. link while Crawford started the season with an “A” on the left side of his #6 in 1946-47. I have found two photos of him wearing the “A” on his sweater from that season as well.

    As for Schmidt, he link! I located this team photo and Schmidt is clearly wearing the “C” in the front row. Two seats to the right, you can see Crawford with the “A” on his sweater again.

    Mystery solved. Now it’s time to correct the vast number of internet lists that have these facts wrong. LOL!

    When I find cool stuff where should I e-mail it to? My e-mails in recent history have not become entries. Maybe they’re not cool enough but I just want to make sure.

    Also, I am interested in having a Uni Watch party in Chicago. What would be the best way to go about? Thanks Paul.

    Hi, Marc-Louis…

    The best address for sending Ticker submissions is uniwatching at gmail. I don’t end up using every submission I receive (if I did, the Ticker would be many times larger than it is now, and I’d be working on it 24/7), so I’m sorry if yours haven’t made the cut, but don’t give up!

    I haven no current plans to visit Chicago, so I won’t be convening a Uni Watch party there any time soon. But you’re welcome to convene your own UW party without me (I’ve been encouraging people to do this for years, actually). If you want to organize this, I can post something about it on the site next week.

    One: F-1 helmet for Fernando Alozono looks like it has a two aces in a slot on the back anyone know what that is about? (I think the aces are for his championships, cannot figure the slot)

    Two: Canada and Livestrong Foundation. Aesthetically I like it from a branding point of view it is a colossal fail. All three involved (Livestrong, Hockey Canada, and Nike) should be shunned.

    There may be a better explanation for Russell’s uniform, but my recollection is that he felt he played for the Celtics, not for Boston, after his atrocious treatment by some of the “fans” in Boston’s racist heyday.

    No idea why he’s wearing a “Boston” jersey while Bill Russell’s wearing a “Celtics” one, but #20 is Larry Siegfried. Perhaps Siegfried packed the wrong road uniform for the trip to Philly?

    I worded my post poorly, I didn’t mean to suggest “alternate” jersey so much as a back-up or replacement jersey. It’s curious though: Russell sports a “Celtics” jersey in virtually every image of him I’ve ever seen. But of the few images I’ve seen where he’s wearing a “Boston” uniform, he’s noticeably young.


    Siegfried, on the other hand, didn’t enter the NBA until the 1963-64 season, by which time Russell was an established veteran.

    Nice work Omar and Carlos!
    I’m an F1 novice with a couple of questions regarding car numbers (I’m surprised that they aren’t more prominent and plentiful on the cars):
    Are car #’s assigned by F1?
    Are F1 drivers closely associted with their car #?

    Thanks guys.
    Numbers wise: The F1 (FIA is the governing body who rules F1) assigns each team a number depending on the following factors. The champion wears #1 and his teammate #2. Then the numbers are in couples for each team depending on the position they achieved during the constructors championship (if the constructors champion is where the drivers champion runs then everything is “normal” but when they are different teams then the constructors champion will start with 3 and 4). Then each team assigns the number to each of its drivers as they think best. In ’93 and ’94 the champion of the previous year retired from F1 (Mansell and Prost) so Williams had to use 0 and 2.
    There are some in the past but right now is something not very important to them as in Nascar.

    Car numbers in F1 are assigned to teams annually in sequential order by the FIA, the sport’s governing body, based on the highest finish in the overall points standings of the teams’ drivers at the end of the previous year. Series champion Sebastian Vettel’s car will carry #1, and his teammate Mark Webber’s car will be #2, even though Webber finished 6th in the overall standings last year. Runner-up Fernando Alonso will run #3, and his teammate Felipe Massa shall be #4 despite his 7th-place finish, and on down the table. The sport presently does not assign #13 to any car, and a car numbered 13 hasn’t run in F1 since 1963.

    Should’ve also mentioned, thanks very much for the work, Omar and Carlos! Especially enjoy the driver helmets being included–when the cars are at speed and liveried so similarly, and the numbers so small like you mentioned, Chris, the driver’s helmet is really the most reliable way to identify one teammate from another on the track, and you’ll hear race commentators do the same frequently during a broadcast.

    Sorry, I was completely wrong about the assignment of car numbers after 1 and 2, it is by the team’s position in the constructors championship like Carlos and other said, not by the drivers’ results. I’ll stop now.

    I only have 2 real gripes. First, it is a front wing, not a front spoiler. Second, I’m not real sure you can call Ferrari’s black BFBS when they have a history of running with black wings. (Both front and back)

    My mistake, you can see we used the correct term in the other teams. I’m calling it BFBS because it’s creeping in places it normally didn’t appear and growing. Besides, the last time they used the black wings was in the 1998 so they had gotten rid of it for a long time.

    Also any black bodywork around the exhaust exists is usually heat resistive bodywork as opposed to the regular carbon fibre.


    Adding to my earlier comment, you can see Ferrari has a history of using Red, White, and Black on their cars.

    The second picture in the ticker item about the Knicks Noche Latina uniforms shows JR Smith wearing the old style Knicks uni, not the current one for this season.

    “Hello, New York City?”

    “Yes, it’s the 90s calling. We want your pay phones.”

    Seriously, I didn’t realize there were such things in cities anymore, except a very few smatterings here or there. Only in NYC, apparently.

    They’re still around, every once in a while you’ll even see somebody using one. They’re kind of like technological flotsam, police/fire call boxes being another.

    I like that, “technological flotsam.”

    I notice ’em at gas stations, maybe once every couple months … on a city corner maybe 2-3x year. Most have loooong since been removed.

    I was curious why NYC (and possibly other cities) would want to keep pay phones around in this day and age; I came across this ’07 article which shed some light on this:


    “…New York’s still-abundant pay-phone kiosks generate considerable cash from advertising, and the city gets a hefty share of it. Since 2001, pay-phone revenues from ads have exceeded revenues from calls, of which the city gets a 10 percent cut. The city gets a bigger cut–26 percent–of the ad money.”

    Can’t let this go by without mentioning NYC pay phones actually worked during the 2003 blackout and Hurricane Sandy. They should be in no hurry to get rid of them.

    Dolphins new logo partially leaked? Brian Hartline’s girlfriend tweeted a picture of him signing his new contract at team facility and it appears to have the new logo in it.


    Whoa, great catch, Elliott! Yeah, everybody, take a look at the logo on the table in that pic. It is different–note that the sunburst is over the dolphin’s tail, not under it like in previous logos. The dolphin appears to be a lot sleeker than previous logos (or the whale-like, “you can’t have a sunburst underwater” one that got leaked 2.5 months ago).

    i am not sure if i buy that. it looks a lot more angular than the old log and some of the lines are thinner and pointer

    I think they are the same. The angle of the Hartline photo makes things look pointy, etc.

    I guess its possible but to me they look completely different. And odd that the Hartline photo looks exactly like the version that’s been circulating for awhile now

    No, it’s just a perspective thing. Remember that the leaked logo also had extra spikes in the sunburst which clearly aren’t in the original photo.

    It’s a weirdly inaccurate logo with the positioning of the dolphin behind part of the sunburst… but it’s not the new logo unless they decided to scrap the leaked version entirely and just made that minor modification to the old one.

    damn! F1 paint schemes, and helmets! i could look at pics all day, really…

    GREAT work Carlos and Omar… can’t wait to see more of your work

    If Washington was to change there name ,how about the Washington Sentinals keep the colours as they are including the helmet but use the old R logo with a W instead ,I think this would kelp maintain tradition in transition ,I think it would be acceptable to everyone!

    @ ChrisH, cars numbers are decided by a few factors. The WDC from the previous season gets the #1, his teammate gets #2, all other numbers are set by the WCC standings.

    WDC- World Driving Champion
    WCC- World Contructors Champion

    It seems the Knicks “Noche Latina” jerseys last night had what is supposed to be the road version of the script, which has the white outline. I guess they (Adidas?) only made one version of “Nueva York” to put on both jerseys.

    So now we have to ask why the Dolphins had an inaccurate logo on their table. That logo clearly depicts the Dolphin jumping through the sunburst (as if it were a ring of fire or some such thing), rather than in front of it.

    C’mon Paul you are better than that. It is easy to see that those 2 photos are not the same

    or I should say those 2 LOGOS are not the same. So I guess the Braves really didn’t plan on using the screaming brave logo on their cap either. Cause they told us so

    Omar and Carlos,
    Could the black paint at the rear of F-1 cars have a different compound (and be black) because of heat generated from engines and exhaust?

    I think it is as the texture in close ups looks different. However, it wasn’t like that in the past years though the exhausts are in the same place

    Omar and Carlos, have you guys been paying attention to testing? What do you think about where it looks like Ferrari has placed the front camera pods?

    You mean this? link

    Those extensions to the camera pods are for aerodynamic measurment purposes. Not every team uses them but some others use it in different variations McLaren link
    Marussia link

    I mean the actual camera pods which are commonly places around the nose. (Like this: link)
    In this pic (link) it appears to be on top of the front wing, inside the mounts.

    Ok, now I see (while looking for other pic in the previous comment found this one link) sure looks like a camera but not quite sure. As far as I know, teams are required to have them and they just check if the position the TV wants them does not alter anything in the aerodynamic. I’m guessing we will have to wait until Australian GP to see.

    Although, they are clearly not in the studio pics link or the live presentation link

    I have noticed that teams like Ferrari that do a in-house launches tend not to include the camera pods.

    The player wearing “Boston” in the Russell shot is Larry Siegfried, a fine guard on several Celtics championship teams. He was also on those great early-60s Ohio State teams with John Havlicek and Jerry Lucas (and benchwarmer Bob Knight).

    Challenging the federal trademark for the Washington football team isn’t gonna help. Instead of getting fans to accept the name change, we’re gonna have fans polarized against change.

    “we’re gonna have fans polarized against change.”


    Gonna? Pretty sure we’re already there. And will be. For a while.

    It’s similar (IMHO) to gun control, SSM, and any other host of social issues over which the nation seems polarized and seemingly intractable. One side will “win” (a term that really shouldn’t be applicable in situations such as these) and the other will be deeply disappointed, possibly bitter and resentful. Sadly, many times change (because compromise is apparently a ‘dirty’ word these days) can only be brought about by legislative fiat or court order.

    Sorry for the late reply.

    What I mean is that if we want to convince a decently sized group of people to be for the name change, then the best option is to hammer away at the opposition. The more you expose the reasons for the name change, the more people will align for the name change. Hell, two years ago, I would have thought that everyone for the Redskins’ name change was just a weepy bleedin’ heart, and now I’m batting for the other team.

    Unfortunately, you’re right, the courts will probably have to step in. I find it highly unlikely that the courts would now revoke the trademark, with the amount of money the NFL could lobby at governmental agencies to protect their marketing trademark. Because this is about marketing after all, neither the NFL or the Redskins would want to lose money.

    If they do win, that’s good I guess. I’d rather get the tooth pulled now then have to sit with it for the next, what, ten years? The name change wouldn’t happen for another three years even if the trademark was thrown out.

    tl;dr, it’ll take time people. We need to let this idea work it’s course. Many are still closed-minded to the name change, and let us let them get acclimated to the cold pool water.

    Couldn’t tell you why, but I’ve always been super fascinated by brimless catchers helmets. In fact, I threw a fit of joy several years ago when I thought Saltalamacchia was wearing one, only to find out he was just wearing his helmet brim-forward. Actually, my very first DIY project was probably creating my very own brimless helmet as a 5 or 6 year old. I had a blue plastic helmet shell with a separate white plastic brim and ear cover piece bolted on. Figured out that I could remove the bolts, pry off the white piece, throw on the new mask I got for my birthday and voila, I was a big league catcher. It was either that or my “custom” facemasks on my plastic Cowboys helmet.

    Um, not everybody has a cell phone, you know, especially poor people and the elderly. Around 10% of the population, I believe. You may not have much sympathy for people who just refuse to adapt, but a lot of people simply can’t afford them.

    Where I live, the poor people seem to have the BEST cell phones. I think it’s a good indication as to why they’re poor.

    I really don’t like the gray trim on the Knicks. Its just superfluous. It serves no purpose other than to distract.

    “… Whoa, check out the amazing letterhead used by a 1920s telegraph pole company (big thanks to James Ashby). …”

    Thanks, Paul; thanks, James.

    Also don’t know jack about F1 except that logo is a fine use of negative space; it reminded me of the NB New Balance logo; and those Ecclestones that are always all over Daily Mail.

    Or it could be arabic? I really have no clue, but I remember that being used as an example of how FedEx puts their neg. space arrow into other languages.

    Haha I’d never noticed it before you mentioned it but it’s so blatantly there. I usually see things like that. Can’t believe I’ve missed that one for so long.

    It’s also there in every exit sign…

    …and in pretty much every situation where a capital “E” is followed by a capital “X.”

    I see it more as when a capital “E” would be followed by a lower-case “x”, as in FedEx, no?

    And I guess to clarify, I’d never realized how intentional it seems, that the “x” meets at the perfect height with the “E” to form a more recognizable arrow than with the EXIT sign, which would create more of a double tailed arrow.

    The space between the E and X in an EXIT sign isn’t an arrow.

    Yes, most instances of a capital E followed by a lowercase X will result in an arrow-like shape – but there’s usually a space between the letters to prevent it from being a true arrow. The FedEx arrow is intentional, and isn’t just a result of the letters.

    Oh give me a fucking break. From the article: “Although many people do not know, the m-word is derogatory,…”

    If no one knows that a word is supposed to be derogatory, then it isn’t actually derogatory anymore, is it?

    It’s just like any other word that has taken years and years to become offensive to a majority of people or derogetory. The M-word just hasn’t, apparently, been offensive long enough to enough people.

    Now that you know it is, the ball is in your court.

    Offensiveness can only be measured by the recieving end of a comment/word.

    If no one knows that a word is supposed to be derogatory, then it isn’t actually derogatory anymore, is it?

    Exactly. At what point is intent taken into account? I can certainly see why certain people might find a term offensive but don’t agree that they should in the given context. Idk, maybe it’s not my call to make. I have Crohn’s disease, which has caused me to lose a lot of weight. I hate it when somebody will say “you’re so skinny!” because it bothers me that I’ve lost all the weight that I have. And it’s rarely used with negative connotation (quite the opposite usually), but it still bothers me. But to demand that anybody stop using the word “skinny” because it bothers me when people say it about me is absolutely absurd. Agreed that this argument could be considered apples/oranges in some cases, but the point remains. Anyone can find any term offensive for any reason and nobody can refute that it is offensive to that person, but it would be insane to let that control our language. Intent has to be considered. Judgement has to be used. Not everything can be black or white. Some things are just gray.

    “Hey, you’re standing on my foot.”

    “Really? Huh. Well, I didn’t mean to.”

    “Um, could you please stop doing it? It’s kind of annoying and uncomfortable.”

    “That’s your problem. I didn’t mean to do it, after all.”

    “Skinny” is an offensive, pejorative, ethic slur and a term for Somali militia fighters.

    Yeah, “M-word”

    Martinka says, “I hope Addie takes away the knowledge that she can bring change.”

    I wonder how much of this word policing is practiced by those that just want to “bring change”, and aren’t the least bit offended whatsoever.

    In reply to Paul,

    Apples/oranges. Your point is valid. Absolutely. But so was mine. I won’t ask you to stop using “skinny”, but I guess if I did you would have to by your own reasoning.

    My point was that, contrary to the argument put forth in your previous comment, “intent” is not a particularly good barometer by which to base something’s appropriateness.

    Case in point: I don’t think even the most vociferous opponents of the name “Redskins” think that the team’s management is intentionally trying to offend anyone with the team name. But that doesn’t de facto mean that the name is therefore suitable.

    I’m not taking a position either way on “midget”; I’m simply pointing out that the argument you put forth is intellectually suspect.

    In addition to “Skinny” being an offensive, pejorative, ethic slur and a term for Somali militia fighters, an “Apple” is a slur describing an American Indian, who is “Red on the outside, and white on the inside”.

    It never ends!

    In response to Paul,

    I understand and I don’t fully disagree. Especially with your “Redskins” example, which is why I left that particular example out of my previous post.

    I guess to clarify further, what I’m really trying to get across is that judgement and intent together would be a better measurement. Re-reading, I mentioned but didn’t do an excellent job of explaining the judgement side. When I say judgement must be used, I mean on part of said “offender”. We all can agree there are words, such as slurs of racial or homophobic nature that wouldn’t be acceptable in any context. But when someone uses good judgement when choosing words, and avoids phrases with negative connotation, i.e. “skinny as shit” etc., intent makes all the difference. I guess the counter to that would be that when being negligent with judgement, i.e. “Redskins”, intent makes little to no difference.

    I’m sorry, I’m really not trying to be argumentative, but there has to be a line somewhere. I think intent with good judgement gives us all a stick to draw the line with.

    Promise I’ll let this one go now. Sorry.

    “Bye, bye “midget” hockey and football.”



    Not sure where you’re getting that — it’s certainly not in the article and no one (that I’m aware of) is suggesting changing the names of either the hockey or football designations.

    That being said, it might not be such a bad thing to raise awareness that the term “midget” is potentially offensive, just as “retard” or “retardation” (despite them being legitimate and correct terms for things other than human development) are now considered “offensive” to the developmentally disabled community.

    Not trying to be argumentative, but instead of us (as a whole) reflexively rolling collective eyes and saying “oh, for fucks sake” or “give me a break,” maybe we could just simply use synonyms like “mite” hockey (or junior or what have you), just as though one day we will refer to those with mental retardation as having “developmental disabilities”.

    See, that wasn’t so hard.

    In reply to Phil, it is fascinating that when this subject comes up, it touches nerves like no other. We get the condescending “Um.’s” and “See, that wasn’t so hard.” Every. Single. Time.

    I apologize that trying to make a point by trying to be cute with the “bye bye midget . . .” not realizing it had to match the article to satisfy you. Didn’t mean to direct the content. My mistake.

    “it is fascinating that when this subject comes up, it touches nerves like no other…”


    I wasn’t trying to be condescending by using “Um” or “that wasn’t so hard” and I apologize if you took it that way. But clearly your use of “it is fascinating…” is a clear shot at Paul (who used that term twice a couple of weekends ago); whatever. Clearly, we’re off to a bad start.

    My point, and thank you for providing me with two examples of where someone finds “midget” offensive in regard to its use with “midget football” (or hockey or auto racing), probably wasn’t made clear. And personally, I don’t necessarily find the term to be offensive, but it’s not about me (or you).

    One of the people who was referenced in the second article you posted equated the word “midget” with “retard.” Now you may not personally (nor may I) find “retard” to be a derogatory term, but some obviously do.

    What I find troubling (not with you, but with a large segment of the population in general) is the reaction: e.g. “Oh, for Christ sake, now (insert term) is offensive. Can’t the word police just get off their high horses.” And I don’t think this is necessarily an unnatural reaction. But instead of perhaps trying to understand why some might consider the term offensive or simply saying, “OK, what is a more preferable term,” it seems most people find it’s a tremendous inconvenience, almost offensive to their own sensibilities, and push back.

    “Well, fuck you, I don’t find “retard” (or “midget”) offensive so who the hell are you to tell me I shouldn’t say it.” “OH, so now we gotta change the name of the sports division?” As if this is somehow an attack against mothers and apple pie. Seriously, would it really be so bad to refer to the “midget” league as “11-12 hockey” or “mite hockey” (or pick almost any other designation)?

    Yes, maybe 50 years ago neither of these terms were considered offensive, but 100 years ago a majority probably didn’t consider the term “nigger” to be offensive. Yet today the term is not used. We’re not talking about renaming a professional football team, where there are other arguments (mostly monetary) that can be used to justify keeping that name (and lets not rehash those arguments). We’re simply talking about the name for a division (age group) for a youth sports league. Is it really that big of a deal to call it something other than “midget”?

    Am I saying “midget” belongs in the same category of “offensiveness” as “nigger” or “retard”? Not necessarily, but we’ve basically refrained from using one and are on the way to removing another from our lexicon. I really don’t think it’s that big of a deal to do so. That’s why I was said “that wasn’t so hard” earlier — not to be condescending or snarky, but to literally point out that in the overall scheme of things, finding another designation for the current “midget” isn’t really that difficult.

    Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. But . . .

    First, you weren’t “trying to be condescending”. Is that not unlike not *intending* to be offensive? Really, think about that for a moment, and compare it to Paul’s “standing on my foot” analogy.

    All I did was post a timely, on-topic link to an article about someone who was offended by a word that many now call the “M word” – midget.

    To draw attention to the article, I added “Midget is now officially offensive. Bye, bye “midget” hockey and football”. I still fail to see what was so bothersome with that. Some *are* trying to change the usage of the word midget with respect to these programs. That’s a fact. I bet the use of the word midget with sports programs will disappear within ten years, and that auto racing will be the last to comply.

    I have not posted an opinion whether or not I think the pickle lady’s position is ridiculous. No one, including you, knows my opinion.

    But too often here, all it takes is someone to simply post a link, and if the poster is presumed to be pro-Native American imagery or anti-PC, the knives come out, and it gets personal. I don’t think it’s good form.

    I’ll say it again, this topic touches nerves like no other before it. I do find it truly fascinating – that’s the perfect word, but I’ll ratchet it down – it’s intriguing. It’s also head scratching. I didn’t deserve the tone, all I did was post a link to the article about midget pickles.

    OK, but “Oh, for Christ sake, now (insert term) is offensive” is a perfectly appropriate reaction if you insert “black hole”, “niggardly”, “tar baby”, “horehound” and commandeered words like “Monday” for example, even though plenty of people ignorant to the true meaning find these words offensive.

    Thank you for your reply.

    No, I shouldn’t put words into your mouth or assume you have a “stand” on something when you didn’t actually take one. My bad. However…

    “I wonder how much of this word policing is practiced by those that just want to “bring change”, and aren’t the least bit offended whatsoever.”

    When you make a statement like that, I do infer that you have a problem with those who seek to change wording (for whatever reason). Otherwise you wouldn’t have said it — if you weren’t opposed to a possible renaming of “midget ______” why would you have even made a statement like that?

    And if that is not your position (opposed to renaming “midget ______”), I would ask why you used such loaded language as “word policing.” Unless, of course, you’re simply playing ‘devil’s advocate’ with every scenario (such as your ridiculous examples of “apples” and “skinny” being offensive to some). And if you think I’m being as ridiculous with “midget,” consider this: “midget” is a specific medical term that

    refers to a person who is very short, but normally proportioned. The term midget is now rarely used and is considered offensive. But its usage was very common until the end of the twentieth century. It has given way to “Short person” or “little person”.

    Again, I’m not saying the term specifically offends me, but it does offend some. So what’s the big deal with renaming “midget football” to something like “11-12 football”?

    “. . . it’s certainly not in the article and no one (that I’m aware of) is suggesting changing the names of either the hockey or football designations.”


    “. . . it’s certainly not in the article and no one (that I’m aware of) is suggesting changing the names of either the hockey or football designations.”


    Many NASCAR drivers started out racing midgets:


    Tony Stewart still does:


    Some things never change?

    Looking at the Celtics/Boston picture, the Boston jersey looks more like a practice jersey. It doesn’t have the piping, and the shoulder “sleeves” are almost like s spaghetti string tank top. I wonder if Russell’s jersey is correct and the other one is the incorrect one.


    Paul, did you watch the clip about ASU updating Sparky? I read your text and clicked the link expecting a legit video about the process, not a satire about making fun of the new design.

    Confession: No, I did not watch it. I was in “super-rush finish the Ticker” mode. Mea culpa.

    Having now watched it, however, it’s not bad.

    It may not be a case of ‘BFBS’ on the Caterham. Paint adds weight to a car, it may be just the bare carbon fiber. I’ve looked at some of the photos of the Caterham and the outsides of the front wing look like they may be painted black, the winglets is tough to tell.

    Interesting uni note, I was watching the Timberwolves vs. The Wizards the other night, and the announcers got into a discussion about Washington’s new unis. They love that the unis bring back memories of the Bullets, but pointed out the numbers are impossible to see when the press box is positioned high in the stands.

    Did a quick search and didn’t find that note anywhere else.

    This will make a lot of my fellow Brewer fans, and all Barrel Man connoisseurs, very jealous.


    I can’t believe my boss got some of these in our store. I thought they were exclusive to the Brewers store at Miller Park? Oh well, glad to have it.

    The reason why Lotus retained the logo on the tip of the nose is a F1 rule – the manufacturer logo must be of a certain number of square millimeters on the tip of the nose. If you look closely, all teams will have it.

    As far as the BFBS and Ferrari – their history actually favors them having black wings over white. They have had white wings in the past due to sponsorship reasons. The black on other cars, especially around the exhaust area, is in fact a different material. You can not use last season’s cars as a direct relation to this season’s cars when claiming that it is BFBS – cars change on a near weekly basis in this area, and the areas have shrunk to the point where they need the extra high heat sensitive materials there.

    The green of the Caterham suits hasn’t changed because you can only get Nomex in certain shades of color. It isn’t a material like a normal uniform where you can get fabric in any Pantone color you could want.

    To the person that said that the helmet is the only way to tell the cars apart when they are at speed – the FIA has specifically color coordinated the T-bar cameras at the very top of the car. The lead driver in every team will have a neon red camera, and the second driver in every team will have a neon yellow camera.
    Lead drivers for 2013 are: Vettel (Red Bull #1), Alonso (Ferrari #3), Button (McLaren #5), Raikkonen (Lotus #7), Rosberg (Mercedes #9), Hulkenberg (Sauber #11), di Resta (Force India #14), Maldonado (Williams #16), Vergne (Toro Rosso #18), Pic (Caterham #20), Bianchi (Marussia #22).
    Second drivers for 2013 are: Webber (Red Bull #2), Massa (Ferrari #4), Perez (McLaren #6), Grosjean (Lotus #8), Hamilton (Mercedes #10), Gutierrez (Sauber #12), Sutil (Force India #15), Bottas (Williams #17), Riccardo (Toro Rosso #19), van der Garde (Caterham #21), Chilton (Marussia #23).

    And this year, F1 racing will be televised by the NBC Sports Network and a few will be on NBC. It’s on channel 220 if you have DirecTV.

    I just took a look at the Big East’s FB page. Well whatever it will be called this Summer’s FB page. In the recent posts by others I saw 2 people suggest getting extra revenue by selling the new Conference’s name to corporate sponsors and gave examples. 1 said “All State Conference”. Another gave 2 other examples the “FedEx Conference” or the “Coke Conference”. I’m glad I didn’t eat lately or I would’ve hurled. Do the companies and the Conference really need to be given an idea like that? It’s bad enough the tournaments and bowls are sponsored. Not really much worse than leaders and Legends I suppose but I hope this doesn’t catch on!

    Wait a mascot aimed at kids? Gasp.

    I’ll agree that his head should have remained maroon (maybe make the goatee black), but other than that the new sparky is an upgrade, when you consider it supposed to appeal to kids.

    I think too many people forget that they serve as an ambassador to kids (its why the kids gear tends to be ripe with cartoonified versions of the mascots). It really pisses me off when the Hokie bird tries to act tough, the absurdity of it is off the charts (1) you’re a turkey, 2) you are wearing no clothes 3) you are supposed to be messing around doing mascot things not walking with “swagger” 4) you’re a turkey).

Comments are closed.