F1 What is going on.

Look at it another way, if it had been Ferrari (and Jordan and Minardi ) who couldn't race because their Bridgestone tyres were defective and unsafe as a result can you really imagine the other (Michelin shod) teams allowing an impromptu chicane to be erected on the fast turn to cut speeds to allow them to race? Not bloody likely!

In the past teams have encountered problems with their rear wing mounts (breaking at high speed) and decided to not race because they couldn't find the cause and it was unsafe. It just so happens that in this case a safety related technical fault affected 7 teams but the outcome was no different and IMO quite correctly so.

The reason none of the Michelin shod teams could "take a chance" is for legal reasons. Once Michelin had made a very public written statement declaring their tyres unsafe any team that still went racing with them risked a massive and catastrohpic lawsuit had anyone got seriously injured or killed as a result of a tyre failure.

I realise the race was a farce but it's spectacularly unfair to put any blame on Ferrari for the situation. Their opponents screwed up, what are they supposed to do?

Michael.

 

Agree with most of what you say but if the boot was on the other foot as i were, 18 cars on the grid as opposed to 6 would have been a bit different, also what was wrong with having the chicane with Michelin cars not scoring points ? Maybe a Ferrari might still not have won they'd have taken the points, and even if it might not have looked that good (still cant beat the Michelin crowd even when thay had rubbish tyres) no one is going to take this result seriously anyway, and it probably looks a lot worse from a PR point of view anyway.
Jeff

 

I don't think the number of cars affected really comes into it. Why should Bridgestone be penalised simply because they only happen to supply 3 teams? I don't really see that there was a viable alternative to what happened. I'm still astounded that a world class company like Michelin can't bring a product that will last the distance to a world class motorsport event. For heavens sake what about a backup (lower performance) tyre???

Michael.

 

If the Michelin runners were not points scoring, in what way would Bridgestone have been penalised?? As far as a "back up" tyre goes wasn't it too late as from what I gather FIA wouldn't allow a second tyre to be used. Michelin were going to (or did ) fly out a replacement set.

I'm not one to take sides or blame any particular party, but ISTM there were many opportunities to resolve the matter. Pride, stubborness, selfishness and refusal to look at the bigger picture are what mede the alternatives "not viable".

 

So what would have happened if one of the non-points-scoring cars would have taken one of the points-scoring cars out of the race?

Being mischievous for a moment, if I had been a Michelin-team principal, I would have thought that if neither of the Ferraris made it beyond 75% of the race, my position in the championships would probably be better. Not to imply that any deliberate accidents really would have happened, but think of the suspicion that would have made the rounds if an accident actually had happened.

 

Could have suspended the non-points scoring team for however many races, or deducted points from existing scores. Sorry, but I just cannot believe that a way could not have been found.

I would also have though that finding a way through would have been a bit of a PR boost for the Bridgestone side.

As it is, surely everyone's come out of it covered in something smelling rather foul.

 

First of all, I'm not sure that having just the Michelin runners not scoring any points was a seriously suggested option. I think the suggestion was race with a chicane and make it a non-championship event for everyone. That would have penalised BStone who had a legitimate advantage in this race.

Secondly, as Markus has already pointed out, running the race with a chicane and Michelin runners not scoring would have created a whole host of other tricky issues and apart from pleasing a few people who don't follow F1 and just wanted to see a race with more cars it would have been just as much of a farce. It would also have potentially penalised BStone if, for whatever reason, one of the Michelin cars caused one of the BStone cars to retire.

The whole chicane thing was a laughable idea IMO. Imagine a team turning up to a football game with only 5 players and saying: "hey, can't we just redraw the lines on the pitch and play 5-a-side instead?" .

Michael.

 

Mebbe they should have let the drivers run round the track, wearing whatever footwear they liked.. Or even better make them play an It's a Knockout type game using the duff tyres...

 

Or maybe the drivers should have lined up on the start line with a tyre each, then roll them down the straight and the winner is the one who rolls the tyre the furthest without it exploding?!

oh now a better idea has just poped into my small head, what about a cycle race instead, would have shown how fit the drivers are and (to link with another thread that's running) shown how seriously they take the environmental impact of the sport, boom boom! :lol:

 

Statement by the FIA:

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2005/June/200605-01.html

A short quote:

I have to say I totally agree.

Michael.

 

I feel sorry for all those who paid to travel etc to see a race, Michelen should shoulder the blame, the rules didn't allow it to happen any other way, FWIW F1 doesn't need America, they do fine with all the other countries in the world, let them moan, they don't even have any drivers or teams good enough to take part anyway, and having continental USA "World series" it seems they don't need F1, so lets get on with the championship, that is one of the best there has been in ages, at least yesterdays debacle has mixed it up a little and made it even more interesting.

 

The FIA statement is very clear and common sense. Can't argue with any of it.

Lee, while the likes of DC may have wanted to race, and credit to them for having balls to even consider it, such a decision would have been very irresponsible. To take a gamble on their own safety is one thing, but that of the other competitors (regardless of what rubber they're burning), marshalls and fans is quite another.

 

Wasn't this also considered unsafe, because if they ran slower another car could run into them on this fast banked corner, I've read the press release, it still sounds like childish, buerocratic rubbish to me. Michelin bulls up, big time, not having a safe race tyre, not bringing a backup set of tyres (strangly omitted from all the talk on Sunday), I mean you couldn't really get it more wrong, So what would have happened if say they were all on the same tyre, would we have watched an empty track for 2 hours?

I feel the only sultion to this one would have been to postpone the race, fine Michelin for the costs of doing this of course, and reran it, but hell, that's the best points Manadi are going to get for a while! They're ahead of BAR now, that's gota smart! ouch.

 

Err they race indy cars around that circuit at much highter speeds, have more crashes, probably the reason for the 50ft fence, you make it sound like the crowd are standing by the roadside.

When Rikenin flat spoted his tyre and refused to come in to get his tyre changed which then caused him to subsequently crash, he could (and almost did) take another car out, or hit a marshall, is that irresponsible too? In my view the same thing, its a risky sport, one of the last to not have been "softened" up, that's what makes it exciting to watch, otherwise you might as while get the scaletrics out.

 

There is, naturally, a lot of spin on this issue comming from all sides. Just a couple of points I'd like to make.

* Michelin should have had 2 different tires - they did, neither of them were deamed to be safe for T13.
* Chicane & Ferrari - Ferrari didn't support it, but why should they?
* Chicane & FIA - FIA refused, citing 'safety' grounds. This strikes me as somewhat hipocritical in light of the alternatives they offered the Mi. teams:
1. take T13 slow - dangerous speed differential b/w Br and Mi teams. Also, bloody hard to enforce and manage. Hell, Juancho wont even stop for red lights!
2. change tires every ten laps - tire could still let go on L9. Not enough sets of tires for a 70 lap race
3. drive through the pit lave to avoid T13 - just plain silly - what about pit lane safety?

Discussion on a chicane being a penalty for Br. teams is missing the point somewhat. Yes, the 'race' would have been compromised; however, the championship points needn't have been. I'm pretty sure from what I've read thus far that an option discussed/proposed (?) was to award the points to the Br teams BEFORE the race, thus avoiding any posibility of a Mi driver 'taking out' a Br driver to prevent them from scoring.

This would have resulted in a show being put on to satisfy the paying public at Indy and the global telly audience. It would not have conferred any championshop advantage to the Mi teams, as they still would not have scored points. The Br teams, especially Ferrari would have received the same championship boost (as they rightly ought to given their better preparedness), and would have done so without the bad publicity.

It really isn't too hard to see that these issues could have been worked through to ensure a race was put on without confering any sort of advantage to Mi teams in the championship. As I said earlier, the whole thing was pig headed stupidity.

Regards,

Stuart.

 

Michael,


Sorry to say but your standpoint is a clear example of what is wrong with F1. It is too self-absorbed. It continues to forget the single most important fact that if people dont watch it, it will simply cease to exist. Yes I agree with nearly all of the teams, FIAs etcs points of view, but they are all failing to see the big picture. It's like a Premiership football squabbling over what colour shorts they can be allowed to wear and ending up only having 2 or 3 teams play for the season. All fine and dandy you've upheld your fairplay and sportsmanship and stuck to the rules of the game but you've got no fans, so you've got no TV, so you've got no advertising money and no merchandising revenue, so you end up with no sport and no teams.

F1 can keep going like this if it likes. The sad fact is that all the self absorbed egotistical posturing for power and scoring petty points against eachother will amount to nothing when they all find themselves unemployed.

I for one will say "serves you right" when it happens.

GTM

 

GTM - you do of course make a very valid point. I only hope that this episode inspires the FIA, Bernie, teams etc to take a long hard look at what's going on and make sure that F1 is saved before it's too late. The FIAs proposals for the 2008 rule changes look like a promising start and quite a change from their customary tinkering that really changes nothing.

Michael.

 

F1 stopped being interesting when they stopped winning races on the track IMO

 

I'd say similar to golfers
I always remember James Hunt used to do badly in Superstars - mebbe nowadays they're pushed into a bit of exercise in order to justify their ridiculous salaries (it wouldn't be so bad if they were actually driving anywhere, preferably with passengers and payload!)..
But they're not exactly Lance Armstrong!

Give me the Tour De France anyday, though it annoys me no end that it's not shown on terrestrial TV, but completely irrelevant F1 gets hours! And don't even get me started on Wimbledon, or the snooker, or the golf, or the cricket...

 

I'm sure the Tour De France is shown on C4, always used to be.