For the F1 fans left, Minardi chimes in

[Science Abuse]

Paul Stoddart (of Minardi) comments on the US Grand Prix

A personal account of US Grand Prix events

 

What follows is a press release from the MinardiF1 team giving the views of Paul Stoddart.

 

"Much has been said about the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, in Indianapolis, and I feel that in the interests of transparency, it would be worthwhile for someone who was actually present, and participated in the discussions leading up to the start of the Grand Prix, to provide a truthful account of what took place, both for the 100,000-plus fans who were present, and for the hundreds of millions of people watching on television around the world.

 

While this is a genuine attempt to provide a factual timeline of the relevant events that took place, should any minor detail or sequence be disputed, it will not, in my opinion, affect in any way this account of events that led up to arguably the most damaging spectacle in the recent history of Formula One.

 

Background

 

For those who have not followed the recent political developments in Formula One, it is fair to say that, for over a year now, the majority of teams have felt at odds with the actions of the FIA and its President, Max Mosley, concerning the regulations, and the way in which those regulations have been introduced, or are proposed to be introduced. Not a weekend has gone by where some, or all, of the teams are not discussing or disputing these regulations. This is so much the case that it is common knowledge the manufacturers have proposed their own series commencing January 1, 2008, and this is supported by at least two of the independent teams. The general perception is that, in many instances, these issues have become personal, and it is my opinion that was a serious contributory factor to the failure to find a solution that would have allowed all 20 cars to compete in Sunday’s United States Grand Prix.

 

The Facts

 

Friday, June 17

I noticed that Ricardo Zonta’s Toyota had stopped, but in all honesty, did not pay any attention to the reasons why; however, I actually witnessed Ralf Schumacher’s accident, both on the monitors, and more significantly, I could see what took place from my position on the pit wall. This necessitated a red flag, and in the numerous replays on the monitors, it looked very much like the cause of the accident was a punctured rear tyre.

 

Throughout the afternoon, numerous people in the paddock suggested it was a tyre failure and commented that it was similar to the serious accident which befell Ralf Schumacher during the 2004 US Grand Prix. Later that evening was the first time I was aware of a potential problem with the Michelin tyres at this event. In all honesty, I didn’t pay a great deal of attention, as our team is on Bridgestone tyres.

 

Saturday, June 18

On arriving at the circuit, the word throughout the paddock was that there was a potential problem with the rear tyres supplied to all Michelin teams for this event, and it became evident as the first and second sessions were run that most of the affected teams were being very conservative with the amount of on-track running they were doing. In addition, Toyota announced that it had substituted Ricardo Zonta for Ralf Schumacher, who would take no further part in the event. Speculation was rife in the paddock that some Michelin teams might not take part in qualifying. Also, during the practice session, I was informed there would be a Team Principals’ meeting with Bernie Ecclestone at 1430 hrs after qualifying, which I incorrectly assumed would centre around the Michelin issue.

 

Qualifying took place, and indeed, all 20 cars qualified for Sunday’s Grand Prix.

 

At approximately 1420 hrs, I attended Bernie’s office, and with representatives present from all other teams, including Ferrari, the meeting commenced. Surprisingly, the main topic of conversation was the number of events and calendar for 2006, followed by a suggestion that a meeting be convened at the next Grand Prix to discuss two issues only – firstly, a proposal for a single-tyre supplier in Formula One, and secondly, whether or not it would be desirable to qualify with or without a race fuel load in 2006. Only at the very end of the meeting did the Michelin tyre issue arise, and in fairness, it was not discussed in any great detail. I personally found this strange, but as I have stated, it did not affect Minardi directly, and therefore I had no reason to pursue the matter.

 

Throughout Saturday evening, there was considerable speculation in the paddock that the tyre issue was much more serious than at first thought, and people were talking about a fresh shipment of tyres being flown overnight from France, and what penalty the Michelin teams would take should those tyres be used. By the time I left the paddock, people were taking bets on Minardi and Jordan scoring points!

 

Later that evening, I checked with our Sporting Director on what developments had occurred, and was told that the issue was indeed very serious, and the possibility existed that the Michelin teams would not take part in the race.

 

Sunday, June 19

I arrived at the circuit at 0815 hrs, only to find the paddock was buzzing with stories suggesting the Michelin teams would be unable to take part in the Grand Prix. I was then handed a copy of correspondence between Michelin, the FIA, and the Michelin teams that revealed the true extent of the problem. By now, journalists were asking if Minardi would agree to a variation of the regulations to allow the Michelin teams to compete, and what penalties I felt would be appropriate.

 

A planned Minardi press briefing took place at 0930 hrs, and as it was ending, I was summoned to an urgent meeting, along with Jordan, with Bernie Ecclestone, the two most senior Michelin representatives present at the circuit, IMS President Tony George, Team Principals, and technical representatives from the Michelin teams. At this meeting, Michelin, to its credit, admitted that the tyres available were unable to complete a race distance around the Indianapolis circuit without a change to the track configuration, so as to reduce the speed coming out of the last turn onto the banking. Much background information was provided as to the enormous efforts that Michelin, with support from its teams, had undertaken in the preceding 48 hours to try and resolve the problem, but it was clear that all those efforts had failed to produce a suitable solution that wouldn’t involve support from the non-Michelin teams, and ultimately, the FIA.

 

What was requested of the Bridgestone teams was to allow a chicane to be constructed at Turn 13, which would then allow Michelin to advise their teams that, in their opinion, the tyres would be able to complete the race distance. It was made very clear that this was the only viable option available, as previous suggestions from the FIA, such as speed-limiting the Michelin cars through Turn 13, could, and probably would, give rise to a monumental accident. This idea, as well as one concerning the possibility of pit stops every 10 laps, were dismissed, and discussion returned to the only sensible solution – a chicane. During this discussion, a technical representative with specific knowledge of the Indianapolis circuit, together with representatives from IMS, were tasked with preparing the design of a chicane, and Bernie Ecclestone agreed to speak with the one Team Principal not present, Mr Todt, and to inform the FIA President, Max Mosley, who was not present at Indianapolis, of the planned solution to allow the successful running of the US Grand Prix. With only a few hours now remaining to the start of the race, we agreed to reconvene as soon as Bernie had responses from Messrs Todt and Mosley.

 

At approximately 1055 hrs, Bernie informed us that not only would Mr Todt not agree, stating that it was not a Ferrari problem, but an FIA and a Michelin problem, but also Mr Mosley had stated that if any attempts were made to alter the circuit, he would cancel the Grand Prix forthwith. These words had a familiar tone to me, as they were similar to those I had heard around midnight on the Friday preceding the 2005 Australian Grand Prix, when I was told by all the senior FIA representatives present that the Australian Grand Prix would be cancelled forthwith if I did not withdraw pending legal action between Minardi and the FIA. Once again, Mr Mosley was not present at that Grand Prix! It is fair to say at this point that the vast majority of people present in the room both felt and stated that Mr Mosley had completely overstepped the mark, had no idea whatsoever of the gravity of the situation, and furthermore, cared even less about the US Grand Prix, its organisers, the fans, and indeed, the hundreds of millions of television viewers around the world who were going to be affected by his intransigence.

 

By this time, the nine teams had discussed running a non- championship race, or a race in which the Michelin teams could not score points, and even a race whereby only the Michelin teams used the new chicane, and indeed, every other possible option that would allow 20 cars to participate and put on a show, thereby not causing the enormous damage to Formula One that all those present knew would otherwise occur.

 

By now, most present felt the only option was to install the chicane and race, if necessary, without Ferrari, but with 18 cars, in what would undoubtedly be a non-championship race. We discussed with Bernie the effects of the FIA withdrawing its staff, and agreed among ourselves a Race Director, a Safety Car driver, and other essential positions, and all agreed that, under the circumstances, what was of paramount importance was that the race must go ahead. All further agreed that since we would most likely be denied FIA facilities, such as scales and post-race scrutineering, every competitor would instruct his team and drivers to conduct themselves in the spirit of providing an entertaining race for the good of Formula One.

 

At this point, we called for all 20 drivers, and indeed, all 20 arrived, at which point we informed them of our plan. While I cannot testify that each and every driver agreed with what we were proposing, what I can say with certainty is that no driver disagreed, and indeed, members of the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association discussed overseeing the construction of a suitable chicane. Jean Todt was the only significant team individual not present, and the Ferrari drivers stated this decision was up to Mr Todt.

 

I feel it is important to stress that, at this stage, and mindful of the total impossibility – call it force majeure if you wish – of 14 cars being able to compete in the race, the nine teams represented agreed they would not take part in the race unless a solution was found in the interests of Formula One as a global sport, as it was clear to all present that the sport, and not the politics, had to prevail if we were to avoid an impending disaster.

 

After a short break, we reconvened without the drivers. When I arrived in Bernie’s office, Flavio Briatore was on the telephone to Mr Mosley, and it was quite clear from the body language of the others gathered in the room that Mr Mosley was having none of our suggestions. At the conclusion of the telephone call, it was obvious that many of those in the room had lost all faith in Mr Mosley and his ability to perform his function as President of the FIA in respect of Formula One matters.

 

I’m sure this sentence will be treated with contempt by Mr Mosley, but what must be realised is that there are various reasons that other Team Principals, and the most senior people in Formula One, will not say publicly what they openly feel privately about Mr Mosley, his politics and his governance of the sport. There is a great temptation to go into those reasons in detail, but that is for another day. Suffice to say, those gathered at Indianapolis felt Mr Mosley, and to a lesser degree, the lack of co-operation from Mr Todt, were about to be responsible for the greatest FIAsco in Formula One’s recent history.

 

Discussions then took place concerning the other telephone calls with Mr Mosley from, among others, Bernie Ecclestone, Ron Dennis and Tony George, and it was clearly revealed to what extent Mr Mosley was prepared to go in order to achieve his aims. To my total disgust, it was stated that Mosley had informed Mr Martin, the FIA’s most senior representative in the USA, that if any kind of non- championship race was run, or any alteration made to the circuit, the US Grand Prix, and indeed, all FIA-regulated motorsport in the US, would be under threat – again, exactly the same tactic that was used in threatening the Australian Grand Prix and Australian motorsport in March of this year.

 

By now, it was evident Mosley had bullied the US Grand Prix promoter into submission, Bernie Ecclestone was powerless to intervene, and all efforts of the Team Principals, with the exception of Jean Todt, had failed to save the 2005 US Grand Prix.

 

At this point, the pit lane had opened and a hasty discussion took place concerning whether or not the Michelin teams would go to the grid. A radio had been delivered to me by team personnel at this stage, and I was able to know which cars were going to the grid. It is interesting to note that the Jordan Team Principal was not present at this time, and indeed, it was the Jordans that first proceeded to the grid, followed by the Ferraris. After discussion with Bernie Ecclestone, it was agreed the Michelin teams would go to the grid, but were absolutely prevented from participating in the race because of the tyre situation.

 

 

Photo F1-Live.com

Three teams line up for the US Grand Prix

We then proceeded to the grid, at which point I asked Jordan’s Colin Kolles if he intended to stand by the other teams or participate in the race. In no uncertain terms, I was told Jordan would be racing. I was also approached by a Bridgestone representative, who informed me that Bridgestone wished us to race. This left me with one of the most difficult decisions I have had to take during my time in F1, as I did not want to race, but given my current relationship with Mr Mosley, felt certain heavy sanctions would follow if I did not. I made it clear to Bernie Ecclestone, and several Team Principals, that if the Jordans either went off or retired, I would withdraw the Minardi cars from the race.

 

It is important for people to realise that Minardi, the seven Michelin teams, Bernie Ecclestone, and the promoters did not agree with Mr Mosley’s tactics. For the reasons previously outlined, it may take some considerable time, if ever, for this to be admitted, but there is no question in my mind that the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, 2005 at Indianapolis was the responsibility of the FIA President, Max Mosley, and compounded by the lack of support from Jean Todt.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, in my opinion, Michelin was responsible enough to admit that the problem was of their creation. When one considers that even the replacement, Barcelona-specification tyres that were shipped to IMS, when tested, apparently exhibited the same characteristics as those that originally failed, this clearly is a case of force majeure, as I do not for a moment believe that Michelin intentionally brought tyres to the event that were unsuitable for competition.

 

Far more importantly, however, Mosley refused to accept any of the solutions offered, and that refusal was, I believe, politically motivated. Therefore, I feel he failed in his duty, and that is why I have called for his resignation.

 

Much discussion and debate will undoubtedly take place over the coming weeks and months, but I believe this is a truthful and honest account of the facts, and not the fiction, surrounding the responsibility for this FIAsco. People can now make up their own minds!"

 

Press Release

MinardiF1

Finaly some one within the FIA openly calling for Mad Max's resignation.

[Orion]

damn.

 

eric, you were there, and i am ignorant to the usgp events. can you give me a cliffs notes of what actually happened? from a spectators perspective. i obviously have some idea after reading that.

[owndjoo]

i cant believe what happend, all i have to say is i hope nothing like this happens at Laguna with the bikes.

[sgtschulze]

I understand Ferrari's stance. They came to race and they came prepared. I think they should have allowed all teams including Ferrari a "free for all" on tires. Let them use as many etc... That would have allowed Michelin to run safe tires and the race would have proceeded.

 

I love F1 and I was disgusted that the powers at be couldn't come up with something. The chicane would have been bad because none of the drivers had track time and it would impact Ferrari and the other Bridgestone teams. The whole one supplier thing is crazy. That's what makes open wheel racing cool, watching the tires blister etc...

 

F1 needs to come back to the US next year and be on bended knee. Give the fans more for less.

[Akula]

Does anyone ever notice that this happens to all motorsports. Look at NHRA, it isn't about safe racing anymore it is about corporate politics.

 

F1 is really awesome, it is in my opinion the pinnacle of racing. Fast cars, they can turn and accelerate like nothing else. You are right, they need to come here next year with an F1 extravaganza that costs like $20 to get in.

[Mensan]

"Flavio" is a funny name.

[Trouble Maker]

Originally posted by Swirl Marks:

"Flavio" is a funny name.

He's also a funny looking fat dude that dates super models. Life's not fair.

 

Paul Stoddart is my hero.

 

Ferrari could have bent a little. I'm sure they realized that it was a chance to bump them up in the points because if it were them, Minardi and Jordan they would probably get a 1, 2 finish. That's just greedy compared to the stance everyone else was taking (which was for the sake of the sport, not themselves). You have to look at the bigger picture sometimes. What do those few points, or stupid politics and bull headedness matter compared to how much this damaged F1? My answer is obviously that it doesn't compare at all, but the people that matter obviously thought different. That's a huge, and to me saddening problem, that the only people that seemed to matter this situation were Mosley and Ferrari.

[Science Abuse]

Originally posted by Orion:

damn.

 

eric, you were there, and i am ignorant to the usgp events. can you give me a cliffs notes of what actually happened? from a spectators perspective. i obviously have some idea after reading that.

Friday:

Ralf Schumacher"Wow, here i cam back at Indy doing my practice laps, last year I had the worst crash of my career right up in this upcoming turn, my right rear tire blew BLAOW! OH GOD, MY RIGHT READ TIRE JUST BLEW, I'M SPINNING INTOT HE SAME DAMN WAL, WHY GOD WHAAHAYYYYYY!!!SMASH

Michellin Oh hsit, our tires are teh suck! Quick air ship new ones from france!

FIA This could result in 14 cars not making grid, lets think up a solution.

IMS Announcers Welsome to the USGP, everything is great for racing! Buy Race day Tickets!

 

saturday;

Michelin Our new tires are here....FACK they suck too!! Hey FIA, lets talk

Bernie Eccelstone/FIA Attention all, Team principals meeting.

Jean Todt I cant be bothered with a meeting, I'm reading my Machiavelli.

Teams and Bernie at meeting Hey cool, we've got something of a solution, lets run it by everyone.

drivers meeting, Drivershey, sounds like you got a plan, we want to race.

Ferrari drivers We dont disagree, but its up to our Feurer, Jean Todt

Jean Todt I cannot be bothered with this, I'm calling my boyfreind Max.

Bernie and teams FUCK, this is a serious problem, especialy being in the US.

IMS Announcers Welcome to USGP Qualifying, everyhting is cool, nothing is a'miss, buy your race day tickets now, it'll be great!

 

Sunday

Max Mosely, FIA head Your plan sucks, I dont care what anyone says. If you try to change anything I'm canceling hte race outright. It will be run as is by any cars that dont have Michelins!

Bernie Eccelstone Shit, my boss if a fucking moron, we need a ful grid. Hey bridgestone guys, we need to you to stick it to Max by boycotting the race. This will make an honnorable statement to the fans.

Ferrari Fuck you and your mother. We have bridgestones, we will race and win and get points.

Jordan Look, this is our first chance to score points since 99. Our sponsors say we gotta race.

MinardiFuck we hate Max, we want to, but our sponsors want us to run, its out of our hands.

BernieFUCKING..RAT BITCH FUCKASS SONOFA MOTHERLESS GOAT SEX BITCH MOSELY/FERRARI!!!!!

IMS announcers WELCOME to the USGP. We've got 20 of the fastest cars int he world ready to race for you. Hey you outside, buy GA tickets now! It'll be great.

state policeDont mind our riot gear, or the fact that there's not 5 times as many of us

 

20 cars take grid

Parade Lap

14 cars enter the pits and park

6 cars start

IMS AnnouncersOMFG NOEZ! There seems to be a problem that caught us completely off guard!?

fans WTF?

Flavio i'm still a millionaire right?

Frank Williams i'm still a millionaire right?

Jean Todt I'm still a millionaire right Satan?

Tony George I'm still a millionaire right Satan?

Satan Yes, you're both stil millionaires

fansWait, the cars aren't leaving the garages, WE'VE BEEN HAD!

IMS Announcers Ladies and gentlemen please, this isn't our fault, please dont set anything on fire or beat up any cops.

fans WE WANT TO SET FIRES AND BEAT UP COPS! But we dont want to end up in Git'mo, so we will just throw trash, and shout profanity, and flick the cameras off!

Broadcasters The technology doesn't exist to block out all those fingers.

6 fans from india OH MY GOD, THIS IS THE GREATEST DAY EVER, GO JORDAN! Go Narain!

race ends

Shit Shit to tower, shit to tower. This is USGP Shit Storm on route to fan, estimated intercept after press conference, over.

Tower Roger that Shitstorm. Fan prepared for intercept. Internet ready to spread it around, over and out.

[Mensan]

LMAO

[Brandon]

hashaha

[Guest Ponyfreak]

That was the funniest post I have read in a long time!!!!

[lemosley01]

Bwahahah.

 

And accurate too!

[Science Abuse]

Mad Max, giving answers questions he wrote, and being consulted by a legal team:

THE UNITED STATES GRAND PRIX

QUESTIONS TO MAX MOSLEY

22.06.2005

 

What about the American fans who travelled long distances and spent a lot of money to see a race with only 6 cars?

My personal view, and it is only my personal view, is that Michelin should offer to compensate the fans on a fair basis and ask the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to coordinate this. Then Tony George and Bernie Ecclestone should jointly announce that the US Grand Prix will take place at Indianapolis in 2006 and that anyone who had a ticket this year would be entitled to the same ticket free-of-charge next year. But I emphasise, that’s just my personal view.

 

Should you not have just forgotten about the rules and put on a show for the fans?

You cannot do that if you wish to remain a sport. Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport. But even more importantly Formula One is a dangerous activity and it would be most unwise to make fundamental changes to a circuit without following tried and tested procedures. What happened was bad, but it can be put right. This is not true of a fatality.

 

Why did you refuse the request of some of the teams to install a chicane?

The decision was taken (quite rightly in my view) by the FIA officials on the spot and notified to the teams on the Saturday evening. I did not learn about it until Sunday morning European time. They refused the chicane because it would have been unfair, against the rules and potentially dangerous.

 

Why unfair?

Because modern Formula One cars are specially prepared for each circuit. To change radically a circuit like Indianapolis, which has very particular characteristics, would be a big disadvantage to the teams which had brought correct equipment to the event.

 

Is this why Ferrari objected?

No, Ferrari had nothing whatever to do with the decision. They were never consulted. Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi, as the Bridgestone teams, were not involved.

 

Why would a chicane have been unfair, it would have been the same for everyone?

No. The best analogy I can give is a downhill ski race. Suppose half the competitors at a downhill race arrive with short slalom skis instead of long downhill skis and tell the organiser to change the course because it would be dangerous to attempt the downhill with their short skis. They would be told to ski down more slowly. To make the competitors with the correct skis run a completely different course to suit those with the wrong skis would be contrary to basic sporting fairness.

 

Never mind about ski-ing, what about Formula One?

OK, but it’s the same from a purely motor racing point of view. Suppose some time in the future we have five teams with engines from major car companies and seven independent teams with engines from a commercial engine builder (as in the past). Imagine the seven independent teams all have an oil surge problem in Turn 13 due to a basic design fault in their engines. They would simply be told to drop their revs or slow down. There would be no question of a chicane.

 

All right, but why against the rules, surely you can change a circuit for safety reasons?

There was no safety issue with the circuit. The problem was some teams had brought the wrong tyres. It would be like making all the athletes in a 100m sprint run barefoot because some had forgotten their shoes.

 

How can you say a chicane would be “potentially dangerous” when most of the teams wanted it for safety reasons?

A chicane would completely change the nature of the circuit. It would involve an extra session of very heavy braking on each lap, for which the cars had not been prepared. The circuit would also not have been inspected and homologated with all the simulations and calculations which modern procedures require. Suppose there had been a fatal accident – how could we have justified such a breach of our fundamental safety procedures to an American court?

 

But it’s what the teams wanted.

It’s what some of the teams wanted because they thought it might suit their tyres. They wanted it because they knew they could not run at full speed on the proper circuit. We cannot break our own rules just because some of the teams want us to.

 

Why did the FIA stop the teams using a different tyre flown in specially from France?

It is completely untrue that we stopped them. We told them they could use the tyre, but that the stewards would undoubtedly penalise them to ensure they gained no advantage from breaking the rules by using a high-performance short-life tyre just for qualifying. We also had to make sure this did not set a precedent. However the question became academic, because Michelin apparently withdrew the tyre after trying it on a test rig.

 

Michelin were allowed to bring two types of tyre – why did they not have a back-up available?

You would have to ask Michelin. Tyre companies usually bring an on-the-limit race tyre and a more conservative back-up which, although slower, is there to provide a safety net if there are problems.

 

Is it true that you wrote to both tyre companies asking them to make sure their tyres were safe?

Yes, we wrote on 1 June and both replied positively. The letter was prompted by incidents in various races in addition to rumours of problems in private testing.

 

So, having refused to install a chicane, what did the FIA suggest the Michelin teams should do?

We offered them three possibilities. First, to use the type of tyre they qualified on but with the option to change the troublesome left rear whenever necessary. Tyre changes are allowed under current rules provided they are for genuine safety reasons, which would clearly have been the case here. Secondly, to use a different tyre – but this became academic when Michelin withdrew it as already explained. Thirdly, to run at reduced speed through Turn 13, as Michelin had requested.

 

How can you expect a racing driver to run at reduced speed through a corner?

They do it all the time and that is exactly what Michelin requested. If they have a puncture they reduce their speed until they can change a wheel; if they have a brake problem they adjust their driving to overcome it. They also adjust their speed and driving technique to preserve tyres and brakes when their fuel load is heavy. Choosing the correct speed is a fundamental skill for a racing driver.

 

But that would have been unfair, surely some would have gone through the corner faster than others?

No, Michelin wanted their cars slowed in Turn 13. They could have given their teams a maximum speed. We offered to set up a speed trap and show a black and orange flag to any Michelin driver exceeding the speed limit. He would then have had to call in the pits – effectively a drive-through penalty.

 

How would a driver know what speed he was doing?

His team would tell him before the race the maximum revs he could run in a given gear in Turn 13. Some might even have been able to give their driver an automatic speed limiter like they use in the pit lane.

 

But would this be real racing?

It would make no difference to the race between the Michelin cars. Obviously the Bridgestone cars would have had an advantage, but this would have been as a direct result of having the correct tyres for the circuit on which everyone had previously agreed to race.

 

Did the Michelin teams have any other way of running the race if the circuit itself was unchanged?

Yes, they could have used the pit lane on each lap. The pit lane is part of the circuit. This would have avoided Turn 13 altogether. It is difficult to understand why none of them did this, because 7th and 8th places were certainly available, plus others if any of the six Bridgestone runners did not finish. There were points available which might change the outcome of the World Championship.

 

But that would have looked very strange – could you call that a race?

It would seem strange, but it would absolutely have been a race for the 14 cars concerned. And they would all have been at full speed for most of each lap. That would have been a show for the fans, certainly infinitely better than what happened.

 

Did not Michelin tell them quite simply not to race at all?

No. Michelin said speed must be reduced in Turn 13. They were apparently not worried about the rest of the circuit and certainly not about the pit lane, where a speed limit applies. If the instruction had been not to race at all, there would have been no point in asking for a chicane.

 

Didn’t the Michelin teams offer to run for no points?

I believe so, but why should the Bridgestone teams suddenly find they had gone all the way to America to run in a non-Championship race? It would be like saying there could be no medals in the Olympic rowing because some countries had brought the wrong boats.

 

What about running the race with the chicane but with points only for the Bridgestone teams?

This would start to enter the world of the circus, but even then the race would have been open to the same criticisms on grounds of fairness and safety as a Championship race run with a chicane. It would have been unfair on Bridgestone teams to finish behind Michelin teams on a circuit which had been specially adapted to suit the Michelin low-speed tyres to the detriment of Bridgestone’s high-speed tyres, and the circuit would no longer have met the rules.

 

Have you ordered Michelin to produce details of all recent tyre failures as reported on a website?

We cannot order Michelin to do anything. We have no contractual relationship with them. Their relationship is with the teams. However, we have an excellent understanding with both tyre companies and with many of the teams’ other suppliers. We find they always help us with technical information when we ask them.

 

Wouldn’t Formula One be better if one body were responsible for the commercial side as well as the sport?

No, this is precisely what the competition law authorities in many parts of the world seek to avoid. It is not acceptable to them that the international governing body should have the right both to sanction and to promote. This would potentially enable it to further its own financial interests to the detriment of competitors and organisers. Apart from the legal aspect there would be an obvious and very undesirable conflict of interest if a body charged with administering a dangerous sport had to consider the financial consequences of a decision taken for safety reasons.. You can be responsible for the sport or for the money, but not both.

 

Didn’t this entire problem arise because new regulations require one set of tyres to last for qualifying and the race?

No. The tyre companies have no difficulty making tyres last. The difficult bit is making a fast tyre last. There is always a compromise between speed and reliability. There have been one or two cases this season of too much speed and not enough reliability. Indianapolis was the most recent and worst example.

 

Finally, what’s going to happen on June 29 in Paris?

We will listen carefully to what the teams have to say. There are two sides to every story and the seven teams must have a full opportunity to tell theirs. The atmosphere will be calm and polite. The World Motor Sport Council members come from all over the world and will undoubtedly take a decision that is fair and balanced

[Veritas]

Wow. I can't believe that happened. Hahahahahahha. I would of been SUPER pissed had I been there and they didn't finally race because Max needs to die.

 

T.c.

[Orion]

this gets my vote for "best thread ever by eric".

[sgtschulze]

Max Moseley does bring up some valid points. I just wish someone would come forward with the real truth. Did Ferrari influence the decision at all??

[Black ITR Guy]

Originally posted by Orion:

this gets my vote for "best thread ever by eric".

ill second it

[Science Abuse]

Originally posted by sgtschulze:

Max Moseley does bring up some valid points. I just wish someone would come forward with the real truth. Did Ferrari influence the decision at all??

I think we witnessed his finest moment: F1 IS a sport that is entertaining, rather then entertainment disguised as a sport.