Baloney. Bringing an intermediate as opposed to a full rain tire IS a lack of preparation. They rolled the dice and lost and the FIA bent the rules. There is a big difference between hydroplaning off the track in pouring rain and smashing into a wall at 200mph. A chicane would have fixed the issue yesterday. Tell the fans at Indy that you feel that it was appropriate to adhere to the rules.
US Formula 1 Starts with Six Cars!!!!
- Thread starter pscholte
- Start date
- Status
WRONG
A chicane would have resulted in the FIA declaring the race 'non-sanctioned'.
What does that accomplish?
No points awarded. There’s nothing worth racing for. All the teams would have gone home.
The teams are there to score points, win championships. They are not there to parade around a race track pretending it means something.
A chicane would have been a bigger joke than what we got.
NOTHING would have been a bigger joke than yesterday's disaster. F1 had an obligation to put on a race. Points or no points that is the bottom line. The significance of a chicane would have been forgotten by the third lap and F1 surely wouldn't be dealing with a very p!ssed US market today.
If no points are awarded, you don't have a race. You have a parade.
Drivers will go through the motions, not take any risks. Why bother trying to pass someone? It's not worth anything.
I don't consider yesterday a disaster either. It further highlights the stupid tire rules. I can agree with 'start the race with the tire you qualified on'. But after that, forget it. Pit, change tires, wait for FEDEX to deliver tires from France, I don't care.
The engine rules are dumb too. Next we're going to have oil rules. Everyone uses GC sourced from Wal-Mart and you must go to Jiffy Lube for an oil change. It's best for the sport.
I'd rather throw darts.
My solution to the F1 rules problem, which we've had for some time, is to watch MotoGP.
Drivers will go through the motions, not take any risks. Why bother trying to pass someone? It's not worth anything.
I don't consider yesterday a disaster either. It further highlights the stupid tire rules. I can agree with 'start the race with the tire you qualified on'. But after that, forget it. Pit, change tires, wait for FEDEX to deliver tires from France, I don't care.
The engine rules are dumb too. Next we're going to have oil rules. Everyone uses GC sourced from Wal-Mart and you must go to Jiffy Lube for an oil change. It's best for the sport.
I'd rather throw darts.
My solution to the F1 rules problem, which we've had for some time, is to watch MotoGP.
I think the whole tire rule thing is stupid. I'm for safety....but slicks and whatever safe brand and size you want. If the V10 3.0 liter is too fast, then restrictor plate them or something. Don't limit car speed with tires - yeah I know; braking....
well, i was in turn 13 on thursday (at least the area coming into the pits). the track was diamond ground for increased traction. it is like a series of rain grooves with very sharp edges. this is not a huge deal when 1) you get to do testing and 2) when you can change tires.
i have no doubt that bridgestone got tire data from firestone from the indy 500. michelin had no such data.
fia's proposal (in sticking with the rules, right?) was that michelin teams could pit every ten laps and change tires.
this was obviously no solution either.
the track conditions were dramatically different from last year, and michelin had the wrong tire.
but fia and bernie totally screwed the pooch in "not bending the rules" for anyone.
of course, they never see ferrari testing outside the limits of the concord agreement either.
i was fairly unhappy sunday, as i watched bernie talking to the ferrari guy, and the ferrari guy gets this huge grin on his face.
go here for full coverage
i have no doubt that bridgestone got tire data from firestone from the indy 500. michelin had no such data.
fia's proposal (in sticking with the rules, right?) was that michelin teams could pit every ten laps and change tires.
this was obviously no solution either.
the track conditions were dramatically different from last year, and michelin had the wrong tire.
but fia and bernie totally screwed the pooch in "not bending the rules" for anyone.
of course, they never see ferrari testing outside the limits of the concord agreement either.
i was fairly unhappy sunday, as i watched bernie talking to the ferrari guy, and the ferrari guy gets this huge grin on his face.
go here for full coverage
I'm not going to guess the penalties - but they will be severe and shifting the blame to Ferrari won't wash with the FIA lawyers:
Dirty Seven go to Paris
Dirty Seven go to Paris
Shades of the Ford-Firestone Ford Exploder tire debacle.
I’m in agreement with Keith.
Ferrari has no blame in this.
The Michelin teams should have run the race anyway they could. Even if it meant using the tires that were shipped in late. Sure, they would have been disqualified and gotten no championships points. But they didn’t get any points anyway!!
The Michelin teams are just a bunch of cry babies. When Ferrari has tire problems do they want to change the rules? No, but they do start the race and do the best they can for as long as they can.
Ferrari has no blame in this.
The Michelin teams should have run the race anyway they could. Even if it meant using the tires that were shipped in late. Sure, they would have been disqualified and gotten no championships points. But they didn’t get any points anyway!!
The Michelin teams are just a bunch of cry babies. When Ferrari has tire problems do they want to change the rules? No, but they do start the race and do the best they can for as long as they can.
This is from Planet F1, commenting on Race Director Charlie Whiting...
"Ross Brawn’s drinking buddy released a letter that he got from Michelin with some smart answers as to why they couldn’t use different tyres on Sunday.
But he’s changed the rules for Bridgestone prior to a race so we’ve been here before. It's surprising nobody’s questioned why Whiting changed the tyre rules at the beginning of the 2003 Brazilian GP.
Back in 2003 you were only allowed to take one wet tyre to races, so you had to make your mind up before the event. Bridgestone arrived at Interlagos with their legendary intermediate tyre that was quite good in wet and mixed conditions. Michelin had a full wet that could run in more rain.
When the heavens opened before the race, Whiting delayed the start because the Bridgestone runners wouldn’t have been able to make it round safely. It was clearly Bridgestone’s fault for not bringing a full wet tyre, but as the argument has gone this weekend – they knew the situation…
After delaying the start the field was then sent round Interlagos behind the Safety Car until enough water was taken off the circuit. Had they released the field when it was suitable for the Michelins on full wets, then Fisichella would never have won the race in his Jordan and Kimi Raikkonen may well have got the win.
Nobody complained because it was a safety issue. Fast forward two years and Whiting is not prepared to compromise in another safety situation. This interpretation of the rules when it suits them makes F1 fans deeply suspicius - it's like there was an agenda here from the FIA."
Article 131 - gotcha!
Michelin teams are going to get spanked hard at the Paris meeting.
BAR got excluded for 2 races this year for the mere possibility of running underweight. I doubt the FIA will ban all seven teams, because they still have grandstand seats to fill, but at a minimum I see a very big point penalty coming.
Sad to see this happen.... Even though I am a NASCAR fanatic it's obvious F! has issues with that owner/CEO guy is saw in a few interviews... THis probably had a lot more in it then just tires... Did you see his quote about Danika Patrick? LOL messed up.
The news from Michelin is a very good start to repair the damage they did to the sport. The timing is good for them also, just ahead of the FIA hearing. It might build some goodwill.
Although the circumstances were different, it is silly to keep hearing talk of "how it wouldn't have happened in a US race series" and "the show must go on" and "there had to be a compromise" yadadada.
It already did happen in the US, and not so long ago:
Inaugural race at Texas Motor Speedway - cancelled
Couldn't the cars have just gone slower, or put in a couple of chicanes, or....? No, didn't happen.
Although the circumstances were different, it is silly to keep hearing talk of "how it wouldn't have happened in a US race series" and "the show must go on" and "there had to be a compromise" yadadada.
It already did happen in the US, and not so long ago:
Inaugural race at Texas Motor Speedway - cancelled
Couldn't the cars have just gone slower, or put in a couple of chicanes, or....? No, didn't happen.
- Status
Similar threads
