I think Michelin might want to give up selling tyres in the USA
ATB
Simon
Stand up and be counted what do you think about F1
i dont actually know whose fault todays debacle was, but i am sick of the FIA interfering! So i vote mosley to go...
we should never forget how much bernie has contributed to the sport in the past - it is largely his creation.
[Edited on 19/6/05 by JoelP]
CRAP
i could.nt race at Brands today as the race was oversubsribed, ok i was'nt going too any way but there where 6 reserves on the entry list, thats as many as started today, pants.....
Todays Race was a joke and just goes to prove that as with many sports ( and i use the word lightly ) its all about winning and business and screw the fans. I was surprised there wasn't a linching, and wondered if enough fans got together, and could afford it could they sue indianappolis bosses to get a refund for everybody.
It was Michelin's fault that the tyres weren't up to spec, but I think the solution proposed by the teams (add the chicane, race for the
fans but don't score points) was the best thing to do. The FIA themselves should have suggested this, not waited for the teams to come up with a
solution, by which time it was too late.
The FIA's job is to govern the sport, and this is exactly the kind of situation where they should take control and find a solution. They
completely failed to do this and I think it's their fault that the race was such a farce.
Pete
I don't believe a word of it. Years ago, I was talking to a welding inspector who used to do all the weld Xrays. His favorite job was in july
when he was contracted by his firm to Xray tyres at Silverstone, he even got to see the race for free.
I suspect that Michelin is trying to get the F1 monopoly, and tried blackmailing Leslie Crowther and Peter Glaze - who didn't play ball, hence
the pullout.
Does it seem a bit contrived to anyone else, Michelin is too big a corporation to get caught out like that (Peugeot & Citroen and subsiduaries)
[Edited on 19/6/05 by Mark Allanson]
i dont see the sense in that at all Mark.
Of the serious teams, only ferrari are running bridgestones. That left michelin in a pretty good position, winning all races so far this year. Nice
position for a one make tyre series.
Its highly likely that michelin will cop the cost of the whole farce, and will probably get charged with bringing F1 into disrepute with the FIA.
Thats hardly a plan is it?
Makes it incredibly unlikely they would get chosesn as a sole supplier.
There may not have been a construction fault in the tyres as such - it also sounds that they brought an inappropriate tyre for the level of stress in
the corners.
the good thing is that perhaps this will add to the plan for the breakaway series proposed in 2008 and ferrari can FCUK right off.
when IRL split half a dozen years ago from CART, I thought tony george of indy was nuts and a wrecker. Now, CART is just about shagged and IRL is the
leading series.
atb
steve
[Edited on 19/6/05 by steve_gus]
[Edited on 19/6/05 by steve_gus]
I agree they have cocked up big time, but this is a company so big, that if they needed 1500 square tyres delivering at 15 mins notice, they could have done it - the whole thing does not ring right to me
Bridgstone should have been told on Saturday to be prepared to fly in a load of spare tyres and the Michelin teams told to use them.
I think Michelin might want to give up selling tyres in the USA
ATB
Simon
it was stated on saturday that Michelin wanted to ship the same compound that had been used at the previous race. They were not allowed to as once
qualifying starts you cannot change.
It wasnt until the tyres crapped out in qulifying that they knew there was a problem.
Im sure michelin could have shipped truckloads out, but it was said on tv that there are FIVE seperate rules that stop them swapping tyre types after
practice begins.
atb
steve
[Edited on 19/6/05 by steve_gus]
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
we should never forget how much bernie has contributed to the sport in the past - it is largely his creation.
[Edited on 19/6/05 by JoelP]
Too true, he tried to do the same in the snooker circuit but was kept out. I hate to see everyone creeping round him when he deigns to appear on the start grid. It was Grand Prix before he entered the field and had been running for many years.
i think there are 2 things that went wrong today...
and that's an easy one..
neither Ferrari , neither the FIA can see how important it is to race and build an good image for the spectators...
the FIA isnt the most powerfull and they don't act like the smart dad who tells you what to do and what not...
ferrari i never liked the brand, (search for the reason they didn't joined the first GP ever)
and from my point of vieuw today they hadn't an idea what it means..what was happening...
OK FIA = stupid we knew this...(they even cant make an car go slower in one year),(i would say switch to 5 gears but ok)
Ferrari shows againthat they don't have an sole..don't have an heart...
on the other hand,,,
all the michelin teams including jordan including minardi did good buisness reaching the agreement and chooseing for the sport..imagine the family
feeling when you all deside not to try it, not to go..
anyway they would give al the point to the bridgestones etc..
but they wanted to save what they could save...
if you ask me..what was happening was pure ferrari chit and crap.....
if they would shoose for their fans to give them what they pay for..and agree with the chicane..they would be an good team..one with an heart...and an
sport minded people...
but today they decided to go for they own succes what kind of feeling would it gave???for me its like fighting with a child
you knew you win? whats the sport?
if they would throw in the chicane at least they could race! and fight! and some one could call them sportive..
the FIA point is not loosing the boss..they don't want to be ok this time we agree
and then next time too etc..they are the boss..
but if ferrari agreeed..they would do it..and ferrari could made that way some friends...
sidethings??
wy ferrari didn't make statements? or talk in public???
i bet that if michelin has to make room for bridgestone
the teams will decide to rise another class..
leaving ferrari with their own crap..
i hate ferrari...and now one is gonna change my mind that they have passion...
passion for sickness passion for crap..
and the fxxk germa over there has found his good home to..look at his action on the pitlane exit...jaja its for lauging else he couldn't
win...
tks
[Edited on 19/6/05 by tks]
The Chicane wasn't Ferraris' decision......I personally happen to agree with the FIA here, as sending 20 drivers out onto a circuit that has
just had a chicane hacked together 2 hours before a race, in the middle of a corner, IMO, would be as irresponsible as telling 14 drivers to head out
on potentially dangerous tires.
This is the copy/paste of the FIA's response on the matter:
The FIA said it understood that the French manufacturer had told teams the rear left was safe for a maximum of 10 laps at full speed.
It expressed surprise at the situation, given Michelin's years of experience at Indianapolis.
The final banked turn into the circuit's long pit straight puts huge pressure on the rear left tyres, with cars exiting at around 300 kph.
The FIA asked Michelin to advise teams of a safe speed for turn 13 and to make sure that other cars were not impeded.
It said another option would be for teams to change repeatedly the affected tire during the race.
"If the technical delegate and the stewards were satisfied that each change was made because the tire would otherwise fail (thus for genuine
safety reasons) and that the relevant team were not gaining an advantage, there would be no penalty," declared the FIA.
"If this meant using tyres additional to a teams' allocation, the stewards would consider all the circumstances in deciding what penalty, if
any, to apply."
The FIA dismissed as "out of the question" suggestions that a chicane should be laid out in Turn 13 for safety reasons.
"To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the
race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres," it said.
I don't think it's fair to blame any team, the speedway, the FIA, or formula 1. The only party deserving of blame here is Michelin. I see it
as being that simple. It's easy to involve and blame all the other parties, but really, those 2 Toyotas don't blow their tires in practice,
and I'll bet the grand prix weekend goes off beautifully, and nobody is the wiser.
Michelin dropped the ball here, and has no excuse, that's all there is to it.
All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't end up making the drive to see the Grand Prix this year, or I'd probably be mad and sunburnt
about now.
Oh, and for anyone curious, fans in attendance could be getting refunds. This only because Tony George had a contract with F1 for this race, with one
of the terms requiring F1 to field a minimum number of cars (as I'm sure is standard in all these contracts between a series and a
circuit)....I'm sure that number was more than 6, so hopefully people get their money back. Too bad it doesn't cover their hotel stays, time
off, etc...
[Edited on 20/6/05 by turbo time]
I don't know much about F1 as I've only been watching it since the start of my locost build..... But couldn't they have just used bridgestone on all the cars? and maybe had a minutes penalty or something for those cars that would have otherwise been on michalin?
I don't know what all the fuss is about. It seems as though if life deviates from a standard pre-defined path, the TV people positively fall-over
themselves to decry what's going on.
If Alonso had won, he'd have got a mention this morning on the sports news on Radio 4. As it is, they'll be drowning in free publicity and
interest for the next race.
It's the money that's crying. James whatever-his-face-is on ITV is such a moaning self-rightous wuss. He should have enjoyed it for the
farce it was.
Political grandstanding rocks. As long as you can see it for the ephemeral babble it is, it's entertainment that lasts longer than one and a half
hours on a Sunday afternoon.
Cheers,
Neil.
quote:
Originally posted by DavidM
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
we should never forget how much bernie has contributed to the sport in the past - it is largely his creation.
[Edited on 19/6/05 by JoelP]
Bernie Ecclestone had absolutely nothing to do with the creation of Formula 1. He gained control of the sport through what some would say were a series of questionable deals.
The man is a to**er who has ruined the sport for real fans. Anyone who can remember attending any Grand Prix during the 60's and 70's will know what I mean.
David
quote:
Originally posted by DorsetStrider
I don't know much about F1 as I've only been watching it since the start of my locost build..... But couldn't they have just used bridgestone on all the cars? and maybe had a minutes penalty or something for those cars that would have otherwise been on michalin?
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
really? as i understood it, before bernie the grand prixs werent guaranteed to happen at all. I thought that he had arranged a regular calender and ensured that a regular race series occured. Maybe even sorted out the finances of it with the tv deals. Before my time, but thats how i saw it...
quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
really? as i understood it, before bernie the grand prixs werent guaranteed to happen at all. I thought that he had arranged a regular calender and ensured that a regular race series occured. Maybe even sorted out the finances of it with the tv deals. Before my time, but thats how i saw it...
i totally disagree with you statement..
f1 pilots are high professionals..they really know that if there is an change they need to brake....
sow that dangerous is out of the question..
ferrarie is guilty to not accept the chicane solution... they said it wasn't their problem!! bloody bastards..
offcourse michelin is the wrong one on top of this all.. but ferrari just trows petrol on the fire by not accepting the chicane..
and the points where already given to the bridgeston teams..no doubt about that..they just wanted to race..for the fans who paid their money for
that...
and not to see an ferrari practice..
Tks
I don't se how any blame can be laid at the feet of Ferrari. They brought the right kit to the race, the others didn't.
I'd suggest that if it had been Ferrari with the tyre problem, the others wouldn't have agreed to a chicane.
In relation to Bernie Ecclestone the only difference he has made is the introduction of corporate hospitality, elevating ticket prices to ridiculous
levels, milking the TV rights, and taking Brands Hatch off of the Formula One calender.
Formula One has had a full calender since the 50's.
David
bridgestone were supplying 3 teams - it would be a tall order to supply another seven! the point thats being missed is that michelin could supply good
tyres - but the rules would not let them swap tyres after the types had been declared on the friday.
Another angle - just imagine if they had raced, and changed the tyres every 10 laps. Its not an exact science - a tyre could blow on lap 9 and kill
one or more drivers. WTF is that about? all those safety changes, and they would willfully suggest running a tyre thats known to fail.
and if it did, the FIA would then initiate action against michelin for killing a driver.
the post about the politics making it interesting is bollocks. Its a friggin race we watch, not a load of political infighting crap!
Its on the bbc site that fia have summonsed the seven teams.
I can see the fia taking revenge on them. and wouldnt that just sex up the championship and hand it to ferrari.
im being sarchastic there btw
lets hope the current f1 arrangements fall apart and a better independent series takes it place. Its the teams that matter. not the term
'F1'.
atb
steve
[Edited on 20/6/05 by steve_gus]
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
the post about the politics making it interesting is bollocks. Its a friggin race we watch, not a load of political infighting crap!
Time for a rare post...
Has anyone considered other reasons for the teams not starting?
I've been told that the main reason was the good ol' usofa litigation laws were at the heart of things. If this happened in any other
country, then the chances of a race were very good.
As the teams were told the tyres were unsafe, in writing, then they were uninsured for public liability, along with the event organisers. Bernie
Eccleston knew this, as did all the rest of FIA officialdom. Even with a chicane, there was still a big question mark over the tyres' safety.
Imagine what would have been the outcry, if a tyre blew, and some piece of debris/car ended up hurting, or killing a spectator. The US courts would
have been choked with claims, and had a field day. Meantime, F1 would have been suspended, until the cases were heard, possibly.
No, dear Bernie had more to do with this than we are being told. And the rest of the teams summons' and ensuing media garbage is smoke.
At the start of the day, Michelin screwed up big time, and Bernie et al would not give them the courtesy of putting things right.
Michelin didn't have any troubles at LeMans. Strange that! This is an opportunity for them to rid themselves the burden of F1 and its
stupidities.
Syd.
The time for restricted single element foils, flat bottoms, and intake restrictors is well and truly past. These work very well in sportscars, why not
F1?
I'm pretty sure Michelin said they would guarantee the tyres if the chicane was put in place. With all the litigation laws they wouldn't do
this unless they were certain their tyres would be safe. This would have meant that the teams would have been insured, so I don't think that was
the reason the race wasn't run.
Cheers,
Pete
The fact that the question mark had been put over them initially, in writing, would have been enough. Whether they were later deemed to be safe with a
chicane, or not. If they ran with a chicane, and still blew, there would have been an outcry. And the courts would have been full, still! Remember,
this is the usa legal system at work.
Once those tyres were questioned, safetywise, there was no way they could be raced with in the usa. They are only good for footware and furnace
fuel.
The other thing to consider..look at the teams which withdrew. All of the mainstream auto manufacturers, including those wanting their own series.
Ferrari is not a part of this, so had no reason to do anything but what they did. The little teams had no axe to grind, and with the screwed up way F1
works, they get more travelling money with more points. I don't begrudge them that.
The sooner the manufacturers get their own series, the better.
Syd.
Ok everyoone, how about throwing this side of things into the pot.
The Brickyard race was one where the teams and tyre manufacturers are NOT allowed to do pre race testing, thereby they should ALL be entering the race
blind. Allegedly.
Correct me if I'm wrong but was not the track resurfaced recently, and the surface given a diamond cross cutting?
Further, there had before-hand, been a limited amount of racing on this new surface with some of the american oval racers (saloon and open series)
where the competitors use Goodrich tyres, who are owned (supprise, supprise) by Bridgestone. Therefore the bridgestone teams did have some sort of
informational input as to what type of tyre construction would stand the rigours of the race.
There was an awful lot of politics being played out at that race and unfortunately NONE of the powers that be have got the moral backbone or
integerity or honour to stand up and tell the truth. Because if they do then they will surely lay themselves wide open to a lawsuit from some
interested party in the USofA with the financial clout to not give a fig.
Enjoy.
quote:
Originally posted by Syd Bridge
Time for a rare post...
Has anyone considered other reasons for the teams not starting?
I've been told that the main reason was the good ol' usofa litigation laws were at the heart of things. If this happened in any other country, then the chances of a race were very good.
As the teams were told the tyres were unsafe, in writing, then they were uninsured for public liability, along with the event organisers. Bernie Eccleston knew this, as did all the rest of FIA officialdom. Even with a chicane, there was still a big question mark over the tyres' safety.
Imagine what would have been the outcry, if a tyre blew, and some piece of debris/car ended up hurting, or killing a spectator. The US courts would have been choked with claims, and had a field day. Meantime, F1 would have been suspended, until the cases were heard, possibly.
No, dear Bernie had more to do with this than we are being told. And the rest of the teams summons' and ensuing media garbage is smoke.
At the start of the day, Michelin screwed up big time, and Bernie et al would not give them the courtesy of putting things right.
Michelin didn't have any troubles at LeMans. Strange that! This is an opportunity for them to rid themselves the burden of F1 and its stupidities.
Syd.
The time for restricted single element foils, flat bottoms, and intake restrictors is well and truly past. These work very well in sportscars, why not F1?
but what i also hate is that ferrari and bridge stone say they tires are ok no problemo AT ALL..
and during the race they were looking / inspecting the left rear tyre of schumi (Called KEIZER) in spain..
wy should that be the case..right they had an bit of the same chit to!
schumi lost the lead during that pit, but offcourse an bad manouvre on barichello gave it him back (needed to go trough the grass)
Tks
its not that i don't like ferrari (cars) its just they JUST don't arent the best and always try to make you think that..
would never in my live buy one..i then preger an nissan..etc..
surely, its a massive indication of how dog boring F1 has become if people are finding that the politics are becoming as significant as the actual
racing.
Its a bit like buying a crap vacuum cleaner that doesnt work, but thinking it has a nice box, so i will look at that instead.
F1 is a racing series - not a political dogfight!
very sad
atb
steve
quote:
Originally posted by Noodle
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
the post about the politics making it interesting is bollocks. Its a friggin race we watch, not a load of political infighting crap!
I wasn't aware that you speak for everybody Steve. As the commentators make great play about the politics within the teams and the FIA and it fills many a page of the motoring magazines, I naively assumed that it was of interest to someone or some people, somewhere.
Clearly I now know different.
Neil.
following on from jollygreens post.....
no practice / tyre tests allowed at indy.
IRL have about a months preperation for indy! And if firestone / bridgestone ran there , they would have had plenty of feedback.
michelin had none!
atb
steve
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
following on from jollygreens post.....
no practice / tyre tests allowed at indy.
IRL have about a months preperation for indy! And if firestone / bridgestone ran there , they would have had plenty of feedback.
michelin had none!
atb
steve
My understanding is the diamond cut surfaces was carried out after practice for the indy 500 as the drivers complained of lack of grip.
JGG - your post adds a lot to my understanding as I hadn't managed to figure how Bridgestone got it right and Michelin were so wrong.
However, even before reading that I did not blame Michelin. The tyre companies have to second guess all the tracks they have not visited before, and
Indy is an exceptional track which must be hard to get right - especially if it has been resurfaced.
The problem I saw was that Max Mosley as head of the FIA (who claims he is interested primarily in safety) and Ferrari did not look at the big
picture. If they had, they would have realised that F1 needed the race to go ahead, and a chicane would have been the same for everyone. The fans
could have had an even better day than usual because there could have been an extra hours practice session in the morning for the drivers to find the
new line (assuming they could rsk the mileage with the ludicrous 2 races per engine rule).
Of course, Ferrari think they are above the sport and saw the chance to luck in with a win. Max thinks he is God and everyone will do what he says,
and he has plenty of money anyway so even if fired from his unpaid post would not suffer (Bernie would look after his mate!). Between them, they
destroyed F1 in America, and maybe the rest of the world. Remeber that Jordan and Minardi were prepared to allow a race to go ahead, despite the
alternative being their best chance of points this season which will be worth a lot of money to them next year - and they need it more than anyone
else.
The best outcome will be the breakaway series which hopefully will get a good set of rules. Ferrari will be left on their own in F1 and win every race
which is what they want. FIA - Ferrari's Internal Advisers
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
The best outcome will be the breakaway series which hopefully will get a good set of rules. Ferrari will be left on their own in F1 and win every race which is what they want. FIA - Ferrari's Internal Advisers
BTW - who is the solitary person that thinks F1 is being run well
atb
steve
as they say, nothing new under the sun.
read 1980 - 1982
http://www.atlasf1.com/timeline/80s.html
infighting and driver / team strikes
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
BTW - who is the solitary person that thinks F1 is being run well
atb
steve
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
JGG - your post adds a lot to my understanding as I hadn't managed to figure how Bridgestone got it right and Michelin were so wrong.
However, even before reading that I did not blame Michelin. The tyre companies have to second guess all the tracks they have not visited before, and Indy is an exceptional track which must be hard to get right - especially if it has been resurfaced.
The problem I saw was that Max Mosley as head of the FIA (who claims he is interested primarily in safety) and Ferrari did not look at the big picture. If they had, they would have realised that F1 needed the race to go ahead, and a chicane would have been the same for everyone. The fans could have had an even better day than usual because there could have been an extra hours practice session in the morning for the drivers to find the new line (assuming they could rsk the mileage with the ludicrous 2 races per engine rule).
Of course, Ferrari think they are above the sport and saw the chance to luck in with a win. Max thinks he is God and everyone will do what he says, and he has plenty of money anyway so even if fired from his unpaid post would not suffer (Bernie would look after his mate!). Between them, they destroyed F1 in America, and maybe the rest of the world. Remeber that Jordan and Minardi were prepared to allow a race to go ahead, despite the alternative being their best chance of points this season which will be worth a lot of money to them next year - and they need it more than anyone else.
The best outcome will be the breakaway series which hopefully will get a good set of rules. Ferrari will be left on their own in F1 and win every race which is what they want. FIA - Ferrari's Internal Advisers
Bernie was a racer back in the days of the 500cc F3 cars, apart from being the "M" of March has Mosley ever raced ? -- I think not or the
"race at reduced speed" comment would never have been made.
With Max Mosley I suspect the world has been too tolerant too long -- perhaps because of a wish not to hold the sins father against the son.
ferrari didn't show up,
sow they didn't build on an solution
only the drivers came in.. in the briefing
and they said, its his descion...(with the mouth full of teeth)
its written anywhere that ferrari i alone in the dark..and now one llikes them any more.. (in the pit) look at renault and mcclaren they are the
greatest openents but they build to gether on something..
read the post from Minardie Stoddart..on www.f1live.com..
Tks
I checked up on Max he has raced see
http://www.grandprix.com/gpe/cref-mosmax.html
But to call is father a politician just is a bit too tactful.
Mussolini was his role model. He tried all the alternatives though 
.
quote:
Originally posted by tks
ferrari didn't show up,
sow they didn't build on an solution
quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
I am no lover of Ferrari but I can not see what they are being blamed for.
quote:
Originally posted by andyps
quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
I am no lover of Ferrari but I can not see what they are being blamed for.
by not agreeing to any compromise
it was said on ITV coverage that only 9 teams agreed to the chicane.....
As a further point, from Mosely
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/4123710.stm
"Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport.
Translation : it exists for its own sake, and if the followers dont like it, tougth. That includes paying lots of dosh for a farce as a spectator.
Nice to know that the people at the top know how to sell the sport to the fans.
atb
steve
[Edited on 23/6/05 by steve_gus]
Nine teams agreed and one didn't even go to the meeting as it had no opinion.
I lifted the following quote from 10 Tenths. it has been atributed to Tony Dodgins, a respected motor racing journalist.
"It would have been done without thorough undertaking and the FIA's event insurance, for example, is dependent upon the circuit being
properly homologated. To take a risk in America? With race tyres that might still be dodgy? On a boffed-together track? Simultaneosly assuming
responsibility and potential liability when it currently lay elsewhere? Three weeks after they'd just warned the tyre companies? Can anyone
seriously be surprised that the FIA and Max didn't go for a chicane? No, sir."
thats just doublespeak. Not attending the meeting and not voting was effectively a veto, (as all 10 must vote yes) which ferrari would know would stop
the chicane.
Its not even subtle - in fact abit of a childish tactic
atb
steve
PS
about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but 'good for
10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen.
[Edited on 23/6/05 by steve_gus]
"about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but 'good
for 10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen."
No, of course not, That is why they didn't race.
Interview with Max Mosley here.
quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
"about the litigation. Do you think it would have stood up in court as safe if the teams had raced with tyres that were defective but 'good for 10 laps'. Any lawyer would have been able to say that was wilful and negligent should any accident happen."
No, of course not, That is why they didn't race.