Well, it's goodnight from F1; didn't see the race but will record the "highlights". Can't see it continuing in its current form beyond this year with all the in-fighting.
-- Lee Having a Fabialous time.
|
Michelin didn't have any choice. Imagine the fallout if they had not advised the teams to pull out and there had been a disaster. They would have faced legal action for one thing.
What would they have done if Michelin was the only supplier?
|
|
Remember that the Michelin tyre failed twice; R Schu and Zonta. There was a real possiblity of something going wrong.
|
Shortly before the race:
Letter from Charlie Whiting, the FIA Formula One Race Director, in reply to above letter from Representatives of Michelin:
---------
Dear Mr Dupasquier,
Dear Mr Shorrock,
Thank you for your letter of today's date.
As explained in our earlier letter, your teams have a choice of running more slowly in Turn 12/13, running a tyre not used in qualifying (which would attract a penalty) or repeatedly changing a tyre (subject to valid safety reasons).
It is for them to decide. We have nothing to add.
Yours sincerely,
Charlie Whiting
FIA Formula One Race Director
cc: Bernie Ecclestone
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
Jean Todt (Scuderia Ferrari)
Colin Kolles (Jordan Grand Prix)
Paul Stoddart (Minardi F1 Team)
--------
Don't blame Ferrari!
|
1. Michelin claimed that the tyres had a "manufacturing fault" ~ it sounded to me that the tyres had been designed too near the knuckle and hence it was more likely a design error of judgement.
2. The FIA should have given a one-race concession for the incorporation of a chicane, and Ferrari told to like it or lump it. The relevant FIA rule should then have been reconsidered rationally at a later (but urgent) date and a well thought out change made to prevent a re-occurrence of a similar situation.
--
L\'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
1. Michelin claimed that the tyres had a "manufacturing fault" ~ it sounded to me that the tyres had been designed too near the knuckle and hence it was more likely a design error of judgement.
Michael Schu is quoted as saying that Bridgestone left a faster tyre at home due to safety issues with the Indy banking.
2. The FIA should have given a one-race concession for the incorporation of a chicane, and Ferrari told to like it or lump it. The relevant FIA rule should then have been reconsidered rationally at a later (but urgent) date and a well thought out change made to prevent a re-occurrence of a similar situation. --
Ferrari said they would go with the FIA re the chicane idea, i.e. if the FIA had installed a chicane Ferrari would have abided by the decision.
However the chicane could have been more dangerous that the tyre issue, no time to practice, no set up, no data on the effect on brakes, gearing, downforce, fuel consumption etc etc.
|
>>However the chicane could have been more dangerous that the >>tyre issue, no time to practice, no set up, no data on the >>effect on brakes, gearing, downforce, fuel consumption etc >>etc.
I find F1 boring, just a procession of cars with very few changes in the leader and few opportunities for overtaking.
Adding a chicane would have really tested the cars and driver's skills. I would have thought it would have increased the interest in the race.
May be the only way to increase the interest in F1 is to stop all the practice to ensure the cars are performing at their ultimate limits for each track. This would add some guesswork to the teams calculations and show the really quick drivers in the best possible light.
To find pole postion would be easy, each driver would drive one of the same purpose built test cars (a small number would be necessary) around the circuit at several different times of the day. Every driver must use each of the test cars. Then all the lap times for each driver would be added together and then ranked in descending order. Crashing the car in practice would mean automatic disqualification from the race. This would ensure quick and safe drivers only participated in the race.
Maybe F1 should think of how their sport is viewed by the public in general and how they should make it more interesting for them. Keep the customers satisfied, and they will want even more. This would certainly keep the sponsors, advertisers and TV companies happy.
|
|
|
|
Don't blame Ferrari?
Not on their own, certainly. After all, they came up with a car which worked.
But as an influential partner in a spectator sport, they failed to help find a compromise which would have allowed us to see some racing.
The FIA took a very hands-off approach "that as Michelin is responsible for its own crisis, it is up to the tyre company to decide how far it is willing to bend the rules in order to resolve the problem". They gave no indication of the likely penalty except warning it would be severe enough to prevent people swapping tyres again (ie. pretty stern).
Given the extreme risks, the only safe options were:
1. limit the speed in turn 13 (ie chicane); or
2. Use different tyres
Given that earlier in the year, an infringement by BAR led to them forfeiting all their points in the year to date, breaking 4 or 5 rules meant that option 2 was never going to happen.
We should have had a race, even if the bridgestone teams were the only ones allowed to score points. That we did not is down to a few key individuals (including Ferrari) putting self interest above the spectators.
|
We should have had a race, even if the bridgestone teams were the only ones allowed to score points. That we did not is down to a few key individuals (including Ferrari)>>
Rubbish, Ferrari said they would go with the FIA decision regarding the chicane idea, if the FIA had installed a chicane Ferrari would have abided by the decision.
|
|
|
|
|
Just a few notes that I thought interesting - from a pretty good site IMO.
www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15060.html
www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15067.html
www.grandprix.com/race/r740sunpc.html
www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15070.html
|
I always thought F1 was boring and not interesting. Clearly neither the FIA nor the teams give a fig about those people who pay to view it and the TV companies/sponsors etc.
Unless they change their attitudes the future of F1 is going to be death by 1000 cuts.
BTW the Touring Car Championship was much better to watch than a six car jolly...
madf
|
|
|
If the GP had been a football international and one team had turned up without football boots - would FIFA have ruled that the other team must play without boots to make it fairer? Probably not, but FIFA would n't have rules which prevented them flying in a fresh supply of boots.
|
It is quite simple - Michelin got it wrong!
Michelin and the Michelin teams tried to force the FIA into changing the track - potentially more dangerous than a tyre failure since no one knows the lines or braking points.
FIA offered the Michelin leams a compromise - run the cars slower through the corner - but this was not acceptable to them making them un-competitive.
Effectively Michelins mistake gave seven teams the opportunity to create a crisis when it would have been very simple for them to re-map the cars so they had limited speed in that corner so no risk of blowout - but perhaps Ron Dennis & co. could not bear the risk of finishing behind a Minardi!
There should be big panalties on Michelin and the teams for creating this farce - perhaps with the potential of there being a single tyre supplier next year Michelin may just have excluded themselves.
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure of all the twists and turns in the politics of F1 but a few questions came to my mind;
1. What was the purpose of the Michelin teams doing the parade lap? - If they weren't going to race, why bother coming out at all? IMO that added to the farce.
2. Why did Jordan race? - Minardi apparently only decided to race because Jordan changed their mind.
3. If F1 is a sport, then I have to agree with Ferrari's position that "it is not our problem", however much I dislike them. Imagine in the Olympic 100m final, 7 of the runners complain that they have blisters, would you penalise the 8th man because he didn't?
4. If the breakway manu. are flexing their muscles, then what do they have to gain by tarnishing F1's reputation in the States? Surely even if they do go ahead with a breakaway race series, most people will still associate them with F1?
|
1. What was the purpose of the Michelin teams doing the parade lap? - If they weren't going to race, why bother coming out at all? IMO that added to the farce.
>>
They in effect retired from the race rether than boycotted the race, the latter would have left them open to being penalised.
2. Why did Jordan race? - Minardi apparently only decided to race because Jordan changed their mind.
Jordan and Minardi's apparent solidarity with the Michelin teams was political, they rely on one of the major engine manufactures who's main team is one the Michelin teams (i.e. Jordan/Toyota) and will have to rely on them in the future. However they were always going to race, they need the points, the sponsors exposure etc.
I like IanS's football anology and IanJohnson sums it all up nicely!
|
|
Have just read Michelin's press release and they talk about the combination of exit speed and downforce - both in the control of the teams!
|
|
4. "what do they have to gain"
Because it devalues the existing product. With a devalued product (and hence very much weakened) you can say "Look see US F1 fans we are not them, we will fix all the things F1Admin, and FIA are bad at."
It could aslo be the end of the FIA.
Looking at Marks first link, the piccy of the Michelin tyre, it looks a severe failure along the edge of the wall/shoulder. Also I am suprised at how thin the tyres are!
|
Now the big question.
Given that this has made front page news all round the world.
Given that Michelin has been publicly blamed.
Given that Firestone disapeared as a brand post the Exporer debacle
Whats the future for Michelin as a tyre company?
|
Given that Firestone disapeared as a brand post the Exporer debacle
Wife's Clio has Firestones, bought two new ones only three weeks ago.
Whats the future for Michelin as a tyre company?
>>
It is incredibly bad PR though I do not think it will have long term effects in respect of their core business, after all they were clearly 100% at fault in not producing adequate race tyres for yesterday's GP though I would not hesitate in trusting Michelin road tyres today.
|
Always get a little confused about drivers views.
As far as I understand it there was a problem on one corner and that if the cars slowed down then it would have been ok.
My point is, that if we as normal road users come across a dangerous situation, we adapt to it. While I realise that it is a race, why couldn't the Michelin drivers slow down for that corner and treat the danger appropriately.
To me there are similarities when it becomes very wet. I realise that these "cars" are very difficult to control in the wet, but if they slowed down a bit and stopped whinging they might be better off.
The FIA seems to like its rules so much that they have only themselves to blame for this.
|
RF - Think that Michelins demise based on the US GP is a little far from the reality.
Firestone tyres were responsible for deaths on a road vehicle.
Michelin had a tyre that couldnt cope with one corner on an F1 car.
Slightly different methinks. And if anyone stopped buying Michelins because of the US GP is a complete fool. Their road tyres are fine.
Would someone stop drinking Red Bull because the F1 team lost? Or not like Ferrari road cars because the F1 team crashed. no.
Personally i think everyone is to blame besides Bridgestone:
Michelin for not producing a suitable tyre.
FIA and Bernie for not resolving it
And all the teams for not agreeing.
|
"RF - Think that Michelins demise based on the US GP is a little far from the reality."
Almost as far fetched as a large and prominent chain of jewlery shops going awry because of one remark by its chief exec in an after dinner speech?
300 million saw Michelin named and shamed. I tried to do a quick bit of research on Michelin but the corporate web sites are down. Someone is taking it very seriously
|
|
Ah - its now back but very slow.
|
F1 looking to break American. Well they did break it but not in the way they meant...
Incidentely, 'fans' throwing glass bottles in front of F1 cars? Don't they have stewards?
Que class action by the fans for a refund...
|
Incidentely, 'fans' throwing glass bottles in front of F1 cars? Don't they have stewards?
Just a load of pink fluffy dice I guess!
Que class action by the fans for a refund...
>>
Reckon so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
