All F1 2005 Discussions

[Roy MM]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

You blame Ferrari for the other teams turning up without adequate equipment

WTF you on? michellin failed to bring the right tyres for the job, and the FIA would not make any move to sort the track out, this calls for all teams to run on the same tyres.

Originally Posted by Roy MM

WTF you on? michellin failed to bring the right tyres for the job, and the FIA would not make any move to sort the track out, this calls for all teams to run on the same tyres.

good point, Roy, I'm watching champ car on eurosport just now - no wonder the americans are confused by F1

What a farce.

We went to water the garden after the first few laps.

It became obvious that the yanks were not impressed with the amount of stuff chucked on the track in disgust, allthough this could have been bloody dangerous but I do sympathise, I would certainly be looking for a refund / rebate if I had paid to watch it!!!

[Graham]

Well that was Formula Farce, wasn't it?

I think Bernie et al really thought they could browbeat everyone into going on and racing no matter what and figured that when they had them out on the grid they'd all start.

Unfortunately their bluff was well and truly called and then ended up with an utter nonsense of the race that has destroyed not only the credibility of F1 but probably also any chance of F1 races in the USA for the next few years as well.

It is wrong and unfair to blame the teams for "not bringing the right equipment", the tyres are supplied by Michelin, not the teams and so it's not as if it's any one team that "made a mistake".

This was an exercise in brinkmanship and Bernie and Co. lost, big time.

Originally Posted by Graham

Well that was Formula Farce, wasn't it?

I think Bernie et al really thought they could browbeat everyone into going on and racing no matter what and figured that when they had them out on the grid they'd all start.

Unfortunately their bluff was well and truly called and then ended up with an utter nonsense of the race that has destroyed not only the credibility of F1 but probably also any chance of F1 races in the USA for the next few years as well.

It is wrong and unfair to blame the teams for "not bringing the right equipment", the tyres are supplied by Michelin, not the teams and so it's not as if it's any one team that "made a mistake".

This was an exercise in brinkmanship and Bernie and Co. lost, big time.

I agree Bernie lost big time - that is why I question what happened was what he wanted, I don't think it was

Originally Posted by Graham

Well that was Formula Farce, wasn't it?

I think Bernie et al really thought they could browbeat everyone into going on and racing no matter what and figured that when they had them out on the grid they'd all start.

Unfortunately their bluff was well and truly called and then ended up with an utter nonsense of the race that has destroyed not only the credibility of F1 but probably also any chance of F1 races in the USA for the next few years as well.

It is wrong and unfair to blame the teams for "not bringing the right equipment", the tyres are supplied by Michelin, not the teams and so it's not as if it's any one team that "made a mistake".

This was an exercise in brinkmanship and Bernie and Co. lost, big time.

About time that twit had egg on his face for once IMO

Did any one see the interview he did with Brudell before the race, he gave me the impression that he wanted to run away, as did the Michelin guy, who virtually did!!!

Farce.

[iadom]

Originally Posted by cookie_365

You blame Ferrari for the other teams turning up without adequate equipment?

So if you went for a job interview and was told in advance that you had to prepare a series of presentations, and did, then arrived and discovered that the other candidates hadn't managed it, would you be happy if they demanded that the interview be rearranged without the bits they couldn't come up with?

Ferrari turned up with a set of tyres that worked, and beat everyone who wanted to race against them. If the Michelin teams chose not to race, that's their decision, their responsibility, and no one elses. Not Ferraris, not Bernie Ecclestone's: theirs.

One good thing about this is that next year we'll get to dump the tedious US GP and run a race in a country that actually cares about F1.

Going for a job interview and crashing a car at 200 mph into a wall, good analogy that. .
No one is denying that a mistake was made, but with a little common sense and a small change to the track the race could have gone ahead with all the cars. I just realised I said common sense, something in rather short supply in F1 ATM.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by homealone

This was an exercise in brinkmanship and Bernie and Co. lost, big time.

I agree Bernie lost big time - that is why I question what happened was what he wanted, I don't think it was [/QUOTE]

What else *could* he have wanted?

There's no way he'd want the nonsense of 6 cars "racing" but he'd painted himself into a corner and IMO he couldn't see any way out without making himself look even weaker and his hold on F1 is getting pretty tenuous as it is with others trying to move in on "his territory.

[rockin_plumber]

Originally Posted by iadom

You would not say that if someone was killed.
Apparently all the teams bar one agreed to the introduction of a chicane at the problem corner. I will give you one guess which team that was, and I blame them, not the Michelin teams.
If all the teams had stuck together, I am certain the FIA would have backed down.

Fact is that Ferrari didn't disagree to the introduction of the chicane

They were the only team who said they would still race even if the chicane
was not in place
Then Jordan backed down and Minardi felt they had to also

At no time were the FIA gonna put in a chicane.
The teams had their option, change tyres and suffer a penalty.
At the end of the day this aint Ferrari's fault and it aint the Michelin teams fault.
It is the fault of Michelin themselves

[MovedGoalPosts]

The race was doomed the moment Michelen found the serious fault and said it would be unsafe. No-one could go out under such circumstances unless modifications could be made to replace the tyres or slow cars down a lot.

We only have to look back to the court cases that have occurred in after major crashes to see how liability, both civil and criminal would still apply. McClaren (or was it Williams? ) took a long while after Senna's death extracting themselves from the Italian legal system.

What I fail to understand is given the timing when the problem was known, that the race could not have been deemed "void". Those teams not on Michelin tyres get the points in default. Michelen runners get nothing as effectively they are graded "did not start".

At that point then an "exhibition race" could have been held, at least offering some sort of proper event. A Chicane or whatever could then have been provided to ensure safety could be achived.

[bucketbakereturn]

just an utter farce with no one looking at the bigger picture of the sports regard in the USA, seriously would you want to host F1 at your track next year. I think they'd be lucky to sell 50,000 next year, compared to NASCAR 400,000 at Indy........

I haven't searched this thread or heard it mentionned on the ITV coverage (top notch today i think we'd all agree) but what would have been the big problem of Bridgestone suppling all the teams. I'm well aware of the specifics of set ups and tyres but if they knew Fri, made that choice and tested we'd have had a race today.

[ian@huth]

They knew on Friday that the tyres were a problem and had a couple of days to sort something out. It doesn't really matter whose fault it was, the future of F1 was at stake and should have been one of the prime considerations. The powers that be handled it very badly.

Some of the rule changes this year have been stupid, particularly the tyre rules and the engine must last two races rule. I don't know why they introduced these changes, it couldn't have been for safety reasons.

I ccouldn't believe it when they were talking about refunds and I heard what it cost to get into the US Grand Prix, $85. Wish that was all we had to pay over here.

What's the betting that someone tries to start a rival company for F1 like has happened in the States with Indy car and Cart.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Engine lasting two races was to reduce costs, in theory, a major concern for some of the lesser teams who struggle to compete. Even so doesn't work that well as the big boys have more money to develop in to making their engines last longer.

The tyres I think was another, failed, attempt to slow cars down and make overtaking more likely. Not really seen evidence that shows that is or isn't working. I suspect other changes like wing sizes have had just as much effect (cars now loose grip when approaching behind others that they still can't pass easily).

As for swapping to Bridgestone tyres, I doubt that is safe too. Bridgesoten and Michelen tyres are different construction and weight. The whole car handling would change dramatically, and if they have no test data, i suspect teams just wouldn't know how well the car would stay glued to the track.
__________________

Originally Posted by ian@huth

What's the betting that someone tries to start a rival company for F1 like has happened in the States with Indy car and Cart.

There has been a lot of talk already I beleive amongst many of the teams, with Bernie struggling to hold the different factions together.

Does anyone think that changing tyres in pit stops would have been an answer here?

Not to mention bringing an element of excitement back to the sport?

[bmxbandit]

i can understand why the teams ddn't want to race, but when the solution amounted to putting some cones up to create an extra chicane, you have to wonder what the people in charge are up to...
__________________

Originally Posted by Tuftus

Does anyone think that changing tyres in pit stops would have been an answer here?

not really, th teams would inevitably still be pushing the performance envelope of the tyres.