20th June 2005, 05:30 AM
I didnt watch it as I have an exam today (woke up early to study more) but I read all about it. WTF??!!!! Bloody farce it was. I feel immensely sad for those who paid good money. Hope they get a refund.
For those less informed about what happend, see here.
20th June 2005, 08:19 AM
I did watch a bit of it. Yes, a big farce indeed.
I do not buy the FIA's argument that it's up to the teams to turn up at races with suitable equipment. This was a safety issue more than a performance issue.
They (and Ferrari - 'cos they vetoed the idea) should have let the race run with a temporary chicane at the fastest part of the circuit. This would have ensured more safety, allowing the race to go on. The Michelin-shod teams would still have been able to compete, and their probable penalty for not bringing adequate equipment would have been loss of podium position and championship points, instead of loss of life (if one or more terrible accidents happened).
Fans paid good money to see the race. Instead, they got the two Ferraris 'battling' it out. (There was an interesting team radio call that was televised involving Schumi and his race engineer that totally proves how much things are biased in his favour.) And the Jordans and Minardis trying to provide a spectacle.
20th June 2005, 09:45 AM
true its a safety issue...but i wonder what if it was bridgestone who had tyre problems instead of michellin.....i suspect the race would still have gone on as it did early this morning.
20th June 2005, 10:11 AM
it might have, or the chicane would have been in place.
there was an option which could allow the race to go on as a full spectacle but it wasn't taken.
the US has been giving F1 a try. i guess they won't bother at all after this.
20th June 2005, 04:13 PM
Ferrari simply had nothing to do wtih it. It was a sporting decision to maintain a competitive advantage. Why should they give Michelin a helping hand at all? They have a championship at stake unlike Jordan and Minardi. Did any of the previous races feature a last minute change of circuit layout to help the struggling bridgestones? As for this not being a performance issue, it really could be. Why was Michelin unable to bring a safe tyre in where Bridgestone could? Did they just push their tyres a wee bit too far in favour of performance over safety?
20th June 2005, 04:22 PM
yep, I don't see it as Ferrari's problem... they were racing within the rules, while Michelin insists on changing the tyres which is unfair. the recommendation that the cars using the Michelin tyres to slow down if need be is correct as they qualified with that 'faulty' tyre.
no, I am no Ferrari fan and it was indeed a big farce but it is strange that Michelin has so much 'power' in stopping the teams from racing after what was obviously their own supply problem.
if one remember at early part of season, bridgestone has a lot of problems with their tyres and their teams did badly, with tyres wearing out prematurely, bursting, cars spinning out and what's not. but did they insist on changing the tyres after qualification or stop their cars from racing? no, they did not.
no double standards please.
yep, that must be the case, 8 out of 10 top qualifiers uses michelins.
Originally Posted by BurgaFlippinMan
20th June 2005, 04:46 PM
All of the teams agreed to build a chicane on turn 13 to ensure the safety of the drivers and to allow the michelin runners to compete.
Guess which team disagree....FERRARI!
Is it shiok to win this way?
20th June 2005, 05:06 PM
Nope, I disagree. It's very easy to cite rules and regulations and forget that fans paid good money to see 20 cars race each other. F1 isn't exactly the most popular sport in the US, and after this, I doubt they'd bother in the future. F1 doesn't happen in a vacuum. After what happened, interest from the US audience and sponsors is sure to tank.
Regarding Bridgestone's earlier problems, there was no safety issue. The particular problem in the US is the banked wall. (Ironically, the cause of this whole tyre issue.) Most circuits - except Monaco - have gravel traps and tyre walls where there are corners at great speeds. The Indy circuit, where you corner at full throttle (in excess of 200mph), doesn't.
Also, Michelin did not consider it a safety issue the race that Raikonnen's tyre flat-spotted and caused his suspension to give way during the last lap. There, plenty of Michelin tyres were at their limit by the end of the race. But it was within their tolerance margin. Here, they honestly thought that the tyre they brought - for sure - would not last the whole race.
So, the solution was to say, "Fair, is fair. We'll race, all six of us."?
20th June 2005, 05:41 PM
To me FIA created so many rules to prevent Ferrari from winning, so why should Ferrari play saint and agree to the change in rules?
20th June 2005, 05:42 PM
Read the link here for correspondence between FIA and Bridgestone, and the post-race press conference --> http://www.fia.com/index_1024.html
I think Ferrari can hardly be faulted, FIA had flatly refused to change the rules, which is the fair decision, IMO. Michelin teams had the option of 1) Slowing down at turn 13, 2) Pit the car every 10 laps, or 3) Change the tyres and bear the penalties.
F1 race director's reply to Michelin tells it all: "We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen. As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tyre to an event so as to ensure that a back-up (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tyre given your years of experience at Indianapolis."
What a major screw-up.....
20th June 2005, 06:56 PM
20th June 2005, 07:01 PM
20th June 2005, 07:08 PM
the bridgestone failures were unpredictable, michelin had a good idea that their tyres will fail at the fastest (and most dangerous to the driver and spectators) part of the track.
Originally Posted by tao
the big losers here are the paying public. my heart goes out to them.
20th June 2005, 07:42 PM
What a boring race this time.... finally see michelin encounter problems..
20th June 2005, 08:03 PM
From my POV Ferrari cant be blamed at all for the latest fiasco. Why? Most of the changes to the rules of F1 were made so that Ferrari wouldnt be dominating the sport. Hence, in the latest fiasco they stood by the rules and regs
20th June 2005, 08:20 PM
by my understanding, Ferrari's disagreement over the installment of the chicane meant nothing to the FIA. They most probably would have thrown out the proposition even if Ferrari did agree. There simply was no other way about it. All this politics was bound to bring some bad one day, they had it coming. You got to have pity for the American people who paid good money to attend the race, most of them had no idea what was going on. Their NASCAR and IndyCar races arent filled with all the F1 politics.
20th June 2005, 09:09 PM
20th June 2005, 09:22 PM
20th June 2005, 09:43 PM
Interestingly, if you guys go watch NASCAR and INDY races, they hardly care about such 'safety issues' and everyone just race like MEN SHOULD. Of course there are safety measures, performance and safety testing and regulations, but they hardly go to the 'precision safety levels' we see in F1.
Originally Posted by BurgaFlippinMan
Tyres blow up, engines blow up, cars crash, whack each other and bump around, the spectators enjoy it and everyone is ok when somebody crash because of engine or tyre problems.
Come on.... it is a motor sports, there are risks involved but once politics like the full-blown one we saw in this F1-Michelin fiasco, the spectators suffer, get bored and give up on them.
20th June 2005, 10:56 PM
They hardly cared about such issues cos they din know about it. Who can predict engine failures, tyre blow outs and stuffs? NASCAR and Indy cars are designed to go fast around the oval. Hardly any brakes used. Thus their tyres are designed to cope with high speed corners with low down force used. The tyres on the extreme corner sides are bigger. Michelin knows its limitations (Had a crash on testing day), so they pull out. Heard of the HANS device? Now used in almost all motor sports. Invented by a guy from the NASCAR series. Why use it? Safety of cause. Heard of Ayton Senna? What did he do? What happened to him?
Originally Posted by tao
Expect Michelin to close one eye if they know its limitations and send the teams out? Big risk. 7 teams X 2 drivers. 14 lifes at stake, 14 chances that things will go wrong. Who can bear the consequences? Take a chance? Do not pass GO. Go to jail!
My point is, Michelin knows its limitations, hence they pull out. Other accidents, one cannot predict, hence they race like men. Crash and burn. More than 10 cars failed to finish in the Canadian GP.
F1 naturally have more politics because it is governed by FIA and it is international. Just look at football's FIFA and UEFA.
Last edited by afbug; 20th June 2005 at 10:59 PM.