Schumacher wins six-car Indy farce

[EL Chicane]

Talking about America being the most litigious country in the world, here it comes the day after:

http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/050621/40/bp2i.html

[Mushi Mushi]

Oo nga, nakaka-awang panoorin si Tiago Monteiro. Nagtatatalon pa siya dun sa podium for getting 3rd place. And if that was not enough, pinasabog pa niya yung champagne kahit wala ng tao sa paligid niya, binuhusan na lang niya yung sarili niya. Although a race is indeed a race, still nakakaawa pa rin talaga. Siguro natutuwa siya dahil natalo niya yung Minardi. :praning:

[altec]

ANGRY STODDART CRITICISES JORDAN
Last Updated: Sunday, 19, June, 2005, 20:16


Paul Stoddart says his Minardi team is only competing in the United States Grand Prix because their main rivals Jordan decided not to join the Michelin teams’ boycott of the event.

Seven of the ten teams pulled straight into the pits at the end of the formation lap after the authorities refused to agree to Michelin’s request for a chicane at turn 13.

Minardi had been expected to join the boycott, but instead the cars of Christijan Albers and Patrick Friesacher lined up on the grid with the Ferraris and Jordans.

“Nine teams agreed not to race today unless there was a chicane added to allow the Michelin teams to run,” Stoddart told ITV.

“The reason my cars are out there is simple – it’s because one of those teams decided not to honour that commitment, and that was the only team we’re racing in the championship, which is Jordan.

“So while the Jordan cars continue to circulate, we have no choice.”

Jordan’s new sporting director Adrian Burgess said his team chose to compete for the sake of the American fans.

“All these people have paid a lot of money and they’re not going to be happy, but there are six cars out there and we’re trying to put on a bit of a show,” Burgess told ITV’s Louise Goodman.

“We want to help, we want to race.

“The people above us need to make the decisions.”

Minardi and Jordan both stand to benefit from the Michelin teams’ boycott, as the back-of-the-grid teams are suddenly able to fight for the podium.

But Stoddart said that he was “not in the slightest bit interested” in the race, even though it could deliver Minardi’s best ever result.

He warned that the Indianapolis farce could have dire consequences for Formula 1.

“F1 has done some crazy things lately, but this one will have far reaching implications,” he said.

“All this talk about stupid regulations, all the interference in the sport, it needs to stop now.

“If it doesn’t stop, what we’re seeing here this afternoon is exactly where F1 is heading.”

Huge swathes of the crowd have already left the circuit, many demanding refunds, while those who have stayed have begun booing and pelting the circuit with beer cans and rubbish.

“I don’t blame people for stamping their feet,” said Stoddart.

“The most important thing today is that a race should have gone ahead, but this is not a race, this is a farce.”


Aba aba, so napilitan lang pala ang minardi na ituloy ang race? Dapat pala sasama siya sa "walkout"? E gago pala itong minardi na ito, saling pusa na lang nga sa formula 1, nagmamarunong at nagmamayabang pa! Kudos to Jordan for deciding to race for the sake of the fans. Ferrari? They raced as seen between the battle between Michael and Rubens. Kudos to them as well.

[EL Chicane]

Mukhang naniniwala na ako na malamang merong conspiracy dito sa Formula 1. Yang boss ng Minardi eh nagpa-interview pa para sabihin na mag-resign na si Max Moseley ng FIA. Mainit pala ang dugo nito kay Moseley matagal na.

Kung titingnan mo, bakit naman sasama sa boycott ang Minardi eh wala naman silang kinalaman sa gulong ito? Dapat nga hindi rin sila pumayag na maglagay ng chicane tulad ng Ferrari dahil Bridgestone din naman ang gulong nila. So bakit sila papayag na bumagal ang takbo nila using a chicane? Parang lumalabas na ok din sa kanyang makihati sa penalty ng Michelin kahit wala silang ginawang atraso. Ang labo diba? Obvious na merong hidden agenda itong Minardi kung bakit tumatalak pa na sasali dapat daw sila sa boycott.

Nahahaluan na rin ng politika itong Formula 1.

Sa isang dako naman, nakita nyo ba yung picture ni Montoya sa loob ng pit garage? Umiiyak siya talaga, dahil ba naman isang batalyon ng mga kamag-anak niya at kababayan ang lumipad pa ng Colombia para panoorin lang sya sa Indianapolis, tapos wala rin pala. Bastusan talaga ginawa nila sa Formula 1. Tsk! Tsk!

[Monseratto]

Michelin is supposed to have a back-up set in case the first batch proved unsuitable. Guess what...they didn't bring it. When the second batch arrived, it was after qualifying. And they said these too were unsuitable.

[cardo]

its really disappointing to see this in F1

If I were there, I would be raging mad. Yun ticket mo na lang to go to the US is $1300 for an arduous economy flight stuck 8-10hrs in an incywincy chair... wala pa accomodation and shopping money... tas pagdating mo dun sa stadium - you're all fired up suddenly you see 6 freakin cars on the starting grid?

[pissword]

sir jds bakit naman nila pipilitin, their performance was good enough, kung konti lang naman ang kalaban mas nakakahiya if ever nadisgrasya pa sila ng walang kalaban...

[jds]

sir jds bakit naman nila pipilitin, their performance was good enough, kung konti lang naman ang kalaban mas nakakahiya if ever nadisgrasya pa sila ng walang kalaban...

Yung comment ko, eh doon sa sinabi ng race engineer nila, na their tires can last even 100 laps.
Yeah, I agree they don't have to push hard, since ang 2 other teams are no match to them.

Schumee and Roobens just tried to put a show,... at least to make some entertainment out of it. Halos tamaan na sila ng mga bottles and beer-cans from the frustrated fans.

[jim]

It's not a farce!!!It's more of a result/consequence of using MICHELIN TIRES yukyukyukyuk. This only proves that BRIDGESTONE really does a good job in their line of work ;) Shame to MICHELIN!!!

[kimpOy]

bottomline...there are no winners eventhough the jordan driver thought he was...
the biggest loser here are the fans the F1 fans

there's now 3 lawsuit filed against the USGP
http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/050621/2/bpds.html

many more will follow for sure

[mazdamazda]

here's the latest news from formula1.com

In identical letters to the seven team bosses published by the FIA on Tuesday, Formula One’s governing body, who has summoned the teams to appear before the World Motor Sport Council next Wednesday, listed a number of charges.

The charges given are that, according to the FIA, each team:

• failed to ensure that they had a supply of suitable tyres for the race
• wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race
• wrongfully refused to allow their cars to race, subject to a speed restriction in one corner which was safe for such tyres as they had available
• combined with other teams to make a demonstration damaging to the image of Formula One by pulling into the pits immediately before the start of the race
• failed to notify the stewards of their intention not to race, in breach of Article 131 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations.

Article 131 states: "The starting grid will be published four hours before the race. Any competitor whose car(s) is (are) unable to start for any reason whatsoever (or who has good reason to believe that their car(s) will not be ready to start) must inform the stewards accordingly at the earliest opportunity and, in any event, no later than 45 minutes before the start of the race.”

The FIA told the teams they will be sent a full dossier of the charges within the next 24 hours and invited them to send any comments they should have in writing prior to their meeting with the Council in Paris on June 29.

[RedHorse]

as for me, charge nos 3 and 4 hirap nang idepensa yan...

*jim, tama ka bata!

[kimpOy]

Q&A with Max Mosley
Wed 22 Jun, 11:18 PM

What follows is a press release from the FIA in which Max Mosley answers questions on the events on the US Grand Prix, during before and after...

What about the American fans who travelled long distances and spent a lot of money to see a race with only six cars?

"My personal view, and it is only my personal view, is that Michelin should offer to compensate the fans on a fair basis and ask the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to coordinate this. Then Tony George and Bernie Ecclestone should jointly announce that the US Grand Prix will take place at Indianapolis in 2006 and that anyone who had a ticket this year would be entitled to the same ticket free-of-charge next year. But I emphasise, that’s just my personal view."

Should you not have just forgotten about the rules and put on a show for the fans?

"You cannot do that if you wish to remain a sport. Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport. But even more importantly Formula One is a dangerous activity and it would be most unwise to make fundamental changes to a circuit without following tried and tested procedures. What happened was bad, but it can be put right. This is not true of a fatality."

Why did you refuse the request of some of the teams to install a chicane?

"The decision was taken (quite rightly in my view) by the FIA officials on the spot and notified to the teams on the Saturday evening. I did not learn about it until Sunday morning European time. They refused the chicane because it would have been unfair, against the rules and potentially dangerous."

Why unfair?

"Because modern Formula One cars are specially prepared for each circuit. To change radically a circuit like Indianapolis, which has very particular characteristics, would be a big disadvantage to the teams which had brought correct equipment to the event."

Is this why Ferrari objected?

"No, Ferrari had nothing whatever to do with the decision. They were never consulted. Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi, as the Bridgestone teams, were not involved."

Why would a chicane have been unfair, it would have been the same for everyone?

"No. The best analogy I can give is a downhill ski race. Suppose half the competitors at a downhill race arrive with short slalom skis instead of long downhill skis and tell the organiser to change the course because it would be dangerous to attempt the downhill with their short skis. They would be told to ski down more slowly. To make the competitors with the correct skis run a completely different course to suit those with the wrong skis would be contrary to basic sporting fairness."

Never mind about ski-ing, what about Formula One?

"Okay, but it’s the same from a purely motor racing point of view. Suppose some time in the future we have five teams with engines from major car companies and seven independent teams with engines from a commercial engine builder (as in the past). Imagine the seven independent teams all have an oil surge problem in Turn 13 due to a basic design fault in their engines. They would simply be told to drop their revs or slow down. There would be no question of a chicane."

All right, but why against the rules, surely you can change a circuit for safety reasons?

"There was no safety issue with the circuit. The problem was some teams had brought the wrong tyres. It would be like making all the athletes in a 100m sprint run barefoot because some had forgotten their shoes."

How can you say a chicane would be “potentially dangerous” when most of the teams wanted it for safety reasons?

"A chicane would completely change the nature of the circuit. It would involve an extra session of very heavy braking on each lap, for which the cars had not been prepared. The circuit would also not have been inspected and homologated with all the simulations and calculations which modern procedures require. Suppose there had been a fatal accident – how could we have justified such a breach of our fundamental safety procedures to an American court?"

But it’s what the teams wanted.

"It’s what some of the teams wanted because they thought it might suit their tyres. They wanted it because they knew they could not run at full speed on the proper circuit. We cannot break our own rules just because some of the teams want us to."

Why did the FIA stop the teams using a different tyre flown in specially from France?

"It is completely untrue that we stopped them. We told them they could use the tyre, but that the stewards would undoubtedly penalise them to ensure they gained no advantage from breaking the rules by using a high-performance short-life tyre just for qualifying. We also had to make sure this did not set a precedent. However the question became academic, because Michelin apparently withdrew the tyre after trying it on a test rig."

Michelin were allowed to bring two types of tyre – why did they not have a back-up available?

"You would have to ask Michelin. Tyre companies usually bring an on- the-limit race tyre and a more conservative back-up which, although slower, is there to provide a safety net if there are problems."

Is it true that you wrote to both tyre companies asking them to make sure their tyres were safe?

"Yes, we wrote on 1 June and both replied positively. The letter was prompted by incidents in various races in addition to rumours of problems in private testing."

So, having refused to install a chicane, what did the FIA suggest the Michelin teams should do?

"We offered them three possibilities. First, to use the type of tyre they qualified on but with the option to change the troublesome left rear whenever necessary. Tyre changes are allowed under current rules provided they are for genuine safety reasons, which would clearly have been the case here. Secondly, to use a different tyre – but this became academic when Michelin withdrew it as already explained. Thirdly, to run at reduced speed through Turn 13, as Michelin had requested."

[kimpOy]

How can you expect a racing driver to run at reduced speed through a corner?

"They do it all the time and that is exactly what Michelin requested. If they have a puncture they reduce their speed until they can change a wheel; if they have a brake problem they adjust their driving to overcome it. They also adjust their speed and driving technique to preserve tyres and brakes when their fuel load is heavy. Choosing the correct speed is a fundamental skill for a racing driver."

But that would have been unfair, surely some would have gone through the corner faster than others?

"No, Michelin wanted their cars slowed in Turn 13. They could have given their teams a maximum speed. We offered to set up a speed trap and show a black and orange flag to any Michelin driver exceeding the speed limit. He would then have had to call in the pits – effectively a drive-through penalty."

How would a driver know what speed he was doing?

"His team would tell him before the race the maximum revs he could run in a given gear in Turn 13. Some might even have been able to give their driver an automatic speed limiter like they use in the pit lane."

But would this be real racing?

"It would make no difference to the race between the Michelin cars. Obviously the Bridgestone cars would have had an advantage, but this would have been as a direct result of having the correct tyres for the circuit on which everyone had previously agreed to race."

Did the Michelin teams have any other way of running the race if the circuit itself was unchanged?

"Yes, they could have used the pit lane on each lap. The pit lane is part of the circuit. This would have avoided Turn 13 altogether. It is difficult to understand why none of them did this, because 7th and 8th places were certainly available, plus others if any of the six Bridgestone runners did not finish. There were points available which might change the outcome of the World Championship."

But that would have looked very strange – could you call that a race?

"It would seem strange, but it would absolutely have been a race for the 14 cars concerned. And they would all have been at full speed for most of each lap. That would have been a show for the fans, certainly infinitely better than what happened."

Did not Michelin tell them quite simply not to race at all?

"No. Michelin said speed must be reduced in Turn 13. They were apparently not worried about the rest of the circuit and certainly not about the pit lane, where a speed limit applies. If the instruction had been not to race at all, there would have been no point in asking for a chicane."

Didn’t the Michelin teams offer to run for no points?

"I believe so, but why should the Bridgestone teams suddenly find they had gone all the way to America to run in a non-Championship race? It would be like saying there could be no medals in the Olympic rowing because some countries had brought the wrong boats."

What about running the race with the chicane but with points only for the Bridgestone teams?

"This would start to enter the world of the circus, but even then the race would have been open to the same criticisms on grounds of fairness and safety as a Championship race run with a chicane. It would have been unfair on Bridgestone teams to finish behind Michelin teams on a circuit which had been specially adapted to suit the Michelin low-speed tyres to the detriment of Bridgestone’s high- speed tyres, and the circuit would no longer have met the rules."

Have you ordered Michelin to produce details of all recent tyre failures as reported on a website?

"We cannot order Michelin to do anything. We have no contractual relationship with them. Their relationship is with the teams. However, we have an excellent understanding with both tyre companies and with many of the teams’ other suppliers. We find they always help us with technical information when we ask them."

Wouldn’t Formula One be better if one body were responsible for the commercial side as well as the sport?

"No, this is precisely what the competition law authorities in many parts of the world seek to avoid. It is not acceptable to them that the international governing body should have the right both to sanction and to promote. This would potentially enable it to further its own financial interests to the detriment of competitors and organisers. Apart from the legal aspect there would be an obvious and very undesirable conflict of interest if a body charged with administering a dangerous sport had to consider the financial consequences of a decision taken for safety reasons.. You can be responsible for the sport or for the money, but not both."

Didn’t this entire problem arise because new regulations require one set of tyres to last for qualifying and the race?

"No. The tyre companies have no difficulty making tyres last. The difficult bit is making a fast tyre last. There is always a compromise between speed and reliability. There have been one or two cases this season of too much speed and not enough reliability. Indianapolis was the most recent and worst example."

Finally, what’s going to happen on June 29 in Paris?

"We will listen carefully to what the teams have to say. There are two sides to every story and the seven teams must have a full opportunity to tell theirs. The atmosphere will be calm and polite. The World Motor Sport Council members come from all over the world and will undoubtedly take a decision that is fair and balanced."

[andre]

"Ferrari, suffering no problems with their Bridgestone tyres, declined to back the plan, and Michelin advised their teams not to race because they couldn't guarantee the safety of the tyres." - espnstar.com

Does this mean Michelin has an inferior tyres compared to Brigdestone?

This event will have a HUGE negative effect on Michelin tyres. Good Luck Michelin!

[empy]

i never liked their fat-white-tire-man mascot either. looked too much like that scary stay-puft marshmallow man from ghostbusters :D

[pajerokid]

i never liked their fat-white-tire-man mascot either. looked too much like that scary stay-puft marshmallow man from ghostbusters :D

hahaha!!! :lol:

[Tifosi]

This is a dark day for F1. Sa tingin ko it's the final nail on the coffin for F1 taking a foot hold in the US.

Those blaming Ferrari should put themselves in their shoes. You (Ferrari) and Bridgestone did your "homework" right before the race. Would you have voted for that blasted chicane on turn 13 just to see all your work go for naught? I don't think so. Heck I don't even see or hear them complain whenever their Michelin-shod rivals have an advantage over them, like in Bahrain and every other race before Indy.

A big part of the finger-pointing should be absorbed by Michelin. They're the tyre manufacturer for crying out loud. The teams are paying them good money for the goods and services they provide. Then a couple of days before the race, they tell everyone, "Ay mali pala ang mga gulong na nadala natin". HELLO!!!

Sama na rin natin ang FIA. If they didn't implement this season's stupid tire rules, we wouldn't be encountering this situation.

Hay, ultimately though, I'd love to see the FIA scrap that no tire change rule; "in the interest of safety", and to bring more action to the pits.

[Tifosi]

...and I was never really fond of Michelin tires. In my experience with our Michelin-shod cars (the tires they came out of the dealership with), hindi talaga tumatagal sa road conditions sa Pinas. But that's another story. Nung time na paltan, we changed them to Bridgestones hehehe

[kimpOy]

kawawa naman ferrari...they were not asked pala about the chicane...it was a no contest for the FIA...tapos they get to be blame tsk tsk tsk...

well at least walang casualties, nobody died...just a couple of lawsuits lang...

imagine our dear ol' kimi in a zanardi type accident...