F1 race: Indianapolis (only six drivers)
- Thread starter ToronToto
- Start date
I'm sitting in front of the TV and can't believe what i'm seeing. And to think i thought about attending this race.
I blame Michelin completely. I find it hard to believe that Michelin can't develop a tire for Indy. But Michelin in there own words say "their tires aren't safe," so with that the teams have no choice but to park the cars. Ralf already hit the wall hard during practise in turn 13 and couldn't start this race.
I would have liked to see a barrier in place that would have slowed the cars down in turn 13. At least all the teams could race, but Mosely sitting on his ass in London said no. I don't know if that was the correct call or not. On one side why penalize Bridgestone because Michelin can't build tires. On the other side with a barriar all teams would be racing.
Whats going to transpire over the next few days is going to be interesting.
Michelin should be up shit creak.
I blame Michelin completely. I find it hard to believe that Michelin can't develop a tire for Indy. But Michelin in there own words say "their tires aren't safe," so with that the teams have no choice but to park the cars. Ralf already hit the wall hard during practise in turn 13 and couldn't start this race.
I would have liked to see a barrier in place that would have slowed the cars down in turn 13. At least all the teams could race, but Mosely sitting on his ass in London said no. I don't know if that was the correct call or not. On one side why penalize Bridgestone because Michelin can't build tires. On the other side with a barriar all teams would be racing.
Whats going to transpire over the next few days is going to be interesting.
Michelin should be up shit creak.
This wouldn't have happened at a race in Europe. They wouldn't have dared. The backlash would be incredible. But in the minds of FIA who gives a shit about North America or Asia, right? Most of us just turned it off and changed to the NASCAR race in Michigan. I read somewhere a few months ago where the bigwigs were thinking of cancelling Canada or US anyway and moving it to Portugal or Poland I can't remember.
As a marketing stand point, and source of revenue i think there is a huge dollar advantage for a race in the USA. So i think the USA market is very important to the FIA. Canada or Asia i wouldn't want to speculate.dj1470 said:
When you look at the stats for the USA Grand Prix. Every year it was getting bigger and bigger and now for 2005 this blunder happens.
I feel sorry for those who spent thousand on airfare, hotel and tickets to only see 6 cars running.
Lets lose the dinosaurs (Barney & Maxy Pad) and bring in fresh blood to run the FIA.
Much as I love seeing Tony George embarrassed, I feel for the fans who were ripped off completely by this farce.
Seeing as they're on a year-to-year contract, George should tell FIA to get their sorry ass outta Speedway, Indiana forever.
Seeing as they're on a year-to-year contract, George should tell FIA to get their sorry ass outta Speedway, Indiana forever.
George tells the FIA that, then George is out a whole lot of dough.Speedo said:
Since George fucked things up with Cart by bringing in the IRL, open wheel racing in North America hasn't been what it use to.
If George says your out of here FIA, then George just put another noose around his neck. IMHO.
I just read that michellin approached the fia to allow them to change tires during the race, while the teams would not score any points at least the fans would see a race. This was vetoed by ferrari. Jordan and Minardi had agreed with the michelin teams to not go out but broke their word.
Ferrari and Bridgestone did nothing wrong here. Ferrari came to Indy to race and Bridgestone brought the right tire. Michelin f*cked up and expected the FIA to roll over and change the rules for them.
All of a sudden, a two-horse race (Alonso and Kimi) has now turned into a three-horse race (add MS). With 9 races still to go and with the Bridgestones making ground on the Michelins, we're in for a good battle for both titles.
Had this occurred at the French grand prix...
Next up: French grand prix (in two weeks time).
All of a sudden, a two-horse race (Alonso and Kimi) has now turned into a three-horse race (add MS). With 9 races still to go and with the Bridgestones making ground on the Michelins, we're in for a good battle for both titles.
Had this occurred at the French grand prix...
Next up: French grand prix (in two weeks time).
kooley said:
Ferrari could have shown sportsmanship by agreeing to the proposal set forth by all the Michelin teams along with Jordan and Minardi. This proposal would have given the top 6 places to the 6 Bridgestone cars and allowed the Michelin teams to race for the two remaining points positions plus any positions that attition may have opened up in the top 6. This proposal also gave Ferrari the 1-2 finish, accepting the inevitability of them beating Jordan and Minardi. In return, they put a chicane in turn 13 and the Michelin cars can safely race.
It was Ferrari that said "no" to this proposal, claiming that it wasn't their problem. This is technically true, because Ferrari showed up with the correct equipment and was prepared to race. So on this afternoon at Indy, it wasn't their problem. If Jean Todt could see past the length of his nose he would see the bigger picture and realize that irreperable harm has been done to F1 in the US market, a market that they have only recenty begun to penetrate. This will hurt the sport as a whole, as rich US corporations choose to allocate sponsorship dollars to teams that get good press and signifcant TV time in their home market. Yes, Ferrari is a rich team and they will survive. But if the sport crumbles around them, who will they survive to race against?
And for those of you who think I'm being over-dramatic here, keep this in mind. The 7 Michelin teams are also the teams that are talking about walking away from F1 to set up a rival manufacturers series after the Concorde Agreement expires in 2007. Minardi has also signed on with this group, as well. I don't know about Jordan. Ferrari has already aliented themselves by signing a huge revenue deal with Ecclestone that guarantees their commitment to the sport after 2007. You could be only a couple of years away from seeing another IRL/CART debaucle, and if it does happen I think a lot of people are going to look back at yesterday's race as one of the key events in the breakup. At that point it will be Ferrari's problem.
It was Ferrari that said "no" to this proposal, claiming that it wasn't their problem. This is technically true, because Ferrari showed up with the correct equipment and was prepared to race. So on this afternoon at Indy, it wasn't their problem. If Jean Todt could see past the length of his nose he would see the bigger picture and realize that irreperable harm has been done to F1 in the US market, a market that they have only recenty begun to penetrate. This will hurt the sport as a whole, as rich US corporations choose to allocate sponsorship dollars to teams that get good press and signifcant TV time in their home market. Yes, Ferrari is a rich team and they will survive. But if the sport crumbles around them, who will they survive to race against?
And for those of you who think I'm being over-dramatic here, keep this in mind. The 7 Michelin teams are also the teams that are talking about walking away from F1 to set up a rival manufacturers series after the Concorde Agreement expires in 2007. Minardi has also signed on with this group, as well. I don't know about Jordan. Ferrari has already aliented themselves by signing a huge revenue deal with Ecclestone that guarantees their commitment to the sport after 2007. You could be only a couple of years away from seeing another IRL/CART debaucle, and if it does happen I think a lot of people are going to look back at yesterday's race as one of the key events in the breakup. At that point it will be Ferrari's problem.
I was at the race I was in complete shock when 14 of the cars pulled in to the garages. We had heard in the news that there was a safety issue with the Michelins but we had no idea what, if any, decision had been made until almost three quarters of the field drove off.
I'm disgusted with Michelin for bringing a tire that they should have known was unsafe and not having a safer alternative which they have the ability to do under F1 rules. They also make the ridiculous suggestion of putting a chicane in turn 13 when they knew full well that there is a long standing F1 rule stating that the course can not be modified during the race weekend. Does it make sense to force 20 drivers to race a course that they have never even practiced on?
I'm also disgusted with the Michelin teams for starting the race knowing full well they were going to pit on the first lap. If they weren't going to run they shouldn't have lined up on the grid in the first place. They tricked the fans into thinking there was going to be a race. The equipment that they chose to qualify on was substandard and they want to replace it better equipment without penalty?
The FIA also has to carry it's fair share of the blame for not finding a way to resolve the problem. Why didn't they cancel one of the early morning races and have the Michelin teams requalify on the new tires giving the Bridgestone runners the option of requalifying at that time as well. That way you eliminate any advantage the unsafe tires may have given them and still giving the fans the race they came to see.
My final comment goes to those idiots throwing beer cans on the track. I was sitting in turn 1 and saw at least six full cans of beer thrown on the track right in the racing line. One of them almost hit a course worker that was trying to pick up another one. You may not be happy that the race was a joke but it no reason to endanger the life of a driver or course owrker.
I'm disgusted with Michelin for bringing a tire that they should have known was unsafe and not having a safer alternative which they have the ability to do under F1 rules. They also make the ridiculous suggestion of putting a chicane in turn 13 when they knew full well that there is a long standing F1 rule stating that the course can not be modified during the race weekend. Does it make sense to force 20 drivers to race a course that they have never even practiced on?
I'm also disgusted with the Michelin teams for starting the race knowing full well they were going to pit on the first lap. If they weren't going to run they shouldn't have lined up on the grid in the first place. They tricked the fans into thinking there was going to be a race. The equipment that they chose to qualify on was substandard and they want to replace it better equipment without penalty?
The FIA also has to carry it's fair share of the blame for not finding a way to resolve the problem. Why didn't they cancel one of the early morning races and have the Michelin teams requalify on the new tires giving the Bridgestone runners the option of requalifying at that time as well. That way you eliminate any advantage the unsafe tires may have given them and still giving the fans the race they came to see.
My final comment goes to those idiots throwing beer cans on the track. I was sitting in turn 1 and saw at least six full cans of beer thrown on the track right in the racing line. One of them almost hit a course worker that was trying to pick up another one. You may not be happy that the race was a joke but it no reason to endanger the life of a driver or course owrker.
According to this story, written as the situation was developing, the FIA had already shot down Michelin's proposal before Ferrari even had a chance to comment.Warm Hands said:
http://www.planet-f1.com/news/story_19980.shtml
While I don't think Michelin should be let off the hook and should be fined heavily, in their opinion the tires would have worked had the teams agree to inflate them properly. The teams would not agree to the extra air pressure and that's when Michelin pulled the plug and said they would be unsafe. I think the teams are just as much to blame.
Unless you want to through out the rule book and set up a precedent for rule challenges for every race, the FIA's position was reasonable. It's a sad day for Formula 1 but I don't think they could have done anything differently.
As far as letting everyone race and guarentee the top 6 places to Bridgestone runners, you run the risk of a Michelin car taking out a Bridgestone car and messing that up. You can't just arbitrarily award the points based on who they thought might win in that case, can you?
Unless you want to through out the rule book and set up a precedent for rule challenges for every race, the FIA's position was reasonable. It's a sad day for Formula 1 but I don't think they could have done anything differently.
As far as letting everyone race and guarentee the top 6 places to Bridgestone runners, you run the risk of a Michelin car taking out a Bridgestone car and messing that up. You can't just arbitrarily award the points based on who they thought might win in that case, can you?
This was my source for claiming that it was Ferrari that rejected the proposal (amongst the teams):glaeken said:
http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/050619/4/bnsm.html
And proving that there are always three sides to the story, Jean Todt has been quoted as saying that he wasn't the one who said "no" because nobody asked. In fairness, he said he would have rejected the proposal if someone had asked him:
http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/050620/13/boho.html
I couldn't agree with you more about the idiots throwing beer cans and water bottles. If someone had become injured or died, it would have turned a farce into a tragedy. I saw on SpeedTV that they had video of people throwing things, video where the people were clearly identifiable. Hopefully that can lead to some arrests.
That's just racing, and it is a chance you take every time you go out on the grid. Michael and Reubens almost took each out out after Michael's last pit stop. Wouldn't that have been a funny podium? Two Jordans and a Minardi. Of course, if it was a matter of a Michelin car intentionally taking a Bridgestone car out, that's a different story. But still resolvable if the FIA grants points to the car that was intentionally removed.shredder said:
The Michelin runners would have nothing to loose so I think they might have been slightly more agressive, particularly when racing with Michael or Rubens. Based on what happened with the two ferrari cars and the pit stop anything could have happened and awarding points to a car that didin't finish would be rather arbitrary.
A Michelin statement today said that they would have done the same thing all over again. Surprisingly, they haven't brought up the fact that Bridgestone received data from Fierstone after the running of the Indy 500 that no doubt helped them prepare for the Grand Prix. I think that fact alone should have opened the door for a subsittute Michelin tire for the race.
Just an absolute fiasco.
A Michelin statement today said that they would have done the same thing all over again. Surprisingly, they haven't brought up the fact that Bridgestone received data from Fierstone after the running of the Indy 500 that no doubt helped them prepare for the Grand Prix. I think that fact alone should have opened the door for a subsittute Michelin tire for the race.
Just an absolute fiasco.
