Meeting over.. bad news expected and Stoddart REFUSED entry

I truly believe Indy was a fluke because of the banking combined with a flat out speed turn. Eau Rouge and Parabolica potential exceptions, but unlikely.

I'm sure Michelin will play it more safe now, but I also think they continue to bring one "aggressive" tire choice as well. I don't see them loosing their advantage.

 

PARIS - Formula One's governing body ruled Wednesday the seven teams that boycotted the United States Grand Prix were guilty of failing to provide suitable tires and wrongfully refusing to allow their cars to start.

The FIA will announce their punishments Sept. 14.

BMW-Williams, Mercedes-McLaren, BAR-Honda, Toyota, Sauber, Red Bull and Renault declined to race June 19 after their tire manufacturer, Michelin, said its tires were unsafe for the Indianapolis circuit.

In a joint statement, the teams said they were "very disappointed by the decision of the World Motor Sport Council to find them guilty" and will appeal. The teams added that they "reasonably relied on Michelin, an approved FIA tire supplier" — meaning that it was not their fault if unsuitable tires were supplied.

Though Michelin offered fans refunds and free tickets for next year's race, FIA president Max Mosley had harsh words for the company.

"It's a big step forward, but delaying as they have done has caused a lot of damage," Mosley said at a news conference. "The facts speak for themselves. It was a disastrous performance from that company and they should be deeply ashamed."

In September, the teams will face punishments ranging from a reprimand to life bans — but the FIA can only indirectly punish Michelin by applying pressure on the teams using its tires.

"The difficulty here is that the FIA has no contractual relationship with Michelin, we are not in a position to impose penalties," Mosley said. "Had this been the case and judging by what we heard today, Michelin would have found themselves in a very difficult position."

Mosley added that until the penalties are determined, the teams and Michelin must show what steps they will take "to compensate the Formula One fans and repair the damage to the reputation" of the Indianapolis racetrack and "to the image of the Formula One."

Michelin claimed its tests showed the tires were not "intrinsically flawed" and justified demands for a chicane, or a curve, to be installed to slow cars on a high-speed part of the course. Michelin added that the circuit's banked Turn 13 was unique to the championship and the pressure exerted on the rear left tires was greater than estimated.

The FIA refused the request, even though nine of the 10 teams — excluding Ferrari — said they would race if the turns were installed.

"They were asking for a chicane when they said they didn't know the root cause of the problem," Mosley said. "So how did they know a chicane would be safe if they didn't know the root cause? This completely begs the question: why did they not turn up with proper tires?"

Two Michelin tires failed during practice sessions two days before the race — one causing a wreck that prevented Ralf Schumacher from competing.

Mosley said the race could have gone ahead safely if teams were prepared to adopt a Michelin-only speed limit on turn 13, Michelin runners used the pit lane instead of the banked corner, or there were repeated pit stops to change damaged tires.

In a joint statement, 19 F1 drivers — including Fernando Alonso and David Coulthard — argued against this, saying, "This suggestion would have been an unprecedented restriction ... and would have been completely contrary to the competitive essence of Formula One. It would have been unworkable, unpoliceable and above all, unsafe."

The problems are the latest that threaten to break up the F1 series.

Nine of the teams are considering a breakaway series in 2008 backed by three key manufacturers — BMW, Mercedes and Renault. Honda and Toyota have also given unofficial support to the idea.

They are opposed by Mosley, F1 owner Bernie Ecclestone and Ferrari. Ecclestone is trying to persuade the teams to sign a new contract beginning in 2008 and Ferrari has already signed up through 2012.

The next F1 race is the French GP at Magny Cours on Sunday.

 

I think all this political nonsense makes a breakaway series a virtual certainty....and maybe as early as 2006.

 

I think you are grossly mischaracterizing Todt's reason for being at the meeting. He is a member of the council and as such I am sure he was obligated to be there. You're making it sound like he's a caring nice guy who just wanted to go there out of his own volition to ensure they were not besmirched by vengeful Michelin runners. That's simply untrue.

As for whether Ferrari had anything to do with the decisions... it depends on how you look at it. If I am standing next to your car and the E-brake was not on and it starts rolling down the street into traffic, am I responsible for a crash? Of course you would be responsible, having forgotten to set the brake, however I could have intervened to prevent the outcome. The same with Todt. Of course the root blame is with Michelin, but Todt had the power to change the outcome but did not. He did not have this power by virtue of having Mosley in his pocket (or vice versa), but rather by being the 10th team to agree to something, virtually any rule can be implemented. Todt continually abstains from voting especially when he is against something, knowing full well that the matter will go back to the FIA and be denied, after which Todt says "it was not my decision".

People don't blindly hate Ferrari. Many feel they are afforded special considerations. I don't believe they are and I don't believe they were afforded such at this past race. However, Todt sure it a man out for himself and to win at any cost, be it a cost to the image of F1, a cost to his perception in the media, or any other cost. It was technically correct the way this played out, but it was also unsporting. As others said, there are at least 4 guys who needed to get together to work this out. Mosley, Ecclestone, Todt, Whiting and on the other side the Michelin runners. That they could not speaks volumes.

 

I'll say it again... Indianapolis, the track, did it before and it will do it again. This will probably be the end of my love for F1.

 

The fact that Todt, Max, and Bernie are in the same camp says everything. Even though technically Todt has no real power to make a decision on the part of the FIA, his decision not to take any action to rectify a problem is, in effect, the power to control the situation.

Todt works for Ferrari, so Ferrari in effect has to power to resolve problems, but chooses not to do so.

Ferrari may have some historic importance in the history of Grand Prix racing, but it must be remembered that companies like BMW and Mercedes make more cars in a week than Ferrari makes in a year, and therefore, are in a much better position to support a breakaway series than Ferrari is to sustain the current one.

 

A dangerous statement for several reasons:
- Ferrari give F1 the glory
- Ferrari is the only team to have participated in every year of F1 WC
- Currently neither BMW nor Mercedes are fully committed to F1 with an engine and a chassis

Todt did not help Ferrari's image with his actions or lack thereof in Indy. However I have to say, if e.g. Ron Dennis had been in his position, I don't think the outcome had been any different. After all F1 is the Piranha Club.

 

Ferrari is "favored" in F1 not only because they are a legacy, and have a huge fan base, but also because they don't act like d0uchebags and make Max and Bernie's lives total hell. When they sucked, FOR 20 YEARS, they weren't constantly b!tching for changes, pulling cars from races, etc. No, they took it like a man, and little by little they came back. They eventually beat them (McLaren, Williams, Renault-Benneton-) at their own game. No whining we need to change things to suit us.

I would love nothing more than to have Ferrari utterly dominate the season from this point in. Monza last year comes to mind. And then, if they want to put their money where their mouth is, let the others breakaway. It's like a hot girlfriend, you can't keep bending over backwards for her trying to get her to stay with you. Either she wants to or she doesn't, and you gotta let her decide for herself.

 

absolutely true Tifosi12 !!!!

Give any of these guys the opportunity to win the way Todt did and they would ALL take it - especially Stoddart!

If the German manufacturers had won FIVE YEARS in aa row they would have left F1 (as Mercedes has done before) stating there is nothing to gain from continuing and use that crap for advertising for the next 20 years

 

As did Honda, Renault, Porsche and BMW. Very true.

Leaving F1 to the manufacturers will resolve some of the current issues with FIA (rules) and FOCA (TV rights compensation), but will create a whole bunch of others.

F1 needs a benevolent dictator to run its business. Bernie has filled that role fairly well for the past 20 years. Unfortunately he has gotten too old by now. If GPWC wants to succeed they need Ferrari on board and will have to find some kind of forum/president that is capable of implementing rules and govern.

 

Michelin screwed up not making a good enough tyre. The teams screwed up not showing up with the proper equipment. They violated FIA-ruling by not starting the Indy GP (remember: they pulled in after the warm up lap and did not arrive on the starting grid).


Of course those teams need to be severely punished.

 

They are (at least) MS, RB, NK and TM (Ferrari and Jordan drivers). Remember, there are third drivers too who signed, so it's not that there's one driver who didn't sign. Conclusion: the drivers are divided just as the teams are. What else is new...

 

Ah yes, the third drivers. Forgot those, but you're right, that explains it.