Jump to content


Photo

Is it time for Max Mosley to go?


  • Please log in to reply
128 replies to this topic

Poll: Is it time for Max Mosley to go? (240 member(s) have cast votes)

  1. Yes, he is tarnishing the sport. He should go! (190 votes [79.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 79.17%

  2. He does a good and fair job. He needs to stay. (50 votes [20.83%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.83%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 13:50

After a year of controversy off the track, with contentious decisions on all sides, no end to a minefield of politics within the sport and some highly controversial comments and attitudes - Is it time for Max Mosley to tender his resignation?

Advertisement

#2 pUs

pUs
  • Member

  • 2,553 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 22 October 2007 - 13:54

Great, another poll. :

#3 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,850 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 22 October 2007 - 13:55

Some time ago.

#4 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 13:56

I think this one asks a fair and important question though. And it is a good start to a wider debate.

Jim

#5 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 20,699 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 22 October 2007 - 13:57

Originally posted by Jim Mango
I think this one asks a fair and important question though. And it is a good start to a wider debate.

Jim


search and yo uwill find many threads on this topic

#6 Hacklerf

Hacklerf
  • Member

  • 2,333 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 14:01

I think he should stay, plus, who would replace him :confused:

#7 Hacklerf

Hacklerf
  • Member

  • 2,333 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 14:01

They should make Howard Stern the FIA president :smoking:

#8 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,745 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 22 October 2007 - 14:05

President of the FIA does not revolve around motorsport. It's an incidental facet.

Should there be a separate FISA and President of that under the FIA Prez? There's another question.

#9 ex Rhodie racer

ex Rhodie racer
  • Member

  • 3,002 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 14:07

The fact I think he should go is influenced by the length of time he has served, rather than by his record. It´s unhealthy to have one person holding the reigns of power for the length of time Max has. I also feel a younger person might bring fresh ideas that would benefit the sport. At the moment it´s getting bogged down with red tape.

#10 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 22 October 2007 - 14:12

Originally posted by Gilles4Ever


search and yo uwill find many threads on this topic



Yes, and I have read many of these arguments. But it is time to be counted! I would like to get an idea of the numbers of people who have an opinion on this.

#11 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 09:36

I think anyone who hasn't done so yet needs to take a second look at Max's latest interview. Hmmm. Surely that kind of relationship with a team principal raises a conflict of interests - at the highest level of the sport!

Jim

#12 Tigershark

Tigershark
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 23 October 2007 - 09:55

Originally posted by ATM_Andy
This is a very poor answer!!!!

Not really, he is very honest and fair: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than[sic] Ferrari is treated like any other team." He even gives an example to prove his point.

#13 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 09:57

Yes, its ridiculous...

What about a French team? Or a German team? or an Indian team??? Should they not feel that there is a bias toward the British too. Or maybe a bias toward the Italians and their 'special' position?

Jim

#14 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 10:01

Originally posted by Tigershark

Not really, he is very honest and fair: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than[sic] Ferrari is treated like any other team." He even gives an example to prove his point.



Yes but the point is, when it comes to the FIA is imposing its regulations on other teams, can we be sure they aren't being guided by Ferrari? Or that those outcomes don't unduly favor one team over another due to this 'special' relationship?

Jim

#15 BlackCat

BlackCat
  • Member

  • 808 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 October 2007 - 10:04

please, mr Mango... if you think this is important, then DO something about it, dont organize polls. go to your countrys FIA office and talk with persons who CAN do something - however little - about it.

#16 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 10:07

Originally posted by BlackCat
please, mr Mango... if you think this is important, then DO something about it, dont organize polls. go to your countrys FIA office and talk with persons who CAN do something - however little - about it.


Well, I may actually do just that. I thought it was important to gather popular opinion first, so that the governing body can start to feel the weight of the sports supporters.

Jim

#17 Tigershark

Tigershark
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 23 October 2007 - 11:19

Originally posted by ATM_Andy
A proper answer would have been: No, ALL F1 teams are equally important to the show/sport. Spiker and Super Aguri are as important as Mclaren and Ferrari.

It would have also been false. Spyker is not as important to F1 as McLaren and Ferrari, which is why nobody really cares if they change their drivers twice to pay of debts or change names every season.

#18 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 11:59

Originally posted by Tigershark

It would have also been false. Spyker is not as important to F1 as McLaren and Ferrari, which is why nobody really cares if they change their drivers twice to pay of debts or change names every season.


You really are missing the point Tigershark.

Remember this isn't an F1 historian speaking, nor an F1 media manager or advertising exec... This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.

Jim

#19 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 23 October 2007 - 12:11

Originally posted by Jim Mango


You really are missing the point Tigershark.

Remember this isn't an F1 historian speaking, nor an F1 media manager or advertising exec... This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.

Jim

Spot on :up:

Spyker was once Jordan and between 1994 and 2002 were never lower than sixth and was as high as third in the WCC. There's nothing to say that with the right regulations they could not be third again one day.

Advertisement

#20 BlackCat

BlackCat
  • Member

  • 808 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 23 October 2007 - 12:14

FIA is more about pedestrians wearing those blinking cat's eyes even than about sport...

#21 Lazarus II

Lazarus II
  • Member

  • 4,527 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 23 October 2007 - 12:41

Welome Jim, :wave:
You see, the Ferrari fanboys will protect Max to the death. That is why they will attack you for suggesting that Max needs to go; even though Max himself said that he should not be in position longer than two terms. Of course he said that long ago.

Great thread, couldn't agree more with you and in this case a younger Max; two terms then get out.

#22 DCult

DCult
  • Member

  • 760 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 23 October 2007 - 12:56

Originally posted by Jim Mango



Yes but the point is, when it comes to the FIA is imposing its regulations on other teams, can we be sure they aren't being guided by Ferrari? Or that those outcomes don't unduly favor one team over another due to this 'special' relationship?

Jim



Yes, we can be sure that Ferrari sets the rules based on their budget and their marketing campaign. Has been like that for at least 10 years. Every rule change in the last 10 years has been made to keep Ferrari competitive so in not to run them out of business. V8's, tyre changes, everything. Very very sad. The modern plague of F1, Ferrari and Max.

#23 Tigershark

Tigershark
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 23 October 2007 - 13:00

Originally posted by Jim Mango
This is the head of the governing body, who is in charge of fairly and impartially upholding the the regulations of the sport. If that is seen to be (or indeed is) bias in any way, that is when fan's and competitors alike get angry, and the sport starts it break down.Jim

Max Mosley says Ferrari is more important because "it holds a historically important position". There is no arguing with this, apart from the degree in which you believe Max to think Ferrari is more important. McLaren and Williams have also been in F1 longer than many of it's fans and supporters have been alive, and if Max were to make a list I have no reaso to doubt they would be close behind Ferrari.

The second point Mosley makes is that he wants to make sure Formula One does not become, or get the image of being, a British run and British won championship. Look no further than the Tour de France, where the ongoing investigations against Lance Armstrong were seen and reported worldwide as a French grudge against the American. Or the Soccer World Cup, where what I believe was considered an outsider team like South Korea suddenly did fantastic in the tournament once it was held in their own country. Such an image is very bad for an international, and indeed exceedingly non-European championship. Without teams like Ferrari that attract and get a worldwide audience excited, Formula One runs the risk of becoming either a series like Grand Prix 2, or another British championship only watched in the Commonwealth. Of course I am exaggerating, but it's Mosley's job to prevent the situation from coming even close to this.

He finishes his answer with a reassurance to people that this does not in fact mean Ferrari is favoured: "But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, than Ferrari is treated like any other team."

#24 Davebo

Davebo
  • Member

  • 1,299 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 23 October 2007 - 13:19

Only 17 no votes so far? I'm sure there are more Ferrari fans here than that.

#25 howardt

howardt
  • Member

  • 2,102 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 23 October 2007 - 13:35

Based on Max's answer, Spyker should indeed be the most important team in F1 ; it's the only Dutch team in a sport where the commercial rights holder, president, race director etc are all British. Spyker alone is standing up for Dutch interests.

Max says : " stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia’ or cartel tries to take advantage of them"

Does he do the same thing for Spyker ? Does he do the same for Renault, as the only French team ? No he does not. He is giving Ferrari preferential treatment and loftier status, and says as much in his own words.

This is not acceptable behaviour. Even if he is being even-handed, it is not transparently so, and his office should be carried out in a manner that is above reproach.

#26 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 23 October 2007 - 13:41

Originally posted by Tigershark

The second point Mosley makes is that he wants to make sure Formula One does not become, or get the image of being, a British run and British won championship.


But to do this by having a 'special' relationship with one Italian team is just so flawed. They should do this by establishing good checks and balances, enabling complete impartiality to any team or driver regardless of nationality or historic status.

A good start would be to see that a president doesnt become too entrenched (Max's own two term idea sounds great!) and has some sort of appropriate accountability when it comes to his/her own relationships with key figures in the sport.

Jim

#27 Tigershark

Tigershark
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 23 October 2007 - 13:57

Originally posted by Jim Mango
But to do this by having a 'special' relationship with one Italian team is just so flawed. They should do this by establishing good checks and balances, enabling complete impartiality to any team or driver regardless of nationality or historic status.

I can't properly judge if Mosley is too involved in his relation with Ferrari, but I'm all for making the organisation more transparent and having a professional system of people who are accountable for what they do. Absolutely, and I agree that there should indeed be a maximum amount of years for any position of influence.

Improvements are possible, but Mosley has a very difficult position and I guess that as long as he's getting an equal amount of complaints from Spain, Germany, Italy, and Britain he's doing a pretty decent job. ;)

#28 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 23 October 2007 - 14:39

imagine that there were only one British team and all other teams were Italian, that the commercial rights holder was Italian, as was the FIA President, the race director and his assistant and the sport’s commissioner. Wouldn’t it be understandable that this team would be very careful? I therefore use my neutrality with a huge amount of responsibility and stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia’ or cartel tries to take advantage of them.


Why isn't this also the case for Toyota or BMW, both of which are based wholly outside of Britain also? You could also argue (less successfully, probably) that Renault, Super Aguri, and Honda deserve some assurance too.

But in actual fact the teams that really need the assurance, the teams that could really do with a bit of FIA TLC, are the independents; Williams, Force India, and Prodrive. They are essentially at the mercy of the manufacturers who otherwise control the tech groups.

#29 Tigershark

Tigershark
  • Member

  • 996 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 23 October 2007 - 16:32

Originally posted by Buttoneer
But in actual fact the teams that really need the assurance, the teams that could really do with a bit of FIA TLC, are the independents; Williams, Force India, and Prodrive. They are essentially at the mercy of the manufacturers who otherwise control the tech groups.

Mosley raised this issue in the TV series aired by, amongst others I guess, BBC World called 'Formula for Success'. He emphasized the importance of support and reassurance for the independent teams because they were, if financially possible, going to stick around forever while the big manufacturers could pull out at any moment if the situation was not benefiting them.

#30 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 23 October 2007 - 16:37

Originally posted by Tigershark

Mosley raised this issue in the TV series aired by, amongst others I guess, BBC World called 'Formula for Success'. He emphasized the importance of support and reassurance for the independent teams because they were, if financially possible, going to stick around forever while the big manufacturers could pull out at any moment if the situation was not benefiting them.

Well that's good news at least. It's a shame he didn't reiterate that view in the interview we are discussing here really. His reply was never going to go down well with many (including me) and it just reinforces entrenched opinions.

The man is a fool, really, and it would probably be right to hang all his criticism of Stewart right back on Mosley...

#31 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 23 October 2007 - 17:02

All politicans should be subjected to term limitations...

#32 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2007 - 08:09

A thats the thing... He thinks he is a politician - but he isn't. He seems to revel in turning everything into politics and I think thats part of the reason we have had a year like this.

Its a shame, I think he did a good job in his first couple of years, but now its seems to have fallen drunk with the power.

Jim

#33 britishtrident

britishtrident
  • Member

  • 1,954 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2007 - 08:20

For anybody who thinks Max can stay just do a Google for "Max Mosley" KBW :down:

If still unconvinced Google for "Max Mosley" "Salford East" :down:

If you need still the BBCi site has this http://news.bbc.co.u...000/2776295.stm :down:

Lots more out on the web :wave:

#34 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2007 - 08:25

Well, I was deliberatly steering clear of his family history... I don't think it is fair to bring it into this context, because it is easy for people to simply label him a racist and that isn't really helpful.

What I was refering to was his comments in the Motorsport press in the past.

Jim

#35 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,077 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 24 October 2007 - 09:27

Yes, and it's been a while since it has become so.

#36 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 24 October 2007 - 09:29

Originally posted by Jim Mango
A thats the thing... He thinks he is a politician - but he isn't. He seems to revel in turning everything into politics and I think thats part of the reason we have had a year like this.

Its a shame, I think he did a good job in his first couple of years, but now its seems to have fallen drunk with the power.

Jim


Yes, that's his vice. While Berne's fix is the money, Max's is power and prestige, and he wallows in it; I find it hard to believe he'll ever be able to give it up - and he changed the rules of election so to make it almost impossible for anyone to challenge him until he is ready to give it up. F1 deserves to be run by people passionate about motorsport, but it's not and nor is it ever likely to be. Still, I voted for Mosley out because, even if we have to settle with a pseudo-politician heading the FIA, we could still do with someone less vindictive and less supercilious than Mosley.

#37 jonpollak

jonpollak
  • Member

  • 13,715 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 24 October 2007 - 16:55

You've got to hand it to him though, he's one mixed up man.
His duplicitous behaviour has been comical this year.

WHAT?
Not mention his family?
Sorry...it's just too hysterically ironic to avoid.

He was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

His mother, Diana Mitford, had a diamond swastika in her retinue and claimed to have adored Hitler. Meanwhile, dad Oswald stood for election in the 1960s on a political platform that emphasised the sexual deviance of black people.

So he's a fascist, turned Tory, turned new/old Labour supporter who grew up in a household that held Hitler in high esteem and that saw black people as criminals and perverts.

I'm no analyst but that's got to be worth a book. Trouble is, if you started writing it his friend would most probably send around some 'associates' to break your typewriter. Most likely over your head.

Ignoring this takes all the fun out of it

Jp

#38 Zmeej

Zmeej
  • Member

  • 31,452 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 24 October 2007 - 17:06

Great post, jon :up:

Guess how I voted, folks! :p

#39 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,746 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 24 October 2007 - 17:27

So....

e was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

His mother, Diana Mitford, had a diamond swastika in her retinue and claimed to have adored Hitler. Meanwhile, dad Oswald stood for election in the 1960s on a political platform that emphasised the sexual deviance of black people.

So he's a fascist, turned Tory, turned new/old Labour supporter who grew up in a household that held Hitler in high esteem and that saw black people as criminals and perverts.

I'm no analyst but that's got to be worth a book. Trouble is, if you started writing it his friend would most probably send around some 'associates' to break your typewriter. Most likely over your head.


Well I'm sure Oswald would be disgusted about how much of an evil, nasty, twisted and corrupt man his son turned out to be HeHeHe... :p

Advertisement

#40 LeD

LeD
  • Member

  • 1,433 posts
  • Joined: March 00

Posted 24 October 2007 - 17:48

My doctor tells me that I have a genetic pre-disposition to certain nasty illnesses.

It is therefore entirely possible that Rufus has a genetic pre-disposition to fascism.

Nicht Wahr?

#41 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,745 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 24 October 2007 - 17:58

Originally posted by jonpollak

He was an election agent for his father's Union Movement [Euro-fascist] party after the war, he then became interested in becoming a Tory MP but finally switched allegiance to Labour after meeting John Smith. Map that political journey!

It's his dad's in reverse.

#42 scousepenguin

scousepenguin
  • Member

  • 228 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 26 October 2007 - 07:37

Originally posted by ensign14

It's his dad's in reverse.


s'dad sih?

#43 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 31 October 2007 - 10:49

OK, so now max is starting to suggest that Hamilton is bad for the sport.

Although I am aware that the press may be trying to extrapolate to much from this interview but surely the only thing that salvaged this season from political farce was the three way title fightout and the excitement of the Alonso/Hamilton battle?

And Maclaren starting next season with a negative point allocation?Doesnt he realise that this will probably do more to tarnish the soprt and turn off fans than the spying its self?

Jim

#44 Crashand

Crashand
  • Member

  • 64 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 31 October 2007 - 12:08

As long as everyone dislikes Max Mosley he is doing his job.

#45 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 31 October 2007 - 12:12

Originally posted by Crashand
As long as everyone dislikes Max Mosley he is doing his job.

The fact that so many are willing to agree with him in this thread and others suggest therefore that he is not.

#46 Jim Mango

Jim Mango
  • Member

  • 44 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 31 October 2007 - 12:33

Originally posted by Crashand
As long as everyone dislikes Max Mosley he is doing his job.


How on earth do you come to that conclusion?

#47 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,383 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 31 October 2007 - 13:00

Originally posted by Lazarus II
Welome Jim, :wave:
You see, the Ferrari fanboys will protect Max to the death. That is why they will attack you for suggesting that Max needs to go; even though Max himself said that he should not be in position longer than two terms. Of course he said that long ago.

Rubbish,

I for example said since years that Max should go, probably since 1999 or so.

Mosley undoubtedly revealed to me why he should go, when he proudly announced that the FiA has more money available for road safety campaings than certain countries. But to this day I never have witnessed anyone from the FiA involved with road safety projects.

Also my reasons have also to do with the rules we have today. Alternatively to Max retirement, have next to the FOM and FiA a third body, that is solely responsible for the racing aspect of the sport. An agency who is not concerned about safety at all. Especailly with the FiA, that should balance each other out.

#48 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,773 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 31 October 2007 - 13:34

The poll has spoken. Can Max please shut the door on the way out.

#49 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 31 October 2007 - 14:16

Originally posted by HP

Mosley undoubtedly revealed to me why he should go, when he proudly announced that the FiA has more money available for road safety campaings than certain countries. But to this day I never have witnessed anyone from the FiA involved with road safety projects.

Wiki on the Make Roads Safe campaign.

The aims of the campaign appear to be less aimed at the green cross code or tufty club end of the market but making sure that developing companies give due regard for road safety as they put their new and uprated infrastructures in place. It's all about lobbying rather than lokking left and right as you cross.

#50 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,400 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 31 October 2007 - 14:59

If F1 is incidental to the FIA why does Max on blabbing aout it everday?