78 replies to this topic

[milestone 11]

Excellent article by Alex Kalinauckas in Autosport this morning. Evidence, were it ever needed, that the written press still have teeth, sometimes.
The FIA were given the opportunity to respond before publication, presumably, they couldn't be bothered.
https://www.autospor...de-f1/10383284/

Edited by milestone 11, 12 October 2022 - 12:07.

[Primo]

Excellent article by Alex Kalinauckas on Autosport this morning. Evidence, were it ever needed, that the written press still have teeth, sometimes.
The FIA were given the opportunity to respond before publication, presumably, they couldn't be bothered.
https://www.autospor...de-f1/10383284/

 

Yes. Biggest problem is that FIA always need weeks and months to allow for politics and agreements before they come to any decision. We who have followed F1 for a long time have gotten use to it, we do not really expect anything else and accept that whatever they say has gone through many washing stations. It is not a problem that can be solved easily since whole F1 circus is based on a secret agreement (Concorde), an agreement who's essence  is to protect the teams investments. We, the public, cannot know how, and where, the actual rules and the Concorde agreement collide. I do trust FIA's intentions, but not their decisions.  

[KeithD68]

In AD the world got to listen to a race director asking Red Bull apologetically perhaps if it's not too much trouble could they kindly give a place back if they don't mind

 

The FIA are a joke

 

Just run the sport to the bloody rule book instead of all the secret deals and behind the trailers hand shaking, that's all anyone asks

Edited by KeithD68, 12 October 2022 - 11:34.

[EvilPhil II]

As much as I have hated the increasingly conservative nature of the FIA, I have to say, look at Indycar which is like a domestic racing series in comparison, and then look at WEC where it's so sterile and dull even at the track side you are likely to turn it off before race end. I'm not sure there is a better solution is what I mean.

[smitten]

It's an omishambles, and it seems to be getting worse. 

 

We've had hugely controversial events in the past, some of which looked like vendettas.  Today, we seem to have a number of controversial events that just smell like incompetence to me, coupled with an FIA that looks increasingly toothless.  I know there are conspiracy theories around some of the happenings of the last 12 months, but what comes through to me is the FIA not being able to follow its own rules time and time again, and then not having the guts to do anything meaningful or consistent when they do.

 

We'll be here regardless, but will the viewing public care?  One controversy probably looks much like another to many of the casual viewers, and with the cult of personality increasingly dividing people on who they like rather than integrity for all, will they actually switch off?  I doubt it.

[Risil]

We'll be here regardless, but will the viewing public care?  One controversy probably looks much like another to many of the casual viewers, and with the cult of personality increasingly dividing people on who they like rather than integrity for all, will they actually switch off?  I doubt it.

 

It won't make much of a difference to the bottom line while F1's audience is growing and expanding, but inevitably at some point this will stop and F1 will need to rethink what it's doing, and that's when inept governance would really bite. Look at CART -- they looked like geniuses in 1993-98 but by 2001 absolute klutzes. The positive way of looking at this is that there is time to turn this around.

[KWSN - DSM]

Remove all power from the teams, place all power with FIA - Follow the rules strictly, do not allow loopholes and grey areas, if a top team cheats come down on them in a rain of fire, if a small team cheats come down on them in a rain of fire.

 

The sport will survive, the sport has grown and will not lose all the new converts due to a poorly executed race in Japan, or Spa last year, interest is cyclical, but the world at large crave entertainment so the low when it comes will be higher than what the sport have come from.

[Widefoot2]

Quite frankly, what's turned me off F1 more than anything has been the reaction from Mercedes (Wolff) after their rein of domination has ended.  It's as if they (he) can't imagine a team being better than them, and looking for any excuse to bring RB down.

 

This after seven years of powertrain advantage, curiously minor penalties for severe accidents (see Silverstone 2021), and more.  Take a break, Toto - the Championships are not owed to you!

[smitten]

The Grauniad has a similarly themed article today.

[ForzaFormula]

Basically teams can talk and use their political power to get out of trouble, even if what they have been doing is breaking rules to win titles and gain big advantages over their rivals. 

Take the power away from the teams and control them properly, enforce the rules and put the correct punishments in place without hesitation regardless of the outcome of past or future results. 

Edited by ForzaFormula, 12 October 2022 - 12:44.

[Alex79]

Remove all power from the teams, place all power with FIA - Follow the rules strictly, do not allow loopholes and grey areas, if a top team cheats come down on them in a rain of fire, if a small team cheats come down on them in a rain of fire.

The sport will survive, the sport has grown and will not lose all the new converts due to a poorly executed race in Japan, or Spa last year, interest is cyclical, but the world at large crave entertainment so the low when it comes will be higher than what the sport have come from.

alas an utopia. as an earlier poster said "FIA is only one F away from FIFA"

[KWSN - DSM]

alas an utopia. as an earlier poster said "FIA is only one F away from FIFA"

 

Stated my view and opinion, in matters cheating Draconian the way to go, if in Track & Field we have PED's you strike every single record the athlete have ever set, and give them a 4 year ban at minimum. There are no excuses for knowingly cheating, thus penalty should be so severe there are no incentive to cheat. Tour de France got it right when Armstrong was removed, we my have seen him win 7 years in a row, all history books show is that he did not, as well tell the story of the great cheating he and his teams engaged in.

 

My penalty for Red Bull would if there were an offender in 2022 be doubled for that team, eventually the teams will get the message, if happens in 2022 as we 2023 by any team, the 2023 offender would lose all points WCC and WDC - What I say can be written into the rules very easily, then the teams can decide on their own to follow them.

[milestone 11]

One of my biggest problems with the FIA is the lack of transparency. The secrecy continues, yet, Ben Sulayam got the British vote on his transparency ticket. Not only is he a clown, he's also manifestly dishonest.

[ANF]

The court of public opinion doesn't care about opinions hidden behind a paywall.

[Gareth]

In my view, the FIA makes every decision through a lense of "how will this look?", rather than "what is right?".

 

As an illustration, I would offer the stark contrast between how quickly they judged a last lap incident in Japan, vs how slowly they judged a lap 10 incident one week prior in Singapore. In Japan, they knew their decision might bring the championship to an end, so they made it quickly, without talking to any of the drivers, so that moment could me captured on camera. In Singapore, they waited from lap 10 to the end of the race, chatted to the drivers, and by that point knew most people's coverage of the event had ended 2hrs prior so they had best not mess with the result, and came up with the bizarre sequence of reprimand, then warning, then penalty, sequence so as to not mess with the result whilst the cameras were rolling.

 

We all know they followed completely different processes in each instance based on how they thought it would look on TV and to viewers. They let "how will this look?" guide their process and their decision, rather than "what is right?".

 

Their approach is to always close ranks to criticism, and to be as barely transparent as they can get away with.

 

I don't believe they are biased to any one team, or any one driver. I do think they produce a series of inconsistent and shoddy decisions. I think the way they handle things generates understandable suspicion, which they bring entirely on themselves.

 

They need to have their process, be open and transparent about what that is, and apply it to each decision. The outcome is the outcome, whether it's one that has some fans howling or not. Just do the right thing each time, rather than what you think is the popular thing, and you will actually find yourself being popular.

[Rumblestrip]

For me AD21 showed perfectly what is wrong with the current establishment. The two top teams blatantly pressuring the race director for the ’correct’ result told you all you need to know about how decisions are made behind the scenes and the power of the teams to influence. I agree that transparency is key.

[FLB]

One of my biggest problems with the FIA is the lack of transparency. The secrecy continues, yet, Ben Sulayam got the British vote on his transparency ticket. Not only is he a clown, he's also manifestly dishonest.

 

That's not the vibe I'm getting. The vibe I'm getting is that there are a TON of stakeholders in this and quite possibly a few bodies burried (i.e. questionable decisions made in the past). One of the reasons the recently-named CEO has the profile she has is that she has no link to any current stakeholder, directly or indirectly.

[FLB]

In my view, the FIA makes every decision through a lense of "how will this look?", rather than "what is right?".

 

As an illustration, I would offer the stark contrast between how quickly they judged a last lap incident in Japan, vs how slowly they judged a lap 10 incident one week prior in Singapore. In Japan, they knew their decision might bring the championship to an end, so they made it quickly, without talking to any of the drivers, so that moment could me captured on camera. In Singapore, they waited from lap 10 to the end of the race, chatted to the drivers, and by that point knew most people's coverage of the event had ended 2hrs prior so they had best not mess with the result, and came up with the bizarre sequence of reprimand, then warning, then penalty, sequence so as to not mess with the result whilst the cameras were rolling.

 

We all know they followed completely different processes in each instance based on how they thought it would look on TV and to viewers. They let "how will this look?" guide their process and their decision, rather than "what is right?".

 

Their approach is to always close ranks to criticism, and to be as barely transparent as they can get away with.

 

I don't believe they are biased to any one team, or any one driver. I do think they produce a series of inconsistent and shoddy decisions. I think the way they handle things generates understandable suspicion, which they bring entirely on themselves.

 

They need to have their process, be open and transparent about what that is, and apply it to each decision. The outcome is the outcome, whether it's one that has some fans howling or not. Just do the right thing each time, rather than what you think is the popular thing, and you will actually find yourself being popular.

 

One of the reasons for this is the fact that F1 doesn't have permanent stewards, so the same occurrence at a different event will not necessarily be processed the same way nor have the same outcome.

 

In the past, Charlie Whiting very openly admitted that the same offense would not necessarily lead to the same penalty. depending on the drivers involved (cf. Baku 2017).

Edited by FLB, 12 October 2022 - 14:01.

[milestone 11]

That's not the vibe I'm getting. The vibe I'm getting is that there are a TON of stakeholders in this and quite possibly a few bodies burried (i.e. questionable decisions made in the past). One of the reasons the recently-named CEO has the profile she has is that she has no link to any current stakeholder, directly or indirectly.

Absolutely but for some you need either /s or

Edited by milestone 11, 12 October 2022 - 14:03.

[milestone 11]

We still don't know the figures, but IMO some people are too quick to draw conclusions. To start with, FIA has stated that it was a minor fault.[/size]
 
Cost cap must be extremely difficult to police in F1: there are cost that are included, costs that are not included, costs that extend over several years, costs that are shared with other activities... Surely there will be grey areas in what's a cost cap violation and what is not (not that the 'grey areas in the rules' is a new concept to motorsports!). So, I believe some leniency should be applied if the alleged overspent is small, specially in the first years.

Wrong thread DeKnyff?

[thefinalapex]

In AD the world got to listen to a race director asking Red Bull apologetically perhaps if it's not too much trouble could they kindly give a place back if they don't mind

The FIA are a joke

Just run the sport to the bloody rule book instead of all the secret deals and behind the trailers hand shaking, that's all anyone asks

Shame you forget to mention a teamboss pressuring the RD for no safety car in the final race. Bit strange that said teamboss had dinner with said RD before the final race and giving him ‘tips’. Calls him mickey instead if Michael wich suggest quite a close friendship. F1 is not a one way street, every team seeks an advantage as much as you don’t want to believe that.

[DeKnyff]

Wrong thread DeKnyff?

 

Well, it could also be in the cost cap violation thread, but it's also related to FIA governance.

 

Anyhow, I will repost it in the other thread.

 

EDIT: now two threads about the cost cap 

Edited by DeKnyff, 12 October 2022 - 15:02.

[KeithD68]

Shame you forget to mention a teamboss pressuring the RD for no safety car in the final race. Bit strange that said teamboss had dinner with said RD before the final race and giving him ‘tips’. Calls him mickey instead if Michael wich suggest quite a close friendship. F1 is not a one way street, every team seeks an advantage as much as you don’t want to believe that.

 

Great further examples.  Of course teams seek advantages, have you never watched a football coach on the touchline?  The difference in football is the ref chooses to ignore the coach, isn't overtly influenced by coach, and certainly doesn't go to dinner with the coach before the game.

 

The obvious common theme coming from (most) posts is we want the FIA to follow their own rule book, clearly, transparently, and maintain a suitable professional separation from the teams.

Edited by KeithD68, 12 October 2022 - 16:58.

[AlexPrime]

Quite frankly, what's turned me off F1 more than anything has been the reaction from Mercedes (Wolff) after their rein of domination has ended.  It's as if they (he) can't imagine a team being better than them, and looking for any excuse to bring RB down.

 

This after seven years of powertrain advantage, curiously minor penalties for severe accidents (see Silverstone 2021), and more.  Take a break, Toto - the Championships are not owed to you!

Same, for me Toto is a monster and I am happy that he is in sports and not in politics.

[Risil]

EDIT: now two threads about the cost cap 

 

This thread is potentially a bit broader. But many roads seem to lead to the FIA these days.
 

[AustinF1]

I still don't really see this as a 'boom' so much as a rebound from lots of races lost due to covid and people just wanting to get out and travel and do things they couldn't do for 2 years. If it's still going in 5 years, then I'd call it a boom.

[BigCat]

Quite frankly, what's turned me off F1 more than anything has been the reaction from Mercedes (Wolff) after their rein of domination has ended.  It's as if they (he) can't imagine a team being better than them, and looking for any excuse to bring RB down.

 

This after seven years of powertrain advantage, curiously minor penalties for severe accidents (see Silverstone 2021), and more.  Take a break, Toto - the Championships are not owed to you!

Well 2021 was the first time Toto ever lost as a TP and he didn't take it well AT ALL. But maybe the experience will make him a better leader after all since it's not the end of the world to not win them all

[loki]

Won’t make make a difference.

 

Another visit by F1 journos to…

[MasterOfCoin]

Quite frankly, what's turned me off F1 more than anything has been the reaction from Mercedes (Wolff) after their rein of domination has ended.  It's as if they (he) can't imagine a team being better than them, and looking for any excuse to bring RB down.

 

This after seven years of powertrain advantage, curiously minor penalties for severe accidents (see Silverstone 2021), and more.  Take a break, Toto - the Championships are not owed to you!

I'm more turned off by all the people who have convinced themselves that Mercedes domination was ended in good faith.....

[flyboym3]

Where were these journos last year?
Why the uproar now?
Its kinda shocking to their profession that its really took them that long to process whats been going on for the last 9 months.

[Widefoot2]

I'm more turned off by all the people who have convinced themselves that Mercedes domination was ended in good faith.....

 

To those people who are convinced of that it wasn't earned, I heartily give my Secret Pirelli Tire Test award.  May they wear it with great dignity.  And dignity, I mean "yeah, "good faith" - right, mate...".

[Fastcake]

I don't think there's any doubt there is significant problems with the FIA, and has been for a long time. Some would of course say there's never been a time when the FIA hasn't been accused of incompetence of course, but I think there's been distinct issues with race control and the administration of F1 which have cropped up in the last few years. Not coincidentally, it likely stems from Charlie Whiting's untimely death, and while no one can claim he was perfect, the fact that he essentially ran Formula One for so many years then the FIA had to abruptly replace him with a different management structure and a number of inadequate individuals is probably to blame. 

 

I am prepared to give the still new FIA president a bit longer to see what changes may be in store however. Although the fact one of Mohammed bin Sulayem's priorities this year has been to crack down on piercings does not fill me with confidence.

[MasterOfCoin]

To those people who are convinced of that it wasn't earned, I heartily give my Secret Pirelli Tire Test award.  May they wear it with great dignity.  And dignity, I mean "yeah, "good faith" - right, mate...".

Thanks for proving my point, integrity matters.........

[New Britain]

It cannot have helped the FIA that, for 43 straight years until 10 months ago, its presidents were a dishonest jingo, a foaming-at-the-mouth psychopath, and an empty suit. They were all incompetent or corrupt, or both. It should not be impossible for MBS to sort out the smouldering mess that they left behind, but it will take time, determination, and bravery.

[Widefoot2]

Thanks for proving my point, integrity matters.........

When it's convenient for one's rooting interests, no doubt. What did you think/say at the time?

[BigCat]

Mercedes domination ended in bad faith? Didn't Masi suddenly backtrack on his race notes in Bahrain as soon as Max started extending turn 4 and threw them in the trash mid race? What if Lewis had won in Abu Dhabi? Would it have continued in good faith?

Edited by BigCat, 12 October 2022 - 21:50.

[MasterOfCoin]

When it's convenient for one's rooting interests, no doubt. What did you think/say at the time?

 

Honestly I said at the time the race was fix....the FIA/Masi went out of their way to make F1 a show.... 

Mercedes domination ended in bad faith? Didn't Masi suddenly backtrack on his race notes in Bahrain as soon as Max started extending turn 4 and threw them in the trash mid race? What if Lewis had won in Abu Dhabi? Would it have continued in good faith?

Bahrain was the least of Masi's goofs that season, no point focusing on Bahrain.....

Edited by MasterOfCoin, 13 October 2022 - 02:03.

[eab]

It cannot have helped the FIA that, for 43 straight years until 10 months ago, its presidents were a dishonest jingo, a foaming-at-the-mouth psychopath, and an empty suit.

Are those in chronological order?

[New Britain]

Are those in chronological order?

Quite possibly.

[ClubmanGT]

Won’t make make a difference.

 

Another visit by F1 journos to…

 

$140m for bottomless Red Bull liquid lunches? 

[loki]

Are those in chronological order?

I thought it was just one of the guys…

 

It may be that bin Sulayem will prove to be an effective leader but he’ll have to change the culture.  That’s going to be hard for an outsider to do.  He’ll need to prove to both the main office and the ASNs he’s able to drive change.

[BigCat]

Honestly I said at the time the race was fix....the FIA/Masi went out of their way to make F1 a show.... 

Bahrain was the least of Masi's goofs that season, no point focusing on Bahrain.....

It was literally the only mess up comparable to Abu Dhabi out of a whole season of mess ups. He changed the rules in the middle of the race which impacted the end result. If we focus on AD then we also have to equally focus on Bahrain

Edited by BigCat, 13 October 2022 - 03:26.

[lewislorenzo]

Unfortunately the show has taken priority over the integrity of the sport

[smitten]

Unfortunately the show has taken priority over the integrity of the sport

Let's not kid ourselves that the sport has ever been a paragon of virtue.  But it does seem to be making step changes in the wrong direction

[WOT]

Unfortunately the show has taken priority over the integrity of the sport

 

This happened a long time ago...

[AnR]

Let's not kid ourselves that the sport has ever been a paragon of virtue.  But it does seem to be making step changes in the wrong direction

 

and still it's more popular than ever right now

[smitten]

and still it's more popular than ever right now

Is it?

 

This is a chart doing the rounds and I've no reason to doubt it's accuracy, but have no way of checking myself.

 

 

Of course, you may measure popularity in other ways, but by this measurement it's not "more popular than ever".

[RedRabbit]

Is it?

This is a chart doing the rounds and I've no reason to doubt it's accuracy, but have no way of checking myself.



Of course, you may measure popularity in other ways, but by this measurement it's not "more popular than ever".

It's certainly in better shape than a few years ago, so all the doom and gloom seems a little over the top.

It also shows how bad the dominance of Mercedes was, combined with awful sounding engines and awkward looking cars before 2017.

[smitten]

It's certainly in better shape than a few years ago, so all the doom and gloom seems a little over the top.

It also shows how bad the dominance of Mercedes was, combined with awful sounding engines and awkward looking cars before 2017.

I think attributing causation to Merc dominance or wrong sounding cars is overly simplistic.  According to that logic, Merc dominance ended after 2017? 

[Primo]

In my view, the FIA makes every decision through a lense of "how will this look?", rather than "what is right?".

 

As an illustration, I would offer the stark contrast between how quickly they judged a last lap incident in Japan, vs how slowly they judged a lap 10 incident one week prior in Singapore. In Japan, they knew their decision might bring the championship to an end, so they made it quickly, without talking to any of the drivers, so that moment could me captured on camera. In Singapore, they waited from lap 10 to the end of the race, chatted to the drivers, and by that point knew most people's coverage of the event had ended 2hrs prior so they had best not mess with the result, and came up with the bizarre sequence of reprimand, then warning, then penalty, sequence so as to not mess with the result whilst the cameras were rolling.

 

We all know they followed completely different processes in each instance based on how they thought it would look on TV and to viewers. They let "how will this look?" guide their process and their decision, rather than "what is right?".

 

I don't think that is a good example. I don't think that many of us saw the errors Perez made in Singapore when they happened and I think that if they are to make a decision that might take away a win, they need to make sure they get it right. In Japan, the situation was much simpler and while Binotto felt that Leclerc should have been allowed to argue his case, there was no argument there. Even Leclerc said the penalty was fair. 

On the other hand, maybe they should have penalized Perez directly, during the race, after the first offense (if they had clear pictures/data) and ignore the reasons, but racing is different from, for example,  football.