Accepting the unacceptable
Posted on 10/12/2010
 Nothing technically illegal but ... the Ferraris of Michael Schumacher and Rubens Barrichello cross the line together at the 2002 USA Grand Prix |
The FIA’s decision to end its own pathetically inept attempts to control the issuing of team orders should not been seen as a surrender to Ferrari, as some have claimed, as much an acceptance it was trying to police the unpoliceable.
For more than five decades team orders were an accepted part of the sport and while they provoked a few moans, nobody got too upset. But it was the complete dominance of Ferrari and Michael Schumacher which had those running the sport desperately looking for ways to curb them. In Austria in 2002 Rubens Barrichello was ordered to allow Schumacher past to take the win – so dominant was Schumacher anyway that it was hardly needed but it angered sponsors and spectators, and so the FIA who saw the last chance of something resembling a competitive drivers’ championship disappear.
So team orders were banned as a knee-jerk reaction, only it soon became clear that enforcing the rule was impossible. So a murky world of coded messages and limp-wristed enforcement followed.
In Germany this year Felipe Massa was ordered to allow team-mate Fernando Alonso past for the win, wrecking the clearly disheartened Massa’s season and turning opinion against Ferrari and Alonso. The FIA was almost powerless to act and fined Ferrari the derisory sum of $100,000.
By scrapping the rule at least the FIA has admitted what everyone else knew for years. Team orders have always happened and will continue to do so. Anyone who pretended otherwise was a blinkered fool.
Corporate squabbles tarnish a memory
Posted on 10/12/2010At the moment there is every possibility that next season there will be two Malaysian-backed Lotus teams on the grid, fielding four similar cars all powered by Renault engines. However, not only will the teams be unconnected, they may well be at war with each other.
The near-farcical situation has come about because Malaysian car manufacturer Proton, which owns Group Lotus, has switched backing from the Tony Fernandes-run team it supported in 2010 to RenaultF1. It also claims it has the right to the Lotus name, but Fernandes, and others, disagree.
The shambles all goes back to the 1970s when Colin Chapman, the founder and inspiration behind Lotus, split his company into the manufacturing and racing divisions. Eventually, Lotus went broke and in 1996 Proton picked up the pieces but, crucially, the rights to the racing name were bought by David Hunt, the younger brother of former world champion James.
In 2009 Fernandes launched his team and brought Proton on board as a major backer, and with it came the rights to the Lotus name. It was not so much about heritage and commercialism. While sponsors might baulk at funding a back-of-the-grid newcomer, the iconic Lotus name and livery struck an emotional cord, a link to the golden years of British motor racing.
Subsequently, Fernandes bought the rights to the racing name from Hunt. At the time it seemed a neat bringing together of the racing and manufacturing names.
Now Proton have jumped ship and ploughed $150 million over the next seven years into Renault, allowing the French company to withdraw from the sport and concentrate on supplying engines.
However, Proton thinks it has the rights to the Lotus name courtesy of its 1996 buyout, while many racing enthusiasts counter it does not and Fernandes' team has the moral and linear right, albeit a dubious one.
The FIA and Ecclestone have accepted Fernandes' application to race under the name Team Lotus in 2011; alongside it, as things stand, will be Lotus Renault in the black-and-gold livery of the Lotus JPS car from the 1970s - the colours Fernandes had been planning to use himself before he was outflanked by his former partners.
The two parties are set to meet in court in London early next year to thrash out the rights to the name. Whoever wins, the only issue at stake is the marketability of the Lotus name, whatever emotional arguments their lawyers trot out.
The never-ending story
Posted on 06/10/2010
 |
The will-he won’t-he surrounding Kimi Raikkonen and a possible return to F1 which has rumbled on all summer has been as tedious to write about as it must have been to read. And before you ask, we do have to report it because everyone else is, and were we not to we would be accused of missing out. Damned if you do …
Every few weeks there’s a quote from someone saying he is being lined up to drive in 2011. But just read a few things Raikkonen himself has said.
April 28: “"If the F1 world could go back 20 years, it would be the same as rallying now," he said. "It [rallying] is still professional but in just a bit more of a relaxed style.”
July 16: “I don't miss Formula One and I am enjoying what I am doing now.”
August 20: “If I had wanted to be there now, I am sure I would have been driving. But there was nothing sensible, so I chose something else.”
His latest response to speculation appears unequivocal. “"I am very disappointed with the way they [Renault] have used my name for their marketing. I have never seriously considered driving for Renault, and I can assure you 100% I will not be driving for them next year.”
So it seems clear. Raikkonen won’t be in F1 next year. But then again, everyone has his price and as he himself said at the tail-end of 2009: “"I think when there is enough money involved, you can always change anything.”
This is one saga that won’t go away, however much we might want it to.
Bernie's Korean nightmare
Posted on 27/09/2010
 Work on the track continues at the new Korean Grand Prix circuit |
It takes something pretty serious for Bernie Ecclestone to admit that even he has doubts about the ability of organisers to get the less-than-popular Korean International Circuit ready in time for the country’s inaugural grand prix in a month’s time.
The warnings signs have been there for all to see for a long time, and every report which has appeared highlighting how far behind preparations are has been countered with assurances from those running the sport that all is well.
All major untried events tend to be preceded by media panic. The World Cup in South Africa was going to see thousands mugged and attacked, the Sydney Olympics were going to be ruined by wind, and The Athens Olympics were going to take place in a building site. Come the time, all were deemed successes and the predicted chaos did not materialise.
However, it seems quite likely that for once the scaremongering might have substance, and even the most blinkered within the FIA will have been acutely aware of the embarrassment being caused to all those concerned by the shambles that threatens to be the Commonwealth Games in Delhi. The great and the good do not want to travel to a remote backwater of Korea to be ridiculed.
Ecclestone will find few with sympathy for his position. Relentless pursuit of money has led to a burgeoning schedule and races which make little sense other than to accountants. His gambles have invariably paid off but in Korea he has agreed to a race nobody wanted at a venue nobody will be able to get to. It needed to be something special for him to pull it off.
The FIA has flouted its own rules and the final inspection, which should have taken place months ago, is now set to happen only weeks before the race weekend.
It may be that Ecclestone’s latest remarks are a final and public warning shot across the bows of the organisers aimed at helping them stagger across the finishing line. For the sake of Formula One and a thrilling finale to the season, we all have to hope so.
Don't speculate ... enjoy Schumacher while you can
Posted on 17/09/2010
 |
Eddie Jordan’s comments about Michael Schumacher’s future don’t really offer anything new to a debate which has been going on since the first race of the season, and which escalated once it became clear the much-touted tweaks made by Mercedes ahead of the European season were not going to catapult him to the front of the grid.
The reality is nothing will happen before the end of the season. Schumacher will continue to do his best, offering his considerable experience to his team to help them develop and plan for 2011, and will be battling as hard as he can for the minor points.
Only when the dust has settled in Abu Dhabi will any announcement be made, and even then don’t hold your breath. In the meantime, speculation can only be that, and denials by his manager and team are just as meaningless – what else are they supposed to say?
Whatever his large band of loyal supporters might have believed, Schumacher did not expect to return and take up where he left off. The question now is whether he still has the appetite if faced with the prospects of another season of mid-field mediocrity.
In the meantime, fans should not waste time speculating on the future but should savour one of the greats of Formula One while they can. After all, if Jordan turns out to be right, he might not be around that much longer.
Don't write off Danica
Posted on 12/08/2010
 |
Few subjects this year – other than anything involving Michael Schumacher – have attracted as much feedback as that of suggestions Danica Patrick could be signed to drive for an F1 team in 2011.
While Patrick herself has previously denied any interest, it seems unlikely that were the right offer to be made she would turn it down. The boost to her profile as a driver and a celebrity/pin-up would be a strong reason for her to do a u-turn.
Despite all the disparaging feedback comments suggesting otherwise, Patrick can drive. However, while few seem willing to express the view publically, it cannot be denied that the level of media interest in her is largely because of her looks. It may be slammed as sexist, but we are talking about a sport where races at all levels are accompanied by a bevy of models and pit babes. Motor racing is about speed, excitement and glamour. On her day, Patrick ticks all three boxes.
True, her record is mediocre, and certainly were Patrick male or, dare it be said, not attractive enough to warrant the interest of a string of men’s magazines for glamour shoots, then she would not even have registered on Bernie Ecclestone’s radar. But she has won once – a middling IRL event on an Oval track in Japan in 2008 – and had a few other decent finishes.
Many experts believe the physical stresses and strains of driving in today’s F1 preclude a woman from taking part. Most of Patrick’s experience comes on Oval circuits in the USA which are physically less demanding. The transition could be the4 one thing that stands in her way.
Richard Branson admitted he had approached her with a view to driving for Virgin in 2010 but she had turned him down. “I would have loved to have had a looker like Danica drive," he said. "She is not only good and quick, she's a stunner.”
His then team principal, Alex Tai, was more realistic, saying the team had looked but not found anyone. "There isn't really a female out there right now who could do it," he said. "This is a really physical and exhausting sport and they would find it hard to cope."
However, we are talking F1 where money rules – how else would the likes of Sakon Yamamoto get a drive? – and for all the ridicule, the idea of Patrick in F1 should not be dismissed. She would attract a level of interest wholly disproportionate to her ability and for a bottom-end team that would translate into vital sponsorship opportunities. If anyone doubts that watch TV coverage from the USA when she is racing and see how much exposure she gets even when not near the front.
One way or the other, we haven’t heard the last of Danica Patrick.
The not-so-odd couple
Posted on 10/07/2010
 |
Much of the build-up to the British Grand Prix has surrounded the battle between Jenson Button and Lewis Hamilton and whether the pair of them will pretty much declare open war on each other at Silverstone.
Ever since Button signed for McLaren at the end of 2009 the media has been eager to portray him and Hamilton as being unlikely and unmanageable team-mates. It would not take long, so the stories went, before the pair of them were at each other’s throats. But it hasn’t happened.
Sometimes two big names on one team doesn’t work – big egos, bigger expectations and the thorny gorilla in the room of who is the No. 1 usually come to the surface. Even when things start out all sweetness and light, it can quickly go wrong, as was the case with Senna and Prost.
But equally, it can work. Hamilton and Button have something in their favour in that they are both the same nationality, and so there is less scope for cultural misunderstanding. They also bring different strengths to the team. Button, for example, is helping with McLaren’s development programme and that benefits Hamilton. Perhaps most importantly, those who see them day in, day out, report they actually get on as individuals.
There will be tougher times ahead for sure, and come the end of the season McLaren will have to make a tough choice if one of their drivers has more chance of the title than the other. There will also be moments when they can't stand the sight of each other. That's the case with even the closest partnerships.
Those wanting to write about a simmering mutual dislike between Button and Hamilton would do well to look elsewhere for now ... perhaps Red Bull or Mercedes where acrimony resulting from intra-team rivalry is close to boiling point.
Bernie's smoke and mirrors
Posted on 06/07/2010
 |
The latest comments from Bernie Ecclestone regarding plans for the USA have answered none of the questions people are asking about the state of play in Austin, and by rekindling rumours of other sites being assessed, have actually increased the suspicion everyone is being taken for a ride.
Ever since the announcement of plans for a 2012 US Grand Prix in Austin there have been concerns over the lack of any firm details. Nobody knows much about the people behind it, the funding remains a mystery, and despite assurances land has been earmarked, nobody knows exactly where. Put simply, as it stands the venture looks at best speculative, at worst commercial kite flying.
But Ecclestone doesn’t make throwaway comments. Everything he says is done for a reason, and you suspect his letting slip Hermann Tilke is sniffing around New Jersey is aimed at putting pressure on the authorities in Texas to support the Austin proposal.
Or, knowing Bernie, it could be Austin was agreed to force the hand of serious contenders on the north-eastern seaboard.
Either way, nothing is as it seems and, as things stand, a US Grand Prix is as likely now as it was a year ago.
Will the FIA learn from its own failings?
Posted on 25/06/2010
 The US F1 headquarters before it all went south |
Like Goliath's timid brother emerging from hiding behind the bike shed to kick an unconscious David, the FIA has finally got tough on US F1.
The FIA fined it – given US F1 is bust all that means is the FIA conveniently won’t hand back its registration fee – and banned it from future events, which was about as likely as HRT winning the European Grand Prix this weekend.
While much of the blame for the US F1 farce must lie with its own bosses, what the FIA ought to admit is that it failed to even come close to carrying out anything resembling sufficient controls and checks until the situation was terminal. Why was it that raucous alarm bells emanating from US F1’s Charlotte headquarters were being reported by the media long before anyone in a position to investigate lifted a finger.
The hope is that behind this sham of being seen to be doing something, privately the FIA has learnt from its own inadequacies.
F1 has nothing to fear from Indy 500
Posted on 02/06/2010
 'The general impression after an hour or so was of confusion, albeit highlighted by some remarkable crashes' |
Once the dust had settled on the Turkish Grand Prix last Sunday I went home, sat down with a cold beer and watched the Indianapolis 500, introduced with unabashed hype by the slick ABC presenter as “the greatest race in the capital of world motorsports”.
I have to confess this is the first time I have watched the Indy500 throughout. I must also confess that once the initial excitement had worn off, I found it all a bit repetitive. With cars going round a relatively small oval, before long it was hard to see who was where in the field, the consistently-changing camera angles and commercial breaks did not help, and the broadcasters regularly cut to pre-recorded interviews with drivers while reducing the live event to a small background screen. The general impression after an hour or so was of confusion, albeit highlighted by some remarkable crashes.
Clearly, the fans love it and it’s an American institution. But I was left wondering if it’s a bit like the Boat Race is to the British. A must-see event but not because of the content so much as the tradition and for the rest of the year the sport quietly chugs along away from mainstream consciousness.
As a biased F1 fan I ended the day confident that once the FIA gets it act together and finds a place for the USA in its calendar (the jury remains out on Austin) then it’s IndyCar that has a lot more to fear from F1 than the other way round.
- Accepting the unacceptable
- Corporate squabbles tarnish a memory
- The never-ending story
- Bernie's Korean nightmare
- Don't speculate ... enjoy Schumacher while you can
- Don't write off Danica
- The not-so-odd couple
- Bernie's smoke and mirrors
- Will the FIA learn from its own failings?
- F1 has nothing to fear from Indy 500