FIA a disgrace
Discussion
I find this absolutely staggering in a sport that is the ultimate in everything to do with motor sport and we have an organisation running F1 that makes it look totally incompetent
So many incidents over the last two seasons. It’s getting worse rather than better
They do their best to dumb down the excitement with trigger happy red flags, inconsistent application of the rules and safety cars but reading this they can’t even agree amongst themselves how to apply the rules which means there’s too many of them. Add in the jewellery fiasco what a mess
https://www.planetf1.com/news/martin-brundle-heate...
So many incidents over the last two seasons. It’s getting worse rather than better
They do their best to dumb down the excitement with trigger happy red flags, inconsistent application of the rules and safety cars but reading this they can’t even agree amongst themselves how to apply the rules which means there’s too many of them. Add in the jewellery fiasco what a mess
https://www.planetf1.com/news/martin-brundle-heate...
As I mentioned in the other thread, 16 blue flags (and light panels) for Albon who blocked Leclerc for a whole lap ensuring Max was third. Either the race stewards were asleep or relying on what the TV director chose to show which at Monaco was completely hit and miss. The fact that he was a Red Bull driver in the past could possibly have something to do with it...??
Really woeful series of mistakes in recent races that don't give confidence in the impartiality of the race stewards.
Really woeful series of mistakes in recent races that don't give confidence in the impartiality of the race stewards.
Brundle’s Sky column is pretty scathing about the FIA and race control.
https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24096/12624621/m...
The rolling start in Monaco was apparently because the lights on the gantry weren’t working in the rain, but no-one communicated this to the teams nor the media. The delay to the start was also because of power issues taking out a number of decision-making tools. No-one understood the movement of the two-hour and three-hour clocks either.
https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24096/12624621/m...
The rolling start in Monaco was apparently because the lights on the gantry weren’t working in the rain, but no-one communicated this to the teams nor the media. The delay to the start was also because of power issues taking out a number of decision-making tools. No-one understood the movement of the two-hour and three-hour clocks either.
Formula 1 has always been a bit dodgy regarding interpretation of the rules but to my mind it has got farcical over the last few seasons. I agree the more rules they introduce the more " interpretation" is the norm.
It is the inconsistency which makes F1 a comedy rather than the pinnacle of motor sport.
It is the inconsistency which makes F1 a comedy rather than the pinnacle of motor sport.
It is no different in Indycar - every almost identical crash at the Indy500 resulted in yellows/safety car. Again a very similar crash 6 laps from the end with Marcus Ericsson well in front, and this time they throw a red to avoid the race ending under the safety car, which happened anyway due to another crash.
ETA - wrong Marcus.
ETA - wrong Marcus.
Edited by Emeye on Wednesday 1st June 11:36
iandc said:
Formula 1 has always been a bit dodgy regarding interpretation of the rules but to my mind it has got farcical over the last few seasons. I agree the more rules they introduce the more " interpretation" is the norm.
It is the inconsistency which makes F1 a comedy rather than the pinnacle of motor sport.
There's a strong case to be made that the owners Liberty are favouring Gifted to break the monopoly Mercedes and Hamilton had over the previous years, because it was being considered as boring. As US owners, they want that entertainment value.It is the inconsistency which makes F1 a comedy rather than the pinnacle of motor sport.
Emeye said:
It is no different in Indycar - every almost identical crash at the Indy500 resulted in yellows/safety car. Again a very similar crash 6 laps from the end with Marcus Gronholm well in front, and this time they throw a red to avoid the race ending under the safety car, which happened anyway due to another crash.
Its completely different, Indy followed the laid down rules on each occasionAs for the race eventually finishing under yellow, they cant help if someone crashes with less than half a lap to run
And it was Marcus Ericsson
freedman said:
Emeye said:
It is no different in Indycar - every almost identical crash at the Indy500 resulted in yellows/safety car. Again a very similar crash 6 laps from the end with Marcus Gronholm well in front, and this time they throw a red to avoid the race ending under the safety car, which happened anyway due to another crash.
Its completely different, Indy followed the laid down rules on each occasionAs for the race eventually finishing under yellow, they cant help if someone crashes with less than half a lap to run
And it was Marcus Ericsson
- I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
Edited by Emeye on Wednesday 1st June 12:14
I was reading somewhere (sorry, no link) that there's a bit of ill-feeling developing between the FIA and Liberty. Many of the reasons are obvious, but there seems to be a lack of communication between bin Sulayam and Liberty, the former wanting to go his own way.
In theory, all the FIA provides is the rule book. They could disappear without F1 noticing. That said, the legislative body would have to be replaced, and many feel (including me) that it needs to be independent. Liberty would take control.
It's festering and it seems to me that the FIA has more to lose, so will have to back down.
I didn't think Todt would be much of an improvement on the previous two incumbents, but he stayed in the background, supporting other forumulae to an extent. Let's hope he wasn't the best one we'll ever have.
In theory, all the FIA provides is the rule book. They could disappear without F1 noticing. That said, the legislative body would have to be replaced, and many feel (including me) that it needs to be independent. Liberty would take control.
It's festering and it seems to me that the FIA has more to lose, so will have to back down.
I didn't think Todt would be much of an improvement on the previous two incumbents, but he stayed in the background, supporting other forumulae to an extent. Let's hope he wasn't the best one we'll ever have.
Emeye said:
Yeah - er I knew that - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.
My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
At the 500, the the rules were not 'fluid', they were implemented as per the rulebook - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
There is no similarity to whats been happening in F1, or other FIA series
freedman said:
Emeye said:
Yeah - er I knew that - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.
My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
At the 500, the the rules were not 'fluid', they were implemented as per the rulebook - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
There is no similarity to whats been happening in F1, or other FIA series
That’s infinitely preferable to the farce we saw in Abu Dhabi, where the Indy approach was exactly what was needed - but no-one dared make the call, and we all know what happened next.
Sandpit Steve said:
No-one understood the movement of the two-hour and three-hour clocks either.
I think if you dig into the rules all the way you'll discover that the race never actually started, they did a series of formation laps, stopped doing that, then all of a sudden the race had been started some time ago.Sandpit Steve said:
freedman said:
Emeye said:
Yeah - er I knew that - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.
My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
At the 500, the the rules were not 'fluid', they were implemented as per the rulebook - I had Gronholm on the brain having watched some of the WRC 50th Anniversary stuff at the weekend too.My point is the rules seem to be fluid to assist the sceptical.
There is no similarity to whats been happening in F1, or other FIA series
That’s infinitely preferable to the farce we saw in Abu Dhabi, where the Indy approach was exactly what was needed - but no-one dared make the call, and we all know what happened next.
There was no reason for the crash to be red flagged other than to try and finish under a green flag - it has been discussed in the media, an example here: https://theathletic.com/3339601/2022/05/29/2022-in...
F1 seem to be trying to do something similar and making a real hash of it.
If Ericsson had lost he would have been as entitled to be as pissed off as Hamilton was last year. Several identical crashes, but only one gets red flagged.
I don't agree with it. I believe in pure racing, I think we should stick to the rules as they are written and apply them consistently, rather than strive to satisfy the lowest common denominator fan. I'm not a fan of DRS either.
paulrockliffe said:
Sandpit Steve said:
No-one understood the movement of the two-hour and three-hour clocks either.
I think if you dig into the rules all the way you'll discover that the race never actually started, they did a series of formation laps, stopped doing that, then all of a sudden the race had been started some time ago.The two-hour clock I think started at the start of the first formation lap and stopped at the end of the second, then went with the race, by which time it was irrelevant.
This will have been the first race timed out in such a manner, which is why no-one could understand it.
Derek Smith said:
I was reading somewhere (sorry, no link) that there's a bit of ill-feeling developing between the FIA and Liberty. Many of the reasons are obvious, but there seems to be a lack of communication between bin Sulayam and Liberty, the former wanting to go his own way.
In theory, all the FIA provides is the rule book. They could disappear without F1 noticing. That said, the legislative body would have to be replaced, and many feel (including me) that it needs to be independent. Liberty would take control.
It's festering and it seems to me that the FIA has more to lose, so will have to back down.
I didn't think Todt would be much of an improvement on the previous two incumbents, but he stayed in the background, supporting other forumulae to an extent. Let's hope he wasn't the best one we'll ever have.
I’ve read similar, Derek. Was it the Guardian piece?In theory, all the FIA provides is the rule book. They could disappear without F1 noticing. That said, the legislative body would have to be replaced, and many feel (including me) that it needs to be independent. Liberty would take control.
It's festering and it seems to me that the FIA has more to lose, so will have to back down.
I didn't think Todt would be much of an improvement on the previous two incumbents, but he stayed in the background, supporting other forumulae to an extent. Let's hope he wasn't the best one we'll ever have.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/may/30/f1-s...
It does appear that all is not well in the house of Ben Sulayem. If he's starting to rub F1 and Liberty the wrong way this early in his tenure, I don't hold much hope for the situation further down the road.
My limited understanding of the subject suggests the FIA relies heavily on the revenue generated by F1. If F1 were minded to do so, could they drop the FIA completely and govern the sport themselves?
Edited by Nova Gyna on Wednesday 1st June 15:52
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff