F1

[Doobrey]

They should have red flagged the race after Ralfs crash.
I think it was completely moronic of the race director to allow all the cars to go through all that debris on the exit of the corner.
 I know they were following the safety car, but even at that speed they could have had a tyre let go, and then plough straight into the marshals and doctors helping Ralf.

 And poor old Montoya! letting the guy race for 50 odd laps before black flagging him cos he got out of his race car and into the spare too late. Whatever happened to that 20 minute window that penalties had to be given in ? Now if Schumacher had done that......

[Doobrey]

PMC wrote:
BTW, what does everyone think of the proposed new rules?  For those who don't know the plan is an engine size reduction to 2.4 litres and 8 cylinders.

I think it`s bloody stupid.
They have 2 agendas..
 1. Cut speeds because of safety concerns.
 2. Cut/limit the cost of racing.

Cutting the engine size will slow them down for another decade, but the lower end teams on customer spec engines will suffer.
The engine companies have spent years and millions on getting a 3 litre v10 to where it is now, getting a competitve 2.4 litre V8 isn`t as simple as lobbing of 2 cylinders and shortening the crank stroke, so they`re gonna be starting from scratch, and that means the companies with the biggest budgets will still win.

I had a simple idea, so cunning you could stick a big bushy tail on it and call it Reynard..
Why not just use a simple rev limiter?
The FIA could regulate it easy enough, giving each car a sealed box at the start of each race to stop cheating.

It`ll also give engines more longevity, lower revs puts less stress on the whole unit, so you should see more cars finish the race (apart from Sato  :-P ), and should make engines cheaper to make as they won`t need as much exotic alloys as they do now.


 OK, the anaethestic from the dentist has worn off now, and have regained the ability to work out that 8/10s of 3 litres is 2.4 litres, so they can just lob off the end 2 cylinders.. I`ll shut up and get back to coding. :sealed:

[Doobrey]

It`s not about softening the sport and making it totally safe in the way you see it.
There`ll always be an element of risk no matter how fast or slow you crash, just look at Senna`s crash, normally drivers would walk away from something like that..:-(
 I was reading about a crash in practise at the French GP, (I think it was a Sauber) 80g, nose straight into a tyre barrier.Without that new head restraint they said he would have headbutted the steering wheel and at the very least have some damage to his neck.

If they don`t slow the cars somehow, accidents will just get bigger and bigger. A crash this year that puts 80g on the driver, could well be a 90 or 100g crash next year.

I`m with you about Moseley and the FIA, some of their ideas have been bizarre.

Take the idea of putting grooves in the tyres!
How the hell is that improving safety?
Sure, they can`t corner as fast on them, but it doesn`t stop the car reaching the same speed just before they brake.
What happens if a driver needs to take sharp turn to avoid someone/something on the track? Oh dear, not enough grip, and wallop!
 

[Doobrey]

That`s gotta be one of the best races this season.
Although for a new track, a couple of the braking zones looked like a corrugated tin roof, that`s gotta hurt :-o

I wish they`d had some more interesting pit-car conversations though, I can only imagine what some of them would be..
 Pit:"David, your getting too close to Ralf"
 Pit:"Repeat, your getting too close to Ralf,back off"
 DC:"Oopsie"
 Pit:"You {bleep}wit"

[Doobrey]

PMC wrote:
2) Silverstone.  Bernie gets his way and Silverstone is axed

 Wasn`t purely down to Bernie, the BRDC didn`t submit an application cos they couldn`t afford it. On the BBC`s Motorsport page, they said that the final price Bernie wanted was one of the lowest in Europe.
 It just makes me f####g mad that the Government refused to help.
 Look at China and Bahrain, how much did they pour into those tracks ?
 The Canadian GP this year only went ahead after the Canadian authorities subsidised all the teams that normally run tobacco sponsorship, to make up for the loss of revenue.

Yet in the UK, they spend £430 Million on a new Scottish parliament originally budgetted at £40M, the same on the Millenium Dome, god knows how much on rebuilding Wembley Stadium, and wanting to spend several billion on hosting the Olympics.
 But will they help out with the £3 million difference between what Bernie wants, and what the BRDC can afford??

 Obviously you can't penalise the guy for his deserved success, but having someone else win every once in a while would be nice...

 
 Look how they do it in the BTCC with success ballast. Win a race, have a sodding great lump of lead bolted to your car.
 Sounds crude, but it works. after a while it is a fairly level playing field.

4) Jaguar.  Another team bites the dust and goes the way of Lotus, Tyrrell, Prost, Arrows, Pacific, Forti and Larrousse.  That's eight teams in ten years.

 ..pedant mode engaged.
 Tyrrell became BAR.  :-D

I like Bernies suggestion that the teams could run 3 cars next season if there aren`t enough teams left.
 Yeah, good idea that.. when the FIA are trying to reduce the cost of F1, add another 50% to their running costs for another car !

[Doobrey]

CU_AMiGA wrote:
Schumacher to win again this season me thinks!

Yup, especially since Ecclestone`s introduced the new rule that any non-red cars will be randomly banned for two races.

So what does everyone think of BAR`s ban?
From what I`ve read, they hadn`t actually broken any rules. But wierdly the FIA didn`t have to prove they did, BAR had to  prove they didn`t..and since they had no way of proving the weight of the car throughout the race they lost the appeal.

The sooner all the other team set up the breakaway GP series, the better it`ll get. Oh, suprise suprise, who`s the  only team not to have signed that letter of intent to form the new series(and so, still in favour with Ecclescake)??
 :pissed:

[Doobrey]

lurkist wrote:
BTW, any other brits annoyed at F1 moving to ITV with ads, etc?

Yup, and I swear they cut to ads just as something moderately interesting happens.
 Take the San Marino GP for example, 4 laps from the finish, Schumacher crawling all over the back of Alonso and ITV cuts to an ad break. :pissed:
 What moron thought that`d be a good time to press the magic button ? 60-odd laps of bugger all happening, then when it gets exciting we get shown ads for bog roll and ear wax removal   :pissed:  :pissed:

[Doobrey]

blobrana wrote:
 

Is it a severe lack of sleep , or has Red Bull replaced Coulthard's pit crew with 10 yr old kids ?

I just hope that when they were doing the windtunnel tests, no one shouted out "May the downforce be with you"  :-)

[Doobrey]

blobrana wrote:
That `one set of tyres` rule just adds to the danger imho.

 And all in the name of cost cutting forced on them by the powers that be !
 How much does a set of F1 tyres cost? bugger all compared to the   money the teams spend keeping their guests happy in the hospitality suites.

 Although there is another side of this 1 set rule...
Remember what used to happen after a pit stop and the new set weren't as good as the old ones (or vice versa), and you'd suddenly see a difference in the cars lap times?
 Now imagine being stuck with a bad set on race day and no chance to change them after 20 laps :-x

 Ah well, at least it was a good race to watch.
Poor Kimi, he deserved to win. I can't believe he could actually race with that tyre,shame it shook the suspension to pieces (my last British made car had the same problem  :lol: ).. guess the bloke's got balls the size of melons.

[Doobrey]

I feel sorry for everyone that spent money on going to see it.
IMHO, the Michelin teams made the right choice in not racing, why should they have gone out on the new tyres and get penalised for something that isn't their fault?

And as for the FIAs suggestion to use the dangerous tyres but just go slower on the banking ?? The whole point of the 107% qualifying rule was to eliminate cars that'd be too slow and get in the way on the grounds of safety.

There were a couple of solutions to have a proper race, but the Max and Bernie show had their heads stuck so far up each others arses that they couldn't see them.

[Doobrey]

Oh well, looks like the implosion is about to begin...FIA to bring charges against teams :-(
 I can't see any of them rolling over and taking it, wonder if they can counter by bringing disrepute charges against Moseley and Ecclescake?

[Doobrey]

More F1 crap for anyone who's interested..
 BMW buys Sauber

Stoddard blames Mosley..get past the rants and the rest shows the usual Mosley bullyboy tactics.

Edit..
I think this Stoddard's account of USGP says it all, damn good read of how this whole farce came about.

To my total disgust, it was stated that Mosley had informed Mr Martin, the FIA’s most senior representative in the USA, that if any kind of non-championship race was run, or any alteration made to the circuit, the US Grand Prix, and indeed, all FIA-regulated motorsport in the US, would be under threat – again, exactly the same tactic that was used in threatening the Australian Grand Prix and Australian motorsport in March of this year.

[Doobrey]

As much as I hate to admit it,I feel pretty bad for Bernie.
He was stuck between a rock and hard place with Mosley refusing to budge on a compromise.

I guess after the Paris hearing we'll know more.
Knowing what a jumped up little dictator Mosley is, I bet he'd do something stupid like ban all the Michelin teams for a couple of races  :-o

Maybe the teams will decide enoughs enough and bring forward the GPWC idea to 2007 ? Dunno if the Concorde Agreement allows them to do this though..but then what can the FIA do? Ban them from a series they no longer want to race in?

[Doobrey]

Well maybe it's time to get Mrs.Mosley to meet the team bosses wives now..
F1 teams may boycott more races

"Would we race after a (heavy) penalty? I think we'd have a meeting and you wouldn't guarantee it," Stoddart said.

But FIA president Max Mosley countered: "The governing body will always win."
"If it emerges that the guilt of certain teams is of a certain level, then a ban will be justified," he told the newspaper. "There are various other possibilities - points being deducted, a fine or reprimand."

[Doobrey]

Vincent wrote:
Minardi shouldn't be fined - they're bridgestone runners.  It's only the michelin teams that will be penalised.

But who's the one always {bleep}ing and moaning about the FIA?
..and who tried legal threats against the FIA at Australia?
..and acting/behaving like a spokesman for all the team bosses at the USGP?

I'd hazzard a guess and say Minardi are on Mosley's {bleep}list too.