F1 who do you think was responsible in US Grand Prix

F1 who do you think was responsible in US Grand Prix

  • Max Mosley

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ferrari

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • bridgestone teams

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • FIA

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Indianapolis motor speedway

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

Kebab gud

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
1,511
Location
somewhere in yupe
Michellin droped the bomb b ut they did all the chould do to try and fix it .. bur FIA refused..

so it started a s Michellin but it ended with FIA .. so i blame FIA
 

justin syder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
4,096
Location
New York, USA
Car(s)
1986 Mercedes-Benz 300E
So you change the track during the season at the last minute?

Michellin also offered to bring new tires but said THOSE TIRES would ALSO not be good for the track.

They fucked up big time.

Ill blame FIA for shutting down f1racingworld.com and other F1 sites i liked and visited, I also blame FIA, FOM etc for being selfish greedy pigs but not for this incident at the USA GP, its all Michellins fault.
 

bihus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
4,618
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
BMW 330Cd
justin syder said:
Well I dont see how Bihus could blame Indiannapolis Speedway for "resurfacing so badly" when 3 teams were able to race on that "bad surface".
Don't forget they had an unfair advantage. Firestone knew the track, and when Indy cars raced there, they had a great amount of problems. The track doesn't appear that perfect... Let's just see if it won't be resurfaced in the near future...
justin syder said:
I dont blame Ferrari, they shouldnt have to alter the track to accomodate teams that didnt have their tires ready for the race.

FIA, well they couldnt postpone the race, what were they to do?

Max Mosley, Bernie Ecclestone, well what could they have done besides making an alteration on the track which is unfair to the teams that were prepared to race.
All these parts could have thought that the result they achieved with their intransigence is far worst that if they would have allowed the change.
But again, this is just my pov.
justin syder said:
On top of that, Michellin said they could have had new tires bough over from france but they would have also been unsafe, basically they didnt come to the GP with suitable equipment.
justin syder said:
So you change the track during the season at the last minute?

Michellin also offered to bring new tires but said THOSE TIRES would ALSO not be good for the track.

They fucked up big time.
Agreed. but as kebab said
Kebab gud said:
Michellin droped the bomb but they did all the could do to try and fix it .. but FIA refused..

so it started as Michelin's fault but it ended with FIA .. so i blame FIA
*edited
And check this too...
justin syder said:
The race teams cannot be blamed for not racing, they were listening and taking side on be cautious.

Michellin is to blame, 100%.

Let me know if you feel different.
I am. ;)

justin syder said:
Mosley defended the decision not to allow a chicane.

"It would have been unfair, against the rules and potentially dangerous," Mosley said. "To radically change a circuit like Indianapolis ... would be a disadvantage to the teams which had brought correct equipment to the race."
I blame Michellin 100%. You dont alter a track at the last minute, you cant blame Ferrrari for actually being prepared to race so Michellin is where i see the blame go.
You can alter a track, if the result will justify it. Michelin teams agreed to race for no points, so the result would end exactly as they ended. Or Karthikeyan would be 5th and Albers 4th, if the positions were those of the grid. I know Mosley stated today that this is a sport, that can be entertainment, and not the opposite, but that's why there's something called an exception, and extraordinary situation. And I think IMS already have a studied chicane, for next year's SBK race.

justin syder said:
Ill blame FIA for shutting down f1racingworld.com and other F1 sites i liked and visited, I also blame FIA, FOM etc for being selfish greedy pigs but not for this incident at the USA GP, its all Michellins fault.
They sure are greedy pigs, that's why I think this went along like it went. Nothing better than an incident like this to give them the opportunity to change this GP to other track, economically more desirable.

American Idiot said:
bihus said:
Responsible for what?

For not having tires fit to race? Michelin.
For not entering the race? Michelin teams.
For resurfacing so badly? Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
For not accepting a chicane? Ferrari.
For not thinking about the fans? FIA (Max Mosley) and FOA (Bernie Ecclestone).
For keeping up with the race and making it a farse? Bridgestone teams.

Just my pov.
I agree with your first point but the rest are unfounded and unfair.

Michelin Teams? They had no choice Michelin said they cannot race. and the teams have to follow Michelins instructions.
True. But they could have made even worse and raced with the limits that were proposed.
American Idiot said:
IMS? The reason they resurfaced the track was that the IRL teams didnt have enough grip. And it worked for IRL teams, but an F1 car much more downforce to get them through the infield section. thus the tyre wear is bigger.
Well, they changed the track in such a way that all the previous data the teams had from previous years was garbage.
Check this...

American Idiot said:
Ferrari not accepting the chicane? Ferrari never said NO to the chicane. What they said was that it is not up to them to decide its up to the FIA.
Paul Stodart stated otherwise...
American Idiot said:
Not think about the fans? FIA (Max?) FOA (Bernie?) The FIA gave several reasonable suggestions to Michelin and the teams. But Michelin rejected all of them (Blackmailed the FIA). And Bernie has nothing to do with the running of the Grand Prix, he doesnt have a say in those matters.
Well, Bernie might have nothing to do with it legally, but do you really believe he doesn't have a saying on it?
American Idiot said:
Making it a farce? Bridgstone? You wouldve like the Bridgestones go into the pits and then nothing happens on track?? They had contratual obligations to sponsor, TV stations, spectators, to race. They did their job.
They kept with the farce. They had their obbligations, but was this the right thing to do? More, they shouldn't have played all innocent when they knew the track was changed, and they had problems there when Indy cars raced there with Firestone... But ok, all they did was show up the best they could to win the race.

But as a bottom line, I'll just leave a quote from planet-f1.com.

(About Charlie Whiting) But he?s changed the rules for Bridgestone prior to a race so we?ve been here before. It's surprising nobody?s questioned why Whiting changed the tyre rules at the beginning of the 2003 Brazilian GP.

Back in 2003 you were only allowed to take one wet tyre to races, so you had to make your mind up before the event. Bridgestone arrived at Interlagos with their legendary intermediate tyre that was quite good in wet and mixed conditions. Michelin had a full wet that could run in more rain.

When the heavens opened before the race, Whiting delayed the start because the Bridgestone runners wouldn?t have been able to make it round safely. It was clearly Bridgestone?s fault for not bringing a full wet tyre, but as the argument has gone this weekend ? they knew the situation?
 

Zuhaib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2003
Messages
855
Location
San Francisco, CA
Car(s)
19 BMW X3
Michellin is at fault for not having the right tires ready for the US Grand Prix and there replacment tires where no good. Also what happen to the 2nd set tires they are suppose to have for backup that are not suppose to be as aggressive as the first set? Where they also no good or what?

But i also have bad feelings towards FIA.. First if it was not for the stupid tire rule this would not have happen but thats a different thing. What i did not like was most of the teams had come together (this includes the Michellin and Brigstone teams) and say lets race a non-champ race. But FIA did not want a part of it. Reducing speeds via computer control is a risk.. What if a car came in too fast with another car behind him? Slowing down quick would put the car behind him at risk.

So in the end, for the fuck up Michellin is to blame.. But FIA should have done more to slove the problem. Mix in all the bad blood, and it proved that the FIA is worthless.
 

bihus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
4,618
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
BMW 330Cd
Ok, here's a big insider view that mostly reflect my point of view.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24926

Now, you wanna say the FIA was not guilty? It doesn't seem so. Bernie, as it seems, was wrongly accused. I take back what I said against him.

But everybody that want to know what really happened the last weekend at the USGP, please read that link above.
 

ArosaMike

Resident Kart Racer
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
883
Location
Leamington Spa
Car(s)
Mk5 VW Golf GTI, Aston Martin Vantage GT4 Race Car
It's long, but it's worth reading:

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24926

Paul Stoddarts account of the events leading up to the GP.

Yes Michelin are at fault for making a tyre that couldn't stand up to the track....but it's 100% Max Moselys fault for being a total imature arse and not doing what was best for Formula One. If you wan't to blame anyone as to why there were 6 cars on the grid...blame him. If you can't be bothered to read the above article....basically, he said that if a chicane was installed in the track, all FIA motorsport in the US would cease existance from that moment on. Twat.
 

ArosaMike

Resident Kart Racer
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
883
Location
Leamington Spa
Car(s)
Mk5 VW Golf GTI, Aston Martin Vantage GT4 Race Car
bihus said:
Ok, here's a big insider view that mostly reflect my point of view.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24926

Now, you wanna say the FIA was not guilty? It doesn't seem so. Bernie, as it seems, was wrongly accused. I take back what I said against him.

But everybody that want to know what really happened the last weekend at the USGP, please read that link above.
LOL...that'll teach me not to look at page 2 :p Sorry bout that :D
 

bihus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
4,618
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
BMW 330Cd
ArosaMike said:
bihus said:
Ok, here's a big insider view that mostly reflect my point of view.

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24926

Now, you wanna say the FIA was not guilty? It doesn't seem so. Bernie, as it seems, was wrongly accused. I take back what I said against him.

But everybody that want to know what really happened the last weekend at the USGP, please read that link above.
LOL...that'll teach me not to look at page 2 :p Sorry bout that :D
No problem ;) Maybe this way more people will read http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=24926
:lol:
 

ArosaMike

Resident Kart Racer
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
883
Location
Leamington Spa
Car(s)
Mk5 VW Golf GTI, Aston Martin Vantage GT4 Race Car

GraemeH

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,976
Location
Scotland, UK
Car(s)
Toyota Corolla, Lexus IS200, BMW E39 5 Series.
My view is Michelin are to blame for the original screw-up, however they done everything possible to FIX the problem, the FIA and Ferrari's utter unwillingness to compromise stopped the problem from being fixed, so i blame them more than Michelin.

Also, check out THIS... If there really are these suggestions, this is pretty huge..
 

justin syder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
4,096
Location
New York, USA
Car(s)
1986 Mercedes-Benz 300E
the FIA and Ferrari's utter unwillingness to compromise stopped the problem from being fixed, so i blame them more than Michelin.
But how could you blame Ferrari in this? They and bridgestone were prepared to race. They actually took part in the race.

You cant blame them because they werent willing to compromise, why should they adjust to something created by Michellin?
 

GraemeH

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,976
Location
Scotland, UK
Car(s)
Toyota Corolla, Lexus IS200, BMW E39 5 Series.
To prevent the circus that happened from happening. That's why. They would still have got a 1-2 if they had accepted the other teams offer of only bridgestone scoring.

Also someone up there mentioned the Interlagos race where it poured, and bridgestone were favoured. I didn't think of that.
 

andyhui01

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 4, 2004
Messages
8,532
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Car(s)
00' Subaru Forester GT
I think yes... Michelin are in the wrong, they admitted for screwing up, but ultimately, having the most boring GP and biggest screw-up in FIA history should be Mosely's fault, this really killed the F1 name in the USA... yes I agree with him that there are rules to follow, but what he has to realize is F1 is nothing without the fans, no people watching = no sponsors and no sponsors = less money = shittier cars and less cars.... that artical by the Minardi guy was well said
 

buvan

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10
Location
Melbourne, Australia
After reading all comments on this Topic and the two articles the forum members mentioned. No one party can be blamed for what happened at the US GP...

However the 75% on the blame can go to Max Mosley FIA president who has no F#&king idea what is going on in F1 today...
15% Ferrari for their no comprise approach to the situation and 10% Michellin, they attmitted fault but at least they were pro active in a solution to have all 20 cars race....

To some it up the FIA has lost touch with the fan's, it has now become a power struggle between the FIA, Bernie and the F1 teams...

More of this :driving: and less of this :bangin:
 

LessThanSte

Member
Joined
May 22, 2005
Messages
69
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
79
Location
Budapest, Hungary
GraemeH said:
To prevent the circus that happened from happening. That's why. They would still have got a 1-2 if they had accepted the other teams offer of only bridgestone scoring.

Also someone up there mentioned the Interlagos race where it poured, and bridgestone were favoured. I didn't think of that.
Interlagos 2003 was the race in question.
The regualtion back then was that teams could only bring 1type of wet weather tyre. the bridgestone brought regular wets. and not monsoon tyres. and in 2003 there was very heavy rain suited for monsoon tyres and not regular wets. that was beyond the control of bridgestone, how could they know what the weather will be like. even with forcast.
they forcasted rain for Canada this year and nothing happened, so weather forcast cant be totally relied upon.
 

bihus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
4,618
Location
Portugal
Car(s)
BMW 330Cd
American Idiot said:
GraemeH said:
To prevent the circus that happened from happening. That's why. They would still have got a 1-2 if they had accepted the other teams offer of only bridgestone scoring.

Also someone up there mentioned the Interlagos race where it poured, and bridgestone were favoured. I didn't think of that.
Interlagos 2003 was the race in question.
The regualtion back then was that teams could only bring 1type of wet weather tyre. the bridgestone brought regular wets. and not monsoon tyres. and in 2003 there was very heavy rain suited for monsoon tyres and not regular wets. that was beyond the control of bridgestone, how could they know what the weather will be like. even with forcast.
they forcasted rain for Canada this year and nothing happened, so weather forcast cant be totally relied upon.
If they didn't have the right tires, they could have driven slowly?!?!? Or that only applies to Michelin teams on the Indy's turn 13?
 
Top