This page will be updated throughout the day.
Please if you are on Twitter press the tweet button below. If you re-write and tweet individual story headlines don’t forget to include #F1.
You may not realise how hugely important this is and has helped grow our community significantly.
Previously on TheJudge13
The Top-20 GP Constructors who Failed to win a Championship
On This Day in #F1: 12th April 1917
Domenicalli ‘resigns’ from Ferrari UPDATED 11:41 GMT
Wrong deal at the wrong time? Subway to sponsor F1
Max Mosley – The Poacher becomes Gamekeeper
Mercedes car ‘on par’ with Newey’s Red Bull – Costa (GMM)
Prosecutors dismiss Ecclestone ‘blackmail’ – report (GMM)
Haas driver Busch says no to F1 (GMM)
Vandoorne to replace Button ‘possible’ – Dennis (GMM)
Red Bull taking ‘new evidence’ to Monday appeal (GMM)
Red Bull hearing – a summary of the events
Ferrari push for regulation change
Time to grow up Pastor
A well spent weekend saw the 2012 season review being dug out from the archives and enjoyed between reunions and much merriment. It’s amazing how much changes in a year and a half, not with the cars as this is a given with the great changes of 2014, but with the drivers’ race craft, maturity and style.
In what was a remarkable season that went right down to the wire, it was easy to see who was learning and who was developing. Furthermore, who believed in their own reputation and who was willing to work for everything and anything they could achieve. The findings, though obvious, are staggering.
Four main drivers were consistently involved in accidents or incidents due to recklessness, inexperience or immaturity. The names will not surprise you – Romain Grosjean, Sergio Perez, Kamui Kobayashi and Pastor Maldonado – as they dominate the incident list.
All of those drivers have had their comeuppance as they were punished in different ways; apart from one. Grosjean was given the one-race ban for Monza after his wrecking ball impression at Spa in the race previously. Following this he made mistakes, but was nurtured by the caring hand of his (then) team principal and manager, Eric Boullier. The Spa misdemeanour seen below.
Sergio Perez was calmed down by his move to McLaren and then subsequent exit from the Woking setup, even if Nico Hulkenberg felt he was slightly over aggressive in his defence in Bahrain. Checo came of age as he learn to control his racing.
Kamui Kobayashi has been forced to rethink his racing tactics after a year on the sidelines watching the sport he loves so dearly from the comfort of the Ferrari garage. His rash overtaking and unique bravery ultimately forced him to depart from Sauber which looks to have done the Japanese driver the world of good. He has returned a different and more refined beast!
That just leaves us with everyone’s favourite impact test driver Pastor ‘Crashtor’ Maldonado. Leaving in acromonious circumstances from the Williams fold which gave him his first chance in Formula One demonstrated just how far he still has to go in order to mature and fulfill his potential. His maiden, and to date only, race win in Barcelona demonstrated the best of Pastor as he did not panic after losing the lead to Alonso at the start of the race and was not flustered in the closing stages as the man from Oviedo tried in vain to hunt him down.
However, the many crashes that occurred due to him leave a bitter taste for many. Incidents are forgotten as well, like when the red mist descended on him in Monaco FP1 and he decided to ‘pay back’ Perez for when he felt he had been wronged by the Mexican previously deciding to give him a clip as he passed him before the tunnel or when he missed his pit box in Malaysia and was forced into another lap on the wrong type of rubber.
The other three drivers seem to have matured and moved on from the GP2 style driving that left them as great acquaintances with the gravel traps and run off areas. All have shown they have listened to advice from others and adapted their driving accordingly. In this respect, nobody more so than Romain Grosjean who took the advice of Jackie Stewart and ended up going from strength to strength at the tail end of 2013.
The most frustrating part about the Venezuelan is that he can be that good as he duly demonstrated. However, at what point is someone going to sit down with him and ‘put him back on the straight and narrow’ as they force him to reflect on his personal development. Are teams too scared to do this due to the mega bucks of oil money that he brings?
The most recent incident with the other Mexican on the grid, Esteban Gutierrez could be put down to poor concentration or even frustration. However, acts of stupidity like his crash into Hamilton at the European GP (Valencia) 2012 show the exact opposite of the thinking that is required to become a great of the sport. Instead of waiting to pass Hamilton at another part of the circuit he wanted to pass him there and then which ultimately cost them both.
Should he not develop as a driver he will carry with him forever this reputation of purely being a pay driver, which he more than has the potential to change. At what point and whether this will ever happen can only be speculated on, but while he is at the back of the grid he has the chance to focus on this away from the spotlight. Whether a Boullier like figure will appear from the background to aid him in this pursuit remains to be seen, but Pastor’s sake let’s hope he/she emerges soon.
Enjoy the commercials
With the recent suggestion that Jenson Button was not the most useful in terms of marketability, eyebrows were raised in TJ13 towers. TJ13’s man on the ground in Mexico has frequently reported of how recognisable the man from Frome is on his side of the Atlantic. Many will have seen the ‘Head & Shoulders’ adverts he has appeared in, but may not be familiar with other drivers who have been used in such a manner. A short video below shows just a handful…
I don’t suppose drivers will be tucking into pizzas like Damon Hill is seen doing here, or that Mercedes would be so happy to promote Red Bull in the advert with Schumi and Rosberg, or maybe Jenson should not have so much on his mind and just focus on the racing, or even we should have seen the troubles of the 2007 McLaren teammates given the advert.
If we can take anything away from those adverts it is this, Mika Hakkinen will always win – whether it be in a restaurant, a sauna or wherever else.
Wrong deal at the wrong time? Subway to sponsor F1
The hilarious timing of the world of Formula One has one again been demonstrated with the news that Subway the US sandwich chain is ‘exploring‘ the possibility of sponsoring the sport in the not too distant future. Reported by UK newspaper The Telegraph, the company are said to be looking into becoming a major feature on ‘several of the sport’s teams and superstar drivers.
The fast food chain already play a major role within the US in both NASCAR and IndyCar sponsorship, with F1 being seen as the logical platform to promote the brand within Europe. Subway have grown considerably since their introduction on the other side of the pond in 1994.
Chief executive of JMI which is in charge of Subway’s motorsport interest, Zak Brown, says that the series would be the “perfect” fit.
“I took the Subway Chief Marketing Officer to meet Bernie in Montreal last year, and I would say they have been exploring it for a year. They are all about the consumer, they are massive media buyers so they would look at a sport and see if it stacks up from a media point of view and Formula One does.”
There is a significant irony that Subway would see a time when drivers are forced to starve themselves to extreme lengths and in some cases dehydrate themselves as well just to race, as the ideal time to invest heavily in the sport. Is it really going to be believable to see a driver endorsing fast food with the current state of affairs? Furthermore, could we see certain drivers bringing with them a specific food company as part of a team of backers?
Working with it since 2002, Subway are JMI oldest client and have already successfully led them into NASCAR sponsorship. Given Subway’s $18.2 billion revenue in 2012, they would not struggle to raise the required $20 million for an F1 affiliation as well as separate agreements with ‘multiple’ teams they wish for. However, one has to consider if it will really be worth it?
With an estimated 75 million people following NASCAR (1 in 3 American adults) it would seem to be more than worthwhile as a means to reach out to a wide audience. However, would sponsoring an F1 team(s) really prove the good value for money as the company looks to increase the currrent 1,731 stores to 3,000 by 2020?
According to Austosport, France, Germany, Poland and Spain all reported a significant drop in viewing figures last year making it a strange time to invest. The US and Italy saw dramatic increases in the coverage of the sport which aided viewing figures, as the UK increased in 2013 by 2% as well.
Last week Forbes reported that JMI (Just Marketing Inc) has now passed the $1 billion mark for sponsorship since 1995. Christian Sylt reported, “Although its origins lie in NASCAR, the company’s chief executive Zak Brown says that 70% of its profits now come through deals in Formula One.”
JMI introduced Johnnie Walker to McLaren in 2005 and also LG in 2009, both times picking up a tidy sum along the way. With the seemingly imminent departure of the F1 supremo on the horizon, could this instead be Brown angling at a way get inside the F1 circles and follow in the footsteps of Bernie? After all, it is well known that Brown had dreamt of being an F1 driver in his younger years.
Brown realises how lucrative F1 can be and has every motivation to use Subway to increase his foothold within the sport. He was the one who was responsible for bringing Martini back to Williams this season in a deal said to be worth $20 million. Are the fast food chain being led down a blind alley as Brown works his way further into F1 and makes a decent figure along the way?
Furthermore, would the money not be better spent on backing a US driver into a seat (Alex Rossi or Connor Daly spring to mind) which in turn will help the sport grow stateside?
Max Mosley – The Poacher becomes Gamekeeper
Max Mosley was one of the founders of March Engineering. He had trained as a lawyer and he became Bernie Ecclestone’s right hand man during the infamous FISA/ FOCA war of the late 70’s – early 80’s and was instrumental in drawing up the Concorde Agreement. This document gave the FISA control of the rules but crucially gave FOCA control of the promotions and TV rights. Balestre believing he had won the war accepted this compromise and effectively made Ecclestone the most powerful man in the sport.
By 1991, Mosley had ascended to the Presidency of the FIA, and the man who had championed for the rights of the ‘garagista’ against the manufacturers transformed from the poacher to the gamekeeper. The safety campaigns he instigated are possibly his biggest legacies to F1 and the motor industry.
But there are a number of whispers surrounding the deals he made with Ecclestone – for example, a payment of $300million for a 100 year contract is hardly generous when compared to year on year deals which TV companies pay for football rights yet Mr E argued that he had built F1 into the entity it is today. Mosley’s solution was to make the FIA the sporting regulator and FOM would retain it’s commercial role – a situation that the FIA is still looking into to this day.
In a recent interview with the Daily Mail, 74 year old Max Mosley offered himself as the originator of the new Formula One era.
“We are the ones who looked at bringing in the new technology. It was ten years in the making, and actually I like the noise. I wear these things in both my ears (hearing aids) because the noise of the engines went right through me for 40 years or more. It’s too late to save my hearing but not for the next generation. The quieter engines are better for families. You can take children to races without fear of their being deafened. If anybody should be ‘blamed’ it’s me. Safety was the big challenge of the 20th century and the environment is the big challenge of the 21st.”
Mosley continued by saying the quieter power trains would increase the spectacle of watching a car at somewhere like the swimming pool where you could appreciate the violence of the car in motion as opposed to the over-riding scream of the multi-cylinder engines. The introduction of this new technology was also defining new frontiers in motor-sport rather than becoming an irrelevance. Beyond these arguments he underlined the fact that if energy saving technology had not been introduced, Formula One may have lost one, if not two of the engine manufacturers. Yet something does not add up..
Is this the same man who in 2009 stated, “If someone said, ‘Will you stake your entire worldly goods on all of the current manufacturers being in Melbourne in 2010?’ I would be very reluctant to do that. I’d stake my worldly goods, for example, on Ferrari being there. But not on all the manufacturers. But I may be wrong.”
Domenicalli ‘resigns’ from Ferrari
The word is, Stefano Domenicali has fallen on his sword. (09:40 GMT) Ferrari are to make an announcement today at 12:00 CET.
With the Red Bull disqualification hearing at FIA HQ today and possible huge ramifications for the fuel flow regulations being challenged, this is a classic PR trick to ‘bury’ (well at least reduce the impact) of Ferrari ‘bad news’.
For many, the surprise is that the parting of the ways between the Scuderia and its most unsuccessful principal has taken so long.
Domenicali has become the ‘nearly man’ at Ferrari. He was close to leading the team to drivers’ titles in both 2010 and 2012, but for errors and mistakes made by the team. These mistakes eventually frustrated Alonso’s efforts to bring glory to Maranello.
In addition, there was another close call for Domenicali in 2008. Felipe Massa crossed the line in the final race of the season, and was world champion – but only for a few seconds. Hamilton found a more than friendly Timo Glock with just 2 corners to go. The Britain made the pass on the Toyota driver and this was enough to clinch the title for Hamilton.
Ferrari did win the constructors’ title that year, which may be why Domenicali survived as long as he did.
Domenicali was hand picked to succeed Jean Todt, The previous season saw Todt and Raikkonen take the title for Ferrari in the drivers’ championship. Further, the previous 7 years had seen Ferrari, Todt, Brawn and Schumacher dominate in a manner rarely seen in F1 history.
Yet, it was just last September when Luca di Montezemolo defended his ‘nearly man’ to the hilt when asked by Gazzetta dello Sport if Domenicali would be replaced, Il Padrino replied, “Never, he would be missed.
He was the first to advocate the choice of Kimi. He has worked well, preparing for the future and now I expect to see results in the present. But, over the past three years, we have lost two world titles at the last race and it was not his fault”.
Kimi will certainly feel the departure of Domenical, as Alonso begins to draw the team around him even more tightly.
When Il Padrino chose to defend his team principal to the hilt just 6 months ago, he stated, “I’ve been around a long time, from the point eleven years on from [John] Surtees’ title. Then as president, with Schumacher and the [Jean] Todt-[Ross] Brawn-[Rory] Byrne triumvirate, we created a golden era and now the team is ready to start winning again.
The void since the Schumacher era was caused by delays on the simulation front and with the aerodynamics. However, in all but three years, Ferrari has always been in the title fight right to the last race.
I am counting a lot on James Allison. With him came the head of aerodynamics from Lotus [Dirk de Beer] and other new faces. Finally, we will have the creativity we were lacking. Allison knows the team and the men and he speaks Italian.
Others wanted him, but he preferred us and his arrival will also bring a change in working methods in many areas. Pat Fry will concentrate on improving our on-track operations, our methodology and the simulator.”
So what changed? That statement by the president of Ferrari clearly avoids placing too much responsibility on Domenicali and infers James Allison’s magic will take some time to work.
TJ13 believes that behind the scenes Alonso upped the anti and has been agitating for change. Since he threatened to tweet to the world during the Indian GP in 2012 that Fry and Domenicali were incompetent, to suggests the internal relationships were strained would be an understatement. In fact at times, there has been a full blown been civil war raging in Maranello.
Alonso’s hand is immeasurably strengthened at present. Froma simple observation of the current state of the prancing horse, Vettel is unlikely to invoke his side of the ‘pre-contract’ believed to be in place with Ferrari for 2015, Add to this, there are early indicators that Kimi will be ‘bested’ by Alonso this year which means Maranello can’t afford to lose their double world champion team leader driver.
It is also now clear, Fernando can’t be blamed for Ferrari building an engine which could be 3rd best behind Mercedes and the Red Bull installation. In fact it strengthens his position that it is the inferior equipment he has been provided with – year after year which is preventing Ferrari from claiming F1 glory.
Like Martin Whitmarsh, Stefano Domenicali has presided over an era in F1 where there has been a relative tranquillity between the team principals, with them often co-interviewed by the media following a race. Not many can recall Ron Dennis and Jean Todt sharing friendly banter in front of the TV cameras?
Following the “Spygate” scandals between McLaren and Ferrari and the “Crashgate” scandal surrounding Flavio and Renault just a couple of years later, this air of Bonne Homme has been suggested by a number of F1 commentators to be good for the sport.
But times are changing.
This year, McLaren ousted Martin – ‘the nice’ and big bad ass kicking, results demanding Ron Dennis is back.
These nice guys aren’t winning… and Horner, Marko et all have been all dominating.
With the Scuderia in such disarray, the only option open to Il Padrino is to demonstrate change must happen – and happen now. His biggest statement possible is to facilitate such a high profile personnel reshuffle.
Domenicali will be replaced by the current CEO of Ferrari Americas – Marco Mattiacci. The 41 year old Roman started his career at Jaguar in 1989, where he learned about American management processes and styles. By 2000 he received his dream assignment and was called by Ferrari.
Marco established networks in South America, then the MIddle East, followed by others in Finland and Russia. He then focused his attention on the Chinese market and in Japan before being appointed CEO of America. Less than two years ago, he was honoured with the auto manufacturer’s most prestigious award, 2012 Automotive Executive of the Year Award.
TJ13 has been informed there has even been discussion within FIAT suggesting Marco Mattiacci could even replace Il Padrino – should his political aspirations prove to become irresistible. Marco is indeed building a powerful reputation both inside and outside Ferrari.
Of course the cynics may suggests that ‘Cordero di Montezemolo’ is in actuality presenting a potential challenger to his throne with a poisoned chalice from which he may never recover.
Di Montezemolo is a wily fox who has survived nigh on 25 years as Enzo Ferrari’s successor; a length of tenure which clearly indicates Il Padrino knows how to play politics – most skilfully.
So the old guard is moving on… Martin Whitmarsh, Stefano Domenicali and Ross Brawn… though we will definitely be seeing one of them again in F1 – and in the not too distant future.
UPDATE 11:32 GMT
Stefano Domenicali explains what he claims to be his decision.
“It ‘s time to implement a major change. Again, I take responsibility, as I always did, of the situation we are experiencing”.
Domenicali believes it is a bridge too far for him to initiate the change now required at Ferrari.
It is a choice taken with the desire to do something to shake up to our environment and for the sake of this group. I sincerely thank all the men and women of the team, the drivers and partners for the wonderful relationship had in years.
I wish all of you can quickly return to the levels that Ferrari deserves. I give the final thanks to our President for having always supported me.
I wish the best to all the fans with the regret of not having gathered as hard as we sown in recent years.”
Mercedes car ‘on par’ with Newey’s Red Bull – Costa (GMM)
Mercedes insists its 2014 car is “on par” with the chassis being fielded by reigning world champions Red Bull this season.
The more common perception in the F1 paddock so far this year is that while the silver W05 is a tidy single seater, its clear dominance is being fuelled mainly by its vastly superior turbo V6 ‘power unit’.
Red Bull, meanwhile, is apparently only managing to stay relatively competitive amid engine supplier Renault’s problems due to the once again field-leading car design efforts of Adrian Newey.
But Aldo Costa, the Mercedes car designer, insisted to Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport that his W05 is “about on par with Red Bull. There are certain corners, especially the fast ones, where Red Bull is better than us,” he acknowledged, “but in other places it is us with the edge. According to our measurements,” the former Ferrari technical director added, “Ferrari is behind us.”
Costa also hit back at suggestions F1’s new engine rules have made the sport too slow. Actually, he said it is “quite simple” to calculate precisely why lap times are slower in 2014, explaining that the engines are in fact compensating for most of the losses.
“The cars are 50kg heavier (than in 2013),” he started. “This alone costs 1.5 seconds. The downforce was reduced, which is another half a second,” said Costa. “Add to that the harder tyre, then without these factors we would be faster (than in 2013),” said the Italian.
Prosecutors dismiss Ecclestone ‘blackmail’ – report (GMM)
The pre-trial documents outlining the case against Bernie Ecclestone make no mention of the possibility he was blackmailed by Gerhard Gribkowsky. That is the claim of the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag, revealing that it has seen and read the 223-page document ahead of the Munich hearings that begin next week. F1’s chief executive claims he only paid the millions to jailed banker Gribkowsky because he was threatening to divulge details of Ecclestone’s tax affairs to authorities.
But Welt am Sonntag claims prosecutors do not regard Ecclestone’s account as legitimate, insisting the almost $44 million in payments to Gribkowsky was solely so the 83-year-old Briton can “secure his position of power” in charge of F1.
Citing the court documents, the newspaper also says 40 witnesses are scheduled to testify at the trial, which will be attended by Ecclestone himself. Ecclestone said in Bahrain last weekend that F1 will “do our best” to run the sport while he is occupied in court.
“The judge has been very good,” he told British television Sky. “He has said you’ve just got two days a week in court, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. On the Wednesday’s he’s going to try and get things out of the way a little bit earlier so I can leave and carry on doing what I normally do.”
Haas driver Busch says no to F1 (GMM)
Kurt Busch, a leading NASCAR driver, has ruled himself out of the running to enter F1 next year with Gene Haas. Busch, 35, drives for Haas’ NASCAR team, and this year he will try his hand at single-seater racing, driving for former F1 driver Michael Andretti’s team at the fabled Indy 500.
But the Associated Press has quoted him as ruling out a F1 foray, despite his close ties to Haas. “My time has passed to be a competitive driver in F1,” he said. “But a test session? I’d jump on that every time.”
Busch warned that Haas is “serious” about his new F1 adventure. “You just don’t drop $40 million on a wind tunnel and not think that you’re serious about racing,” he said.
“It will be an incredible challenge. He knows that,” Busch added. “We’ve had Michael Andretti, before him was his dad. We had Scott Speed as a driver. Now we have an (American) owner. It will be interesting to see how the driver lineup shapes up.”
Vandoorne to replace Button ‘possible’ – Dennis (GMM)
McLaren could oust Jenson Button at the end of 2014 and replace him with the team’s next young development driver talent. That is the admission of returned McLaren supremo Ron Dennis, who told F1’s official website that it was mainly his decision to axe Sergio Perez after a single season and replace him with in-house rookie Kevin Magnussen.
Dane Magnussen, 21, has subsequently been hailed by Dennis as having “all the ingredients necessary” to follow in Button’s footsteps and win a title. “The decision to take Kevin (in 2014) was mine,” said Dennis.
“I took the decision because I felt that we needed to see if he could meet the expectations of our engineers, and so far he has done a great job. And also Stoffel Vandoorne did a great job last weekend in Bahrain,” Dennis added, “so I think he will be highly desirable by the end of the season.”
Belgian Vandoorne, who is actually a year older than Magnussen, has this year been placed by McLaren in GP2, where at the Bahrain season opener he won a race. Vandoorne is driving for ART, after Nicolas Todt’s GP2 team entered an agreement to work not only with McLaren but also the team’s 2015 engine supplier Honda.
At the same time, Button’s contract is up for renewal. The 34-year-old driver said in Bahrain: “I have no worries that a guy in his thirties is as good as a guy in his twenties in a formula one car.”
Nonetheless, Dennis admitted it is “possible” McLaren’s 2015 lineup could see Magnussen alongside Vandoorne. “Anything is possible,” he said, “but Jenson is doing a great job. He is quick and he is dedicated so there is no reason not to stay with Jenson from any perspective.
“But we still have a whole season to go.”
Red Bull taking ‘new evidence’ to Monday appeal (GMM)
Red Bull claims to have “a very strong case” as the world champions try on Monday to overturn Daniel Ricciardo’s Melbourne disqualification.
Initially, many believed the team would surely fail to convince the FIA’s international court of appeal to quash the stewards’ ruling in Paris. That is because Red Bull admittedly ignored the readings of the mandatory fuel flow sensor, claiming the devices supplied by a British company called Gill are inaccurate.
Team boss Christian Horner now says: “As more races have progressed, issues have become more evident, new evidence has come to light and new understandings have come to light.
“We believe we have a very strong case,” British broadcasters the BBC and Sky separately quote him as saying. Following a disastrous winter pre-season for Red Bull and its engine supplier Renault, the team is only fourth in the constructors’ championship after three races. Defending Red Bull’s push to recover Ricciardo’s second place finish, Horner insisted: “Those points are vital, every point is vital.”
The FIA says it intends to publish the results of Monday’s appeal “as soon as possible” after the hearing is complete.
Red Bull hearing – a summary of the events
Today sees a fascinating gathering at the FIA headquarters, as Red Bull and their lawyers, Mercedes represented by the enigmatic Paul (bulldog) Harris and the FIA and with legal team fight out the validity of the stewards decision to disqualify Red Bull’s Daniel Ricciardo from the season opening race in Melbourne.
Lotus, Williams, McLaren, Force India attended but only as observers.
The Court of Appeal in this case is composed of Harry Duijm (senior judge, Holland), Rui Botica Santos (Portugal), Philippe Narmino (Monaco), Antonio Rigozzi (Switzerland) and January Šťovíček (Czech Republic).
Judge Duijm commenced proceedings and urged all parties not to waste time. “The facts are in the statements”, he states. The lawyers are asked to question the witnesses only to details that are not already listed in the files.
This means we may not be party to everything the varies sides are saying, however the contentious matters should be cross-examined.
Red Bull lawyer Ali Malek speaks first and questions whether the Stewards had the right to disqualify Daniel Ricciardo. He questions whether the FIA measurement was correct suggesting the FIA must prove that Ricciardo was at any time outside the required flow rate.
Everything revolves around the sensor FF73 and Malek argues that Red Bull’s position is that it was not working correctly. He further argues that there is no rule which justifies the FIA sensor as the only usable measurement.
FIA lawyer Sebastien Bernard interjects stating that there can be only one official measurement. “If everyone [each team] measures at will, because they are of the opinion, the official measurement is wrong, we have anarchy.”
The FIA representative explains how the calibration of the FIA sensor works. In a test, the measurements are established and any errors are provided for with a correction factor. Only this creates equal conditions for all parties involved.
Sebastian Bernard argues, the deviations on Sunday were exactly the same on the sensor which Red Bull had installed on Friday. Hence there was no reason for Red Bull to defy the instruction to operate the same correction factor.
Further, with the exception of 5 laps, Ricciardo’s car was consistently above the 100 kgs/ph limit as evidenced by the Gill sensor. However, at times Red Bull increased the fuel flow rate, to around 104kgs/ph. Under the safety car the rate fell as low as 95% of the maximum.
Interestingly, later in the proceeding Red Bull made a minimalist effort to argue the flow rate across the entire race was legal. The fact that it dropped during the safety car period would have assisted in making that possible whilst retaining 2nd place from Magnussen.
Bernard for the FIA questions why Ricciardo’s car only ran to the correct fuel flow rate during the period behind the safety car, no satisfactory reply is forthcoming.
The Mercedes attack dog enters the fray. He states Mercedes calculations indicate that by ignoring the FIA instruction, Red Bull had gained an advantage of 0.4 seconds per lap. Harris continues by dismissing Red Bull’s actions as arrogant.
“Red Bull believe their measurement is better than that of the FIA?. It is not even a physical measurement, but a software model”. Harris suggests Red Bull are motivated by what suits them best and not what is proper and fair.
Paul Harris observes that if Mercedes had applied Red Bull’s philosophy, “we could have gone even faster in these circumstances. And what happens next? Should everyone be allowed to use their own measurement model when they are not satisfied with the FIA measures?”
Paul Monaghan, Red Bull engineer takes the stand and agrees with the previous statements, that by ignoring the FIA instructions, Ricciardo’s car ran around 0.4 seconds a lap quicker.
He presents the argument that all the engine data in FP1 on 2 separate laps gave identical readings, yet the fuel flow sensor gave two different readings. One read 1.2% different from Red Bulls algorithmic calculations and the second time 1.3% difference.
He argues this should not happen. Given the same engine data, the fuel flow rate should be the same.
The Red Bull man then claims that the team did not need to ignore the FIA directives in Malaysia due to the temperature differences between there and at the Australian GP – hence the teams calculations in Sepang revealed there was no need to exceed the FIA regulated fuel flow rate.
The FIA representative asks Monaghan whether Red Bull are in fact measuring the flow of fuel directly. Monaghan denies this stating “it is a calculation based on differing measurements which include the amount of time the fuel injectors are open, the injection quantity, fuel density, and fuel temperature.” Monaghan claims that this measurement has an accuracy range of plus and minus one percent.
Mercedes lawyer Harris interjects. “So Red Bull present figures of a computing model and data – not a direct measurement. Nobody knows what or why data is entered into the model.” He summarises, to agree a process like this and all the underlying assumptions team by team would be impossible for the FIA.
Horner sits apparently disinterestedly fiddling with his smart phone.
Monaghan is asked why the team did not use the spare sensor they had available in Australia. He initially just restates the Red Bull position on sensors being temperamental. When pressed by Mercedes Paul Harris, he reveals that this sensor had been fitted to the spare chassis, which was flown back to the UK during the weekend.
Harris acerbically asks, “and no one thought to remove it?”
It then becomes apparent that on lap 37, Red Bull increased further the fuel flow rate into the engine. When questioned Monaghan replied that the conditions had changed and their calculations would now allow even more fuel to be used to stay within the 100kgs/ph for the entire race.
David Mart, a Renault engineer who works with the Red Bull team is called. He explains it was not his decision to refuse the FIA request to reduce the fuel flow as the car is legally Red Bull’s. He also suggests the offset requested by the FIA was not applied to the fuel flow calculations.
Newey interjects, taking responsibility for the team’s defiance, stating he made the decision. It also becomes apparent that prior to the race, Red Bull had been given an offset calculation to programme into the sensor. This was not done.
In his defence, Newey states he told FIA representative, Fabrice Lom, prior to the race he had doubts over the calculations. Mercedes Paul Harris quizzes the Red Bull guru asking if any other team refused to run the FIA fuel flow rates, would that be reasonable. “If they have plausible evidence, yes”, was Newey’s response.
Red Bull argue the sensor drifted during FP1 and hence cannot provide accurate measurements. The FIA say it did not drift – and indeed that the 13 failed sensors this year, when fail, stop operating completely. The vast majority of these failures have been on Renault engined cars.
Witness Jeff Calam of Red Bull is called. No one has a question for him. He is excused amidst general chuckling.
Fabrice Lom, the FIA expert takes the stand. He explains that even during the practice sessions, Red Bull had failed to run the correct offset value, and so their calculations were wrong.
Further, the ‘dodgy’ sensor FF73 used by Ricciardo in Australia was replaced by sensor FF210 in Malaysia, and the exact same readings were produced, despite the temperature differences.
Lom concludes this must mean that Renault and Red Bull’s algorithms were incorrect.
Fabrice Lom then presents an interesting chart. It lists all 58 laps of Daniel Ricciardo’s car with the lap times and the corresponding flow rate. With the exception of laps 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 Ricciardo drives consistently above 100 kg / h mark.
In the first 12 laps before the safety car phase the value is 100.5 to 100.8 kg / h. Following the safety car it rises to 100.4 to 101.1 kg / h.
In the last four laps when Ricciardo is fighting Kevin Magnussen for second place, interestingly the average fuel flow rate is at its highest for the race and increases again in range from to from 101.0 – 101.0 to between 101 0 and 101.1 kg / h.
Lom produces another chart which shows the effect of Red Bull’s actions with the applied offset. This shows the corrected Red Bull model would have shown values ranged from 99.02 kg / h during the safety car phase to 103.37 kg / h in the race.
Mercedes electronics engineer, Evan Short is called. He explains, “A sensor provides a direct measurement, the calculation of the team can be at best an approximation.”
Evan Short reveals during qualifying in Melbourne, the FIA had informed them Rosberg was using too high a fuel flow rate. It was immediately brought in line with the correction as instructed,
There was a huge argument over consumption peaks and averages, much of which was unintelligible unless one has a PhD in mathematics, yet herein may hang the key to the Judges decision.
In conclusion, the FIA representative spins Red Bull’s arguments on their head. He demands, “they should indeed provide proof that the sensor fluctuated unnecessarily. If they decide not to follow the instructions of the referee, they must provide solid good evidence that the sensor has not been working properly. Their alleged evidence has convinced no one.”
Mercedes Paul Harris clearly remembers being on the other side of the fence last summer over ‘testgate’ along with Red Bull’s demands for punitive punishment against the team from Brackley. In fact during the day, he was probably a more effective prosecutor of the issues than the FIA’s own legal representatives.
He reminds the court that this is a violation of section 12.1.1 c as Red Bull denied the instructions of FIA officials and that this in fact harms the interest of fair competition.
Harris recalls the case of the BAR fraudulent fuel case in 2005 where the team was banned for 2 races in Barcelona and Monaco and given a six month suspended ban with a disqualification from the race where their fuel irregularities were discovered.
The Mercedes legal representative then argued Red Bull’s actions were indeed more serious than those of BAR, because they intentionally defied the FIA regulators and are attempting to protests a physical measurement with a mere calculation.
“We are, frankly, and with great respect, concerned that Red Bull have shown such a flagrant and deliberate disregard for these rules that there is a real risk they will do it again,” said Harris. “We are here to seek to ensure that that does not happen, we must have a level playing field going forward for the remainder of the season.
We apprehend that the other teams represented here today take the same view, which is why they are here today”.
Harris pressed the court to make a statement to Red Bull about the severity of their behaviour with “further sanctions”, over and above the DQ already issued. He concede these may be suspended for the rest of the season “so that they [Red Bull] are acutely aware of their actions”.
Red Bull’s decision to appeal is a high stakes gamble, as clearly Ricciardo’s DQ is no longer the maximum penalty they could suffer. The precedents are there for a ban or a further loss of constructor and driver points.
Red Bull’s position is that technical directives are not binding and that the fuel sensor drifted. Ali Malek concluded, “The only evidence car three has exceeded that flow rate was the measurement supplied by the FFM [fuel-flow meter],” said Red Bull’s lead representative Ali Malek QC.
We say that there was strong evidence before the stewards that this FFM was unreliable. You will recall that passage in the technical directive, if it is obviously unreliable then it is correct to use the secondary method or the backup measure.
We say that it was unreliable and therefore we were entitled to use the secondary measurement.”
The FIA are in direct opposition to this position. Jonathan Taylor concluded succinctly for the FIA. “The most important point of this appeal [is] the technical directives because that is how you are told to demonstrate compliance, Everyone follows those rules and if you do not follow those rules, you do not have a competition.”
This is a completely different case from the Mercedes hearing in 2013, because then the Brackley team were deemed to have acted in good faith and with the co-operation of the FIA’s representative Charlie Whiting.
“We will announce the decision tomorrow morning at the latest,” said Jean-Christophe Breillat at the end today’s six-hour hearing. A full explanation of the reasoning behind the decision will be published “by the end of the week”.
Bell leaves Mercedes
Mercedes confirm that Bob Bell joined Ross Brawn and resigned early last December. The statement confirmed the timing and that Bell will stay with the team to the end of this season, then leave ‘with the intention of pursuing new challenges outside the company’.
Paddy Lowe will ultimately take charge of Bell’s remit.
Clearly Bob Bell isn’t ruling out another role in F1 but is being prevented from doing so immediately by being held to the notice period of his contract of employment.
Having changed the terms of Brawn’s employment which commanded ultimate control, the team were unable to prevent him leaving immediately.
Rumours will no doubt abound that Bell left in conjunction with Brawn, and wherever he may surface, Bell will also.
Sochi F1 GP under threat
Following the Russian annexing of Crimea, TJ13 reported there were moves under way to cancel the inaugural F1 GP in Sochi. Whilst at this time, those who are pressing for this course of action remain unidentified, should there be no change in relations between Russia and the rest of the G8 and the majority of the United Nations representatives, this will become inevitable.
Yesterday, World Superbike event organisers decided to cancel the Russian round which was scheduled to be held in Moscow on September 21.
They stated, “The current political situation affects the capabilities of a number of key partner companies essential to run the event. Parties regret the decision, but are confident that the strong partnership between DWO and YMS Promotion will prevail. It is a common intention to continue with the organisation of the WSBK Russian Round in 2015 and for the remainder of the contract period up to 2021”.
Ecclestone travelled to Sochi to meet president Putin following the winter para-Olympics closing ceremony as an act of unity over the schedule race later this year. The Russian president has associated himself personally with the up-coming event and its preparations.
Clearly F1 has global international partner’s who find it impossible at present due to their host governments’ political positions to contemplate being associated with an event held in Russia. It is merely a matter of time before one of them breaks ranks and says ‘no to Sochi’.
In days past, there have been punitive clauses imposed by FOM which prevents sponsors from withdrawing their brands and logo’s from the teams under any circumstances.
Many believe Ecclestone and FOM’s hardline stance on refusing to allow Vodafone to abstain from advertising on the McLaren car during the 2012 Bahrain Grand Prix, was the reason they pulled out of F1 one year early.
These kinds of international corporations will already be demanding exclusion clauses which allow them to abstain from advertising their brands in countries where they feel this course of action is counter productive to their value.
A moralistic argument that sport and politics should remain separate may be tenable when the rights of individual athletes are most at stake. But when brands worth billions begin to take the hit – to coin a phrase, “it’s a whole new ball game”.
Haas gets F1 license
If you’ve got an hour or so to spare, this may be very interesting. Haas speaks openly and takes Q&A regarding his newly granted F1 license and the team he is quickly putting together.
@F1 in America provided a live twitter stream of the main points during the interview. Here it is if you don’t have time to what the entire video.
AS WITH ALL THINGS TWITTER – YOU MUST READ FROM THE BOTTOM TO TOP FOR CHRONOLOGY
Q: What gives you the confidence to succeed where USF1 failed? Gene Haas: “I think I have 50% of the parts right now [to build an #F1 car]”
Gene Haas: “We have a plan to make [#HaasF1] profitable over 5 years”
Gene Haas: Interested in doing something different for the American #F1 audience #HaasF1
Q from Joe Saward: Is there a simulation program already in place, how quickly can car be developed? #HaasF1
Timetable set around June to set a start date for racing – Gene Haas: “2015 too close, 2016 too far” for 1st race #HaasF1
Q: Would you put Danica in an F1 car? Gene Haas: “The tech expertise going to #F1 races is demanding…NASCAR has a tough schedule” #HaasF1
Gene Haas: “We’re just racing, thats the common denominator, I think #F1 will help both sides” #haasformula
Gene Haas on NASCAR/#F1 crossover advantages: “There’s a lot to be learned…hopeful for knowledge transfer” #haasformula
Q: Will your chassis accept a driver the size of Tony Stewart? Gene Haas: “I don’t think there’s a problem” #haasformula
Gene Haas: “going to more trade shows isn’t going to increase brand awareness…we will help #F1 [to increase sports popularity]” #haasformula
Gene Haas on #f1 logistics – “You’re not constantly rebuilding cars [as in NASCAR]…[rather] changing parts as needed” #haasformula
Guenther Steiner on putting team together – talking to Stefano Dominicali, Niki Lauda regarding partners #haasformula
Gene Haas: “If I didn’t do [#F1]..I’d feel worse about it [if I didn’t try to succeed]” #haasformula
Gene Haas: “I have a wind tunnel..build machine tools…race cars…maybe where [others] have failed I [will succeed]” #haasformula
Gene Haas: “We will evolve our processes… We will beat the Europeans at their own game” #HaasFormula #F1
Joe Saward Q: “How do you go about getting everything together” Guenther: “Define our tech. partner, then go from there…” #haasformula
Q: What did you learn from NASCAR to apply in #F1? Gene Haas: “We’re not making the same mistakes…this is going to be a people organization”
Gene Haas: “I’ll try it even if I do fail…the greatest satisfaction is to do what other Americans haven’t done” #haasformula
Q: Did USF1 cast a shadow over your efforts? Gene Haas: “Cast a long shadow…I respect that they tried…I’m here to prove [America] can do it”
Gene Haas: “We are gong to have to change our wind tunnel to run scale models” to test in #F1 #haasformula
Q: Is there an advantage to [owning] having the @WindshearInc tunnel so close to #Haasformula?
Guenther Steiner on #F1: “[we] can do it better. I’ve seen a lot of waste in #F1…don’t have to invent the wheel…” #haasformula
Gene Haas on yrs btwn American #F1 teams: “Things have changed a lot … few engine suppliers/less rules back then” reminiscing #haasformula
Gene Haas: “This is going to be an American, well-run, efficient organization…the same kind we have at @Haas_Automation” #haasformula #F1
Gene Haas on #F1: “Its a challenge, difficult to do . . . we do this every day . . . lot of similarities to what happens in a NASCAR garage”
Gene Haas and the American way of doing things: “We do things that others think can’t be done all the time” #haasformula
Gene Haas: “We not going to be a European led team, we’re going to be an American led team” #F1 #haasformula
#haasformula strategy: “not about reinventing the wheel . . .we will have our own way of doing things. Not going to be throwing $ at #F1”
#HaasFormula team costs: “Billions and billions [jokingly] . . . exponential rise in costs are in the past, rules look much more favorable”
Guenther Steiner: “The real work starts now” Picking partners, building team, going to take time to get there #HaasFormula #F1
Gene Haas: “We would like an experienced #F1 driver” Ideal situation: a young American driver. #HaasFormula
Gene Haas: “we would like 2015” for a start, coming weeks will determine tech partners and timeline to 1st race #HaasFormula
Engines: #HaasFormula to partner with an engine supplier, satellite base in Germany or Italy, depending on who tech. partners are #F1
Team to be called “Haas Formula” Base needs to be in the USA, in Kannapolis – not purchasing an existing team #HaasFormula #F1
Haas wants to become a household name in ww markets, #F1 to launch Haas as a premium brand, ideally 2x sales of machine tool equip #HaasF1
Ferrari push for regulation change
Ferrari are still raging against the machine that is the new F1. Their leader left the Bahrain GP 10 laps before the end, so it could be his Consigliere have not advised him how riveting the rest of the world found the closing laps of the race.
Today Maranello publish the following on Ferrari.com
“The president of the Italian Olympic Committee, Giovanni Malagò, agrees with the survey run by the Ferrari website on the new Formula 1 format: ‘I speak on behalf of Italian sports people and fans, I don’t like this Formula 1 and in my opinion it’s delivered a product that has absolutely no sense,’ said the top man of Italian sport at the launch of the Italian International Tennis tournament in Rome.
‘In my opinion, it’s a form of self-harm. I hope the people who run the sport look again at the rules because the way Formula 1 is now, it has much less appeal and that’s a shame as it is an extraordinary world.’”
Ferrari’s poll was the most ridiculous PR stunt ever and as even the most disreputable polling organisation would admit was a farce in its remit and collection of opinion.
Unfortunately, with the exception of maybe the tifosi, this damaged Ferrari’s credibility in the eyes of most F1 commentators and fans alike. During the radio 5 live transmission from Bahrain, James Allan, one of the sports senior media analysts repeatedly referred to the comments of Il Padrino – suggesting the new F1 was for taxi drivers – in a most disparaging manner.
One of the F1 twitter comedians, @WTF1, commented. “Who gives a shit what the Italian Olympic Committee think of Formula One? That’s like asking if Royal Ballet like football?”
It wouldn’t be unfair for casual observers to believe F1 is currently losing the plot at present with internal strife and bitter division rising by the day. All this during a period when teams and the sport are searching for new sponsors and money. In fact F1 merely presents as a group of insulated small minded people who cannot see the stupidity of their actions; and who in fact are not the smartest at anything much… other than building fast cars.
Vandoorne is an excellent talent, in my opinion, even better than K-Mag. Can’t see Button past this season at Macca. Unless there’s somethign cooking about Alonso. Unless Ferrari up their game by the end of the season, I can’t see him staying there for long, he deserves at least another WDC.
And we know with Ron that if he thinks the talent is ready, then he’ll put it in (Raikkonen, Hamilton, Magnussen). Vandoorne was arguably ready last year, but with Button doing well there was only one place up for grabs. But if K-Mag matches him this year then that excuse becomes non-existent.
As Ron notes.. by season end the picture will be clearer. Also clearer will be Honda’s preferences – WDC driver, or driver who thumped their own driver in GP2 as a last proving ground. Button can still pick up the cheques for being Vandoorne’s management.. and a year of dieting may take it out of him. Plus he said he would retire when he has kids.. he’s now getting married at last so the next step is..
Not to mention he ruled out seeing 300 races.. so next year would be Vandoorne FP1s at the very least.
“… acquaintances with the gravel traps…”
What happens here if you remove the letter ‘r’…? 😉
for sure Domenicali lasted more than anybody wanted, all those silly and unacceptable flaws throughout the 2008 season were the whole preview of what was going to come and the 2009 season proved it, 2010 and 2012 were near hits, while 2011 and 2013 were disappointing, but still, they should have brought Brawn back, even though I don’t know if he’s placed on a gardening leave after his departure from Brackley
Contrary to popular belief, James Allen thinks otherwise:
“However the decision to quit was Domenicali’s and he was not pushed out by Montezemolo, who wanted the 48 year old to continue, according to well placed sources in Italy.”
“Are teams too scared to do this due to the mega bucks of oil money that he brings?”
Money talks – he has had too many chances and the Bahrain incident proves that he has learnt nothing and needs to go.
note that Pastor is a typical hot headed latin, I am brazilian, even being from anglo french origins, I admit that usually us, latins, included spaniards and italians, tend to top ourselves in the middle of our emotions …
just remember Piquet punching Eliseo, Senna and his many brawls and clashes in and out track, and lately, Alonso and Massa in Nurburgring 2007, and that “va cagare” swearing
of course, I know that generalising sometimes is not fair, but usually it happens to be this way
all that a racer needs is a bit of cold headed and non chalant attitude, but, in his case there is the sponsorship factor, as the author stated, maybe the teams get afraid of bashing and calling out his misdemeanours, who would know …
I want to challenge this ‘Nice guys don’t last in Formula 1’. I’m not saying that this is not true, and to an extent i think it is true. But look at Ross Brawn, a guy with a fantastic record in F1, AND is a nice guy. The key is his ability to lead a team, manage the resources they have efficiently and effectively and execute the hard work when it matters – ie race weekends. Domenicali and Whitmarsh may have been nice guys but this is probably not the deciding factor on the lack of success they have had. Rather, their skills and abilities to lead a Formula 1 team and rally the troops so to speak.
Wolff too, presents himself as a “nice” guy. In fact, that would seem to be the Merc PR default setting, Lauda excepted. And they seem to be getting decent results. 🙂
As far as I can see Wolff is simply riding upon Brawn’s work. With Brawn gone, I’m very curious to see how well can Mercedes can keep up. I’m not so sure that Wolff and Lowe are equipped to lead a team as Brawn could.
What a stupid comment!
No it is not. Wolff is a finance guy, made a lot of money. He was at Williams and skipped off to Mercedes. Brawn is a repeat champion treated shabbily by Mercedes.
He was a finance guy who had an interest in Motorsport, hence him investing in Williams. Furthermore, he’s only responsible for the business side of the team and not the technical bit. How exactly did mercedes treat Brawn badly?
Not sure how nice a guy Wolff is. The way I see it his goal set by the board is one. Win WDC and the WCC with (preferably) the German driver.
The rumours about Merc wanting Rosberg to win the title + the ‘study’ that was done on Lewis’ pace in Malaysia + Wolff’s comments about not allowing in the future drivers to make chopping manoeuvres (i.e. directed towards Lewis), point to this.
True, but they could have just hired Hulkenberg instead of Hamilton? Or even Sutil if they wanted Rosberg specifically to win. Unless the best way to stop the competition (that you helped to raise) is to have it in-house..
Hulk and Sutil are not as marketable as Hamilton. If they win it with Hamilton, they’ll sell more. If they help Rosberg a little bit and win the WDC with him, then they’ll start portraying him as an equal to Lewis/Alonso/Vettel and try to get his market value up. To me, it makes no sense to favour Rosberg and risk losing Lewis. Then again, Merc and their German mentality is different.
Hmm, true, and with the role reliability is set to play, something like another ‘plastic tube’ failure for Lewis could effectively hand the title to Nico. And to be fair, I don’t think he’s that far behind the top 3 anyway.. neither is Hulk. Hulk especially just needs a chance in a top car, while Nico has his now at last, but is up against Lewis.. Nico could do very well and still end up a number 2, like Barrichello to Schumi or DC to Hakkinen. But I agree that they need to keep Hamilton for when they no longer have an engine advantage.
While anything is *possible*, thus far I’ve seen zero evidence of Mercedes trying to tip the scales in this year’s driver battle.
And it makes absolute sense for the team not to want the drivers chopping each other.
FWIW, I didn’t think Hamilton’s move on his team mate crossed the line of acceptability – but it went right up to it (one of the reasons I like him as a driver).
I agree Nigel.. but imagine if Nico didn’t react as quick and both were taken out (not quite as dramatically as Pastor on Esteban)! We’d have a Force India double podium! Given what happened in Suzuka 1989, it’s possible something similar could happen later on in the season, leading to a win for someone like Hulkenberg…
especially if double points is still in place come Abu Dhabi. What a farce that could be if it all is decided on that…
re commercials – too bad that here in the us the ONLY commercial having anything to do with F1 is the Jenson button / tony Stewart Mobil commercial that has been boringly playing for two years. you’d think someone would make more of an effort right?
In lots of ways, you’d think someone would make more of an effort. I watch both US and UK coverage and it’s really night and day. The biggest issue is commercial interruption, but it’s just a nagging sense that improving the broadcast isn’t a priority. I’m not sure how to explain it, but I had really hoped for something other than a retread of the Speed format when NBC took over the rights.
decided to watch NBC coverage instead of Sky last weekend. will not happen again. competent, but nothing more…
Buxton is the only one worth his salt.
Ok what the hell is going on in F1 today? Redbull appeal, Stephano resignation and now Mercedes announcing that Bob Bell had resigned from December last year, but won’t leave the team until the November. Pink slip day in F1
Well, I guess that with Wolff and Lowe sharing the lead role, Bell’s job became redundant as Lowe could absorb Bell’s responsibilities.
Well that’s what the statement said. They won’t be recruiting anyone, Lowe would absorb that into his present role. Not a bad idea, it’s not like Paddy doesn’t have the necessary experience.
Is it a happy coincidence with those announcements for Stefano and Bob on the same day?
What in the world is kgs/ph”?
A lot of the detail is in the documents, so we don’t see it but if that’s all RBR’s got then they ain’t got much.
13 FFMs have failed on 22 cars in three races. That’s ludicrous.
Merc sound like out and out narcs – goody two shoes, polishing the FIA’s apples.
Merc say they acted in good faith during “testgate”. Did he say that with a straight face. What a self-righteous, sanctimonious prat!
On a point of process: Why are Mercedes even there? How do they fit into a fight between RBR and the FIA? Help, please 🙂
…this has not been made clear. RBR were in attendance last summer because they protested the legality of Mercedes actions.
It’s not surprising that Mercedes were there due to a commonality of interest – but Ferrari’s absence is somewhat strange.
…I’m sure a TJ13 reader with time and interest will dig out the rules for the participants in such an occasion
Why get yourself involved (Ferrari) in mud when you can watch the others trying to tear each other apart (Merc and RBR) and divert attention from in-season development?
….Indeed, and even though Ferrari originally co-protested with Red Bull over Mercedes, they didn’t attend the IT hearing.
Judge,can RBR protest this result too,assuming it comes out against them??
Red Bull are merely getting a taste of their own medicine, long overdue I think. If the FIA really wants to lay down a marker in the sand to Red Bull I can see a large fine and a race ban being handed down or worse. In anycase Vettel may have time to dangle his balls in the pool (sorry couldn’t resist that one).
I believe it’s Articles 14.1 and 17.8 that apply here –
Page 20/44 onwards for 14.1 and page 27/44 onwards for 17.8
Reading that document,it would have been better if RBR had read the Article 17.2 and paid the fine of €150,000 and withdrawn the appeal,rather than facing much more serious consequences now..
Maybe Ferrari lawyers’ are busy trying to sort out the contract papers of Alonso to prevent him from leaving the team next year..
In regards to Red Bull, this is perhaps a culmination of pushing the limits of what’s legal to a logical conclusion – Overstepping the line and being so arrogant (due to past decisions going their way) they are blind to the fact that the FIA/Todt may have run out of patience with them and are ready to drop a bombshell on Horner and co.
My view is that you have to abide by the FIA’s decisions at race weekends, then take it up behind closed doors or if a team has a realistic chance of winning an appeal, then they should appeal. Not use the appeals process to try and get rid of fuel flow limits to gain a performance advantage. At best they’ll get a race ban or three, at worst they could face something much more serious.
Alonso wise ? If he’s run out of patience with Ferrari ? Then there’s not a lot Ferrari can do other than to force him to sit out his contract on the sidelines (they paid Kimi to sit around and twiddle his thumbs for a year) or more likely come to an amicable agreement with, whichever team Alonso ends up at. Or everything is fine and dandy at Ferrari and Alonso will sign a new contract. It’s a bit early for the silly season isn’t it ?
Ted Kravitz argued later today, “Alonso’s influence in this has been absolutely key, he is more fed up than anyone that Ferrari are, once again, unable to deliver him a race-winning car.”
“Alonso would have been in the background saying to di Montezemolo ‘Come on guys, we really need to get this sorted’. Alonso was instrumental in getting in James Allison and he would have been saying ‘Come on, we need a big change now’ – the same ‘big change’ that Stefano Domenicali talked about in his resignation remarks.”
I was keeping that in mind with the “Everything is fine and dandy at Ferrari” line meaning Alonso is shaping the team around him and putting pressure on Monty to go out and sign the people Alonso thinks can give him a title challenger. I doubt Kimi is too concerned, given he likes to do his talking on the track. All Alonso’s efforts could prove fruitless if Kimi find his title winning form. Anyway one would hope Ferrari turn things around for 2015 and we get to see that inter team battle play out.
Merc also there b/c RB brought up tyre test. Merc lawyer hit this hard in closing.
IMO RB will get their ass handed to them. Don’t know what they were thinking.
I still don’t understand the ‘terms’ of the Merc presence – They didn’t protest RBR so why are they not observers like the others. They can also be called as FIA witnesses (for the prosecution) but why was Paul Harris acting as prosecutor…!?
Fck Red Bull Racing.
The arrogance and conceit they manifested in abusing the appeals process after deliberately cheating were such that they deserved punishment for bringing the sport into disrepute.
So glad the fraudulent appeal was rightly denied. Red Bull as a sponsor has no love for F1 and RBR has established itself as, perhaps, the most ignoble team in recent memory…
I had the same question too (though I’m not in love with Ricciardo). Can any team show up and ask questions? I remember RBR being very “present” at the Mercedes test gate hearing too. Why are not the other teams who stand to gain directly from RIC’s DQ (those who finished the race in P3-11) not there presenting evidence and cross-examining?
….. It may be they allowed/the FIA requested that Mercedes to send an specialist electronic engineer to give testimony on behalf of them all for simplicity.
…Further, it is more than likely Harris had spoken with those teams present based on his reference to them directly in closing statements….
Again it simplifies matters if there is one team prosecuting matters – and it appears Harris did a better job then the legal eagles from the FIA….
It still seems ‘odd’ (putting it mildly) to me that the FIA lay down the law (in Australia), RBR appeal, and it is (virtually) left to another competitor to put the FIA’s case… How open to ‘corruption’ is that…!?
BJF, perhaps you could review the document linked to above that sets out the appeal process in painful detail and let us know what the actual source of legitimacy is for Merc’s QC’s participation?
I’m sure it’s spelled out in there somewhere and would be eager to hear what you can dig up!
It’s not 13 failures on 22 cars in three races. It’s 13 failures in 22 cars across all the test sessions, races, qualifying, and practice. Most of the failures have been Renault engined cars and after the fuel filters have been modified!
It might not be 13 failures on 22 cars,as it looks like only Renault powered teams have this problem.That amounts to 8 cars out of 22.. Renault teams must investigate it..
Renault powered teams were ” modifying ” the sensors.
The FIA has now banned this ……
no need to investigate anything 😉
RBR get what they deserve, simple as that!
Lots of money and a genius on board made them 4 times champions and they think they suddenly own the sport. What did RBR were doing last year interjecting for Merc’s punishment? It’s payback time for Merc. I’m sorry, but seeing how weak their defence really is, it seems that it’s just arrogance that drives them.
McLaren78 – you are better than this petty comment.
True, thanks for putting me in my place, emotion got the better of me
Red Bull are toast if their defence is just as reported. Very weak. I infer from the judge’s report, that Renault are distancing themselves from RB’s position. Where can we hear the court proceedings?
ps I see that RB need a IT security expert to oversee their related IP. Does the judge have any inside information? Were they hacked? Is there a spy in their midst? Did somebody download information before they left?
http://tinyurl.com/m2m4wqg RB job description.
If you’re Subway, why would you put your money into f1 to expand in Europe instead of going to football? The numbers don’t make any sense. SUBWAY isn’t a premium brand like a watch maker like Rolex or something. They could back Haas instead!
exactly my thinking in writing the piece iceman. That’s why it seems something is shifty about the deal that Brown is constructing with the devil…
Dude, whoa – if you’re gonna make a statement like that, I would think you’d be ready to back it up w/ evidence and not just supposition?
Do you have a grudge against either Z.Brown or Subway? Does he have any history of improper (sponsorship) dealings?
The devil being FOM Joe and yes, will try and get something written on the subject.
and remember Joe, I’m not saying it necessarily is – just it seems.
LOL Jared for Subway lost 300 lbs and made himself famous. Maybe a better fit than you think for drivers on a diet. They sell themselves as a low calorie fast food alternative here in the States.
IMO – it’s a question of WHEN not if the race is cancelled.
Another one to add to the collection of adverts. Although admittedly not very cheesy.
“Unfortunately, with the exception of maybe the tifosi, this damaged Ferrari’s credibility in the eyes of most F1 commentators and fans alike.”
You omitted to insert the word English between the words most and F1 and before fans.
Can’t think many German fans were particularly impressed by it, either.
but you’ve already got ‘commentators’ in that gap…
Unless F1 allows customer cars Haas will fail.
Hey Judge… is it possible to get the ‘thumbs-down’ button returned… Would make life much easier…
I would also support such a feature (live by the sword, die by the sword…).
From the outside, I was surprised by Stefano Domenicali’s resignation. I believe he shows character by stepping down after several years of not winning a championship. Frankly, I like the guy, always in a good mood on tv, quite far from the stereotype of a wild italian under a lot of pressure.
I am also surprised by a comment from our host… stating that Alonso is behind this movement. Not so long ago, Alonso was not beloved within his own team and now he is supposed to be moving the wires.
….. because he is clearly now vindicated. The team have designed a car which at present looks to be woeful and is doing well to be fifth in the constructors’ championship…. and Kimi so far looks to be second rate to him too…..
I would love for our Honour, or Carlo, or BJF to offer a historical perspective on Domenicali’s hiring and resignation. But I, for one, am not so much surprised about the resignation. I’m more surprised that Domenicali got the job in the first place.
From my naive and superficial perspective, the 2000-2005 period was one of impressive success by a small, coherent, very talented and politically astute group within Ferrari. The Schumacher-Brawn-Todt-Allison-Costa was nigh invincible, even when Enstone and Alonso managed the improbable and beat them.
Then at one point Ferrari (i.e. Montezemelo) decided that Schumacher should retire for the good of the squad, even though Schumacher wasn’t quite done with F1 yet. With Schumacher out, Brawn didn’t wait long to bow out, too, created a championship winning car elsewhere using unlimited Honda funds, and then allowed Mercedes to create their own team on those bases and with himself in charge. He even took back Schumacher at Mercedes. At around the same time (in 2005) James Allison left the squad for Enstone.
And then there was Todt. I remember how Montezemelo sidelined him around 2007, and after Raikkonen won his title, removed him from the post and replaced with Domenicali, “to put Ferrari back in Italian hands” (or whichever was the exact phrasing was back then). The implicit assumption was that Ferrari would keep winning in the same way, even with a lesser known Italian in charge. However under Domenicali’s reign Aldo Costa’s work started not to be appreciated (remember all the conservative designs?), so Brawn orchestrated his return to his own team (now Mercedes). Then Costa penned a Mercedes which today is 2.5s faster than anything else in the field.
So it’s as if around 2005-2007 Ferrari (i.e. Montezemelo) was so confident in its own supremacy that they decided that each and all were replaceable. And as such they sort of shot themselves in the foot. And for several years now Montezemelo is whining about Ferrari not winning, something that he orchestrated more or less by himself.
Am I missing anything major here?
Only the fact that maybe you should write the article! 🙂 Seriously, its a great idea and I would certainly read it.
Excellent summary, and pretty much bang on target.
I’ve said before, and I’ll say it again, Luca is a weak link. His time should be over. Politics, posturing and hysteric premadonna utterances are not going to get the cav rampante back winning any time soon.
But Brawn and Bell will, with the rest of the technical team, if they don’t end up at McLaren. Fry excluded, of course.
Pass… but thanks for the invitation 😉 More in Carlo’s line… but I agree with Matt – you seem to be hiding your light under a bushel – whatever that means… 🙂
[Check: Matt. 15… 😉 ]
Nice to see somebody say some positives about Stefano Domenicali, Regis. I’ve been a lifelong fan of Ferrari but have not always admired the attitude or tactics of previous bosses. I think Domenicali brought integrity, openness and a likeability factor to the team and I sorely wish that had been rewarded with better results racing-wise (although frankly I think winning a WCC title, keeping the team top 3 for four years in a row after that – barring the annus horribilis of 2009 – and frequently having a driver in the hunt for most of the season is not a bad record). My feeling is that Stefano did a good job in terms of managing the business side but, due to not having a technical background, was forced to rely on others’ say so of what was the right path for Ferrari to follow car-wise and was let down. If Ross Brawn could have paired with him I think together they could have covered all sides of senior management really well.
I sincerely wish Stefano all the best in the future (for someone who seemed to genuinely value time with the family and could see F1 was not everything in life I think he’ll actually come to enjoy this move). Not sure what lies ahead for Ferrari though. James Allison is a respected designer but does he have the technical leadership skills (or remit) required? And what is Marco Mattiacci’s MO? If Ferrari or one of its drivers does get a title in the near future, I hope it’s down to honest, clever hard work and not through political shenanigans or behaving like b*”!%&%s.
Happy to be with you in the camp of SD not having a bd record… too bad the sport is so ruthless that anything but domination is deemed a failure. And more so for Ferrari.
What a read, that hearing!
It was all rather disjointed, with plenty of posturing for emphasis…
Where was the posturing done? The hearing or judges chambers? :p
The negative spin here on the Subway as a “fast food chain” (obviously, for fat people) is ridiculous. Here in the United States, Subway has the image of a food chain for healthy foods. Moreover, believe it or not, but this poster lost 30 pounds in about 3 months simply by following a diet that included cereal for breakfast and a six inch Subway sub for lunch (half of a footlong). A lot of people asked me how I did it and were surprised when I told them “all I do is eat a six inch sub for lunch and exercise for 30 minutes”
Maybe it is a UK thing Jacob.
Conrats on your weight loss, btw! That’s epic, 30lbs!! NOT easy to do, no matter how nonchalant you are.
disappointed to read the innuendo written here against Zak Brown vis-a-vis his efforts to broker F1 sponsorship for Subway