Did a Return to Simpler Cars in 1994 Contribute to the Accidents?, by Ibrar Malik

"The cars are immediately less stable without the electronic suspension. As a consequence, they are harder to drive and we'll have more cars spinning and going off the track" 

Ayrton Senna, Williams Driver (Killed during San Marino GP)

“Several commentators said it was the elimination of driver aids (to blame for the accidents), a classic post hoc point. It was an intensely stupid inference but was nevertheless widely reported.” 

Max Mosley, FIA President

Following the tragedies of the 1994 San Marino GP, a mass-media hysteria gathered and called for immediate repercussions but couldn't agree on what they should be. Some suggestions were constructive, some destructive, most were frankly a veiled attempt to turn tragedy into titillation. Generally, the fewer journalists knew about F1, the greater the mock outrage was. FIA President Max Mosley was initially at pains to avoid a knee-jerk response…that was until Karl Wendlinger suffered an almost fatal crash at Monaco less than two weeks later. Mosley then came under intense pressure from outside motorsport to impose urgent safety measures, but teams were in an uproar over the haste of such action. They argued Mosley's measures would not be safer until the knock-on effects were established, this led to more problems which are detailed in the book.

Mosley felt it was a statistical cluster that so many accidents happened at Imola 1994. But choose his words carefully afterwards to avoid being branded as irresponsible by a media baying for blood.

The Day Schumacher Drove a Ligier, by Ibrar Malik

The upcoming book details what is learnt about the Benetton controversies when Michael Schumacher tested a Ligier for one day in December 1994. For instance was the German as impressive when not driving a Benetton?

Before we answer this let us remember the background surrounding this test. In early 1994 the Ligier team was in financial trouble following its team owner, Cyril de Rouvre, having been jailed on fraud charges. Benetton directors, Flavio Briatore and Tom Walkinshaw, bought the struggling French outfit in May 1994 following months of conveyancing. Within this transaction, they were partly acting for the Benetton family - their paymasters - who wanted Ligier's prized supply of Renault engines having failed to acquire them via more conventional means during 1993. This was because their rivals, Williams, had stopped Benetton advances towards the French engine supplier by giving Ligier assistance with gearboxes etc throughout 1993. Williams' strategy was to keep Ligier competitive enough to maintain Renault's interest in it rather than Benetton. Following the 1994 acquisition, Walkinshaw owned a minor stake in Ligier but dreamt of owning the whole team and bringing it Grand Prix success with Ross Brawn. While Briatore, another stakeholder, was simply happy to be a sleeping partner and saw the Liger purchase as just another of his investments.

Walkinshaw (left) and Briatore of Benetton. Neither were strangers to controversies, therefore many people consider Benetton guilty of the 1994 accusations simply because of their association.

Brundle at McLaren, by Ibrar Malik

During the winter of 1993/1994 F1 was subjected to infighting, politicking and accusations that cheating was rife within the sport, all of which is explained within the upcoming book. During this time Martin Brundle took a massive gamble with his F1 career, as he refused offers from the likes of Jordan in order to secure the prized race seat at McLaren vacated by the Williams-bound Ayrton Senna. There was a chance 1993 F1 world champion Alain Prost might take it, or Peugeot's man Philippe Alliot, but Brundle felt the risks were worth it because driving for McLaren would almost be a guaranteed passport to Grand Prix success. By 1994 the team had won in every season since 1980, and Martin's gamble was eventually rewarded – albeit on a race-by-race deal for that season.

McLaren had been a dominant force during the 1980s and early 1990s, but had undergone major change for 1994 including a new engine supplier.  

Unfortunately, the dream drive didn't pan out as expected and McLaren suffered their first winless season in 14 years, partly because their new Peugeot engine proved uncompetitive and unreliable. "The team originally wanted Alain [Prost] in the car," recalls Brundle. "We both went to test at Estoril, and I don't think Alain was interested after he drove the car. Then I got in it, which turned out to be a bit of a bad omen really. I had stood and waited for Alain all morning. I got in it, and as I was on my out lap coming to start my very first flying lap, it threw a conrod so hard that it came through the sump and damaged the racetrack! I didn't even start my first run. "But having said that, I was very happy to be in a McLaren."

Brundle 'doesn't understand' Rosberg retirement

Martin Brundle has said that he does not understand Nico Rosberg's decision to quit F1 mere days after the German won the 2016 World Drivers' Championship.

Martin Brundle questioned Nico Rosberg's deicion to retire
Photo: Octane Photography

Speaking at Autosport International in Birmingham today, former F1 driver and current Sky F1 commentator Brundle admitted his surprise upon hearing the news.

"Yeah of course [it was a surprise]" he said, "you could have knocked me over with a feather. Alex, my boy, sent me a text and I thought he was joking. I thought 'it can't be April the 1st'...I couldn't believe it."

And Brundle admitted that from his perspective, he struggled to understand Rosberg's decision.

"I still don't understand it," he added.

"I admire that Nico had the courage of his convictions to say 'this is the high point, I want to jump off now as I've achieved everything I want to achieve.' I think it's a bold decision, a brave decision from him in that respect. But where's the passion? Where's the commitment? Why not come and show the world again next year in this amazing car and amazing team that most of us would have given anything for just for one season to drive in our careers?

Inside Line F1 Podcast - The FIA Bans The Verstappen

The United States Grand Prix was a joke in itself. The only saving grace was the brief wheel-to-wheel battle between Carlos Sainz Jr. and Fernando Alonso. The BIG chatter from the weekend was the FIA banning 'The Verstappen' and Venus Williams snubbing Martin Brundle. Shame on you, Williams.

(Martin Brundle drove a race for the Williams F1 Team in 1988 - had Venus Williams known this fact, would she still have snubbed Brundle?)

How do Formula 1 drivers ensure that they don't become victims of 'The Verstappen'? Ask the FIA to ban it! Ridiculous or sensible? Either way, history suggests that the FIA could well un-ban what they've banned in the first place.

Actually, instead of banning 'The Verstappen' the FIA should have Max Verstappen host a session for the other drivers on how to pull of 'The Verstappen'. He's the one driver that's brought some cheer to Formula 1. Okay, Daniel Ricciardo too.

Ricciardo's shoey found yet another victim (in Gerard Butler) and given the fantastic promotion and free publicity for Red Bull, there's good chance that Bernie Ecclestone would ban the shoey if the the FIA didn't. But before the ban, we'd love to see Hamilton's reaction to being shoey-ed by Ricciardo.

Lewis Hamilton started his race well and that meant an expected end too - a much-needed victory. Due to obvious reasons, there's increasingly more focus on his starts and media behaviour. At his 'second' 'home' race, he scored well on both counts.

By the way, an evil move by the FIA to call him in for the official press conference on Thursday. They seem to have a dark side to their humour.

But it wasn't just the FIA alone, even Red Bull Racing's Spy had something really humourous to say on this subject.

It was a shame to not see Max Verstappen on the podium. After all, it wasn't just Red Bull Racing alone, but the organisers too who had prepared well in expectation. His unexpected pit-stop and radio message caused much chatter. But despite his insistence, he might just end up finishing 4th in the Drivers' Championship, if his form and Ferrari's woes continue.

Also, a thumbs up to our listeners and all the Dutch fans for voting for Verstappen as the 'Driver of the Day' even in races he 'Did Not Finish'! And finally, Verstappen's parked car on the circuit brought out the Virtual Safety Car that eventually helped Nico Rosberg jump Ricciardo to second place. How ironic for Ricciardo, how lucky for Rosberg!

Fernando Alonso's drive to fifth showed us glimpses of his old self, but he was lucky in his clash against Felipe Massa. He should've been penalised. So typical of the FIA!

2017 might see cars, drivers and even different management for a few teams. There's talk of Ron Dennis retiring and Ross Brawn, among a few others, being discussed as his replacements.

Brawn is most welcome to come back to Formula 1. But, we're not sure who needs him the most - Ferrari, McLaren or Formula 1! Ferrari's best finish was a Kimi Raikkonen reversing himself in the pit-lane.

Over to Mexico, there's a possibility of Rosberg clinching the Drivers' Championship this weekend. But at the same time, there's possibility his points advantage could be cut down to just one point. The stakes are equally high for both Mercedes drivers, but Hamilton has been here a few times before, as for Rosberg, this is only his second time (first being in 2014).

Maybe this is why he sang 'Living on a Prayer' post the US GP. But he could well be singing 'We are the Champions' if things go his way this weekend. Ecclestone's comments on Rosberg were very rude, but can better be expected from him? He relies on teams, drivers and podcasters like us to market his sport.

Lastly, despite the Hamilton vs. Rosberg fight, Sergio Perez will be the most cheered driver on the grid in Mexico. Tune in!

(Season 2016, Episode 35)

Melbourne Qualifying - Cloud with a silver lining

As the 19th century German Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke the Elder once said, "No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy". And to put it in F1 terms no new qualifying system survives contact with the sport's reality. Or at least this one didn't.

Not waving but shrugging? Lewis Hamilton
took pole in an absurd session
Photo: Octane Photography

It sounded nice in theory. The clock ticking down continuously and drivers being eliminated incrementally. But it reckoned without F1 as it is. Tyres are designed to degrade and available sets of the softest tyres are finite. These two things coming together mean one chance effectively to set a time. And it showed - today marks tended to be set early and then many under threat of elimination had given up well ahead of the cut-off time as they'd run out of tyres. Even if they had been minded to reply the new system didn't give them an opportunity to as times were too tight. Much of the qualifying hour became an absurd exercise in watching the clock ticking down as cars sat in the garage. Their inevitable exit already set.

Underlining the absurdity, only the two Mercs - not even the Ferraris in other words - went out for a final effort at the end. Then when the pole was won and we got the usual back-slapping on the pit wall, then as the drivers wandered into the weighbridge with their job done, someone noticed that there still was three minutes plus remaining on the clock as it ticked down gingerly, yet removing drivers one at a time. It rather encapsulated the farce.

Brazilian GP Report: Risk management

How often last year did we have cause to reflect something akin to 'thank heavens Mercedes isn't micromanaging races like Ferrari used to'? The sport had (and has) enough things to tear itself apart over, one can only imagine what a repeat of 2002's on-track entertainment levels would have done to an already combustible situation. The intriguing Lewis Hamilton vs. Nico Rosberg battles - in large part a result of Mercedes to its credit then letting its drivers get on with it - in many races as well as in the championship overall, rather rescued us. Indeed of this Mercedes boss Toto Wolff spoke of his responsibilities to the sport as his silver cars dominated.

Sight should not be lost that Nico Rosberg
deserved his latest win
Photo: Octane Photography

How quickly things can change. Mercedes still dominates of course, and in fairness hasn't quite gone to the extent of Ferrari's paranoia of yore. But on the evidence of today's Brazilian Grand Prix at some point it has ventured a way down the same path. Being sensible so to not lose points is one thing, but throwing a wet blanket over the race as Mercedes did today is quite another.

One thing to say before we go further is that it would be unfair to suggest that the eventual outcome of Nico Rosberg beating Lewis Hamilton to the Interlagos win was impacted by this. Nico has for much of this weekend looked to have an edge on Lewis - certainly when it mattered - and deserved his win. He also has been in superb form lately and his showing this time was mere continuation. And for all of the talk afterwards of strict Mercedes orchestration it of course is a long way from clear whether Lewis would have usurped him if he had been allowed to go a different way on strategy. Indeed the evidence we have leads us to doubt as much and severely. But equally it would have provided much-needed diversion to watch him try.

Lewis Hamilton 2015 World Champion - Sign of the times

Glory often comes as an affirmation. A vindication. Well, that goes for most pursuits aside from F1 its seems. Or at the very least aside from the glory achieved by Lewis Hamilton.

Lewis Hamilton's third title started another debate
about where he rates
Photo: Octane Photography

You'll be aware that he's just sealed his third F1 world drivers' championship, only the tenth ever so to do. With this also, even with the rather lengthy previous of British champions, he is just the second among his countrymen to achieve as many as well as the very first to take any titles back-to-back. And yet. In response alongside the plaudits about as prominent were the varied attempts to decode this particularly complex enigma; to unravel the knotted question of just how good he is; ascertain just where he fits. And really it's nothing new, it's just the latest manifestation. Hamilton has long been a driver who divides opinion more than just about any other in history.

Perhaps it's just in the nature of the age. After all Sebastian Vettel too has divided opinion notoriously throughout his time at the top. As had Fernando Alonso for a good while; even now the odd contrary yelp can be heard. I always recall a friend of mine saying that had Twitter existed in 1957 there would have been people on there insisting that Fangio wasn't up to much - perhaps social media lends itself to what euphemistically might be called a thousand flowers blooming. It may tell us something, possibly, that the legendary scribe Denis Jenkinson who watched them both first hand always reckoned Alberto Ascari was the better of the two.

We can form a hypothesis about it too. The further you delve back into F1 past the more that media coverage becomes rudimentary or even non-existent, and the eulogies from the few that were there is the main thing that survives into the modern day. History is written by the winners after all. Whereas now the scrutiny and exposure of all drivers is infinitely more searching and pitiless. No wonder our view of them is rather warts and all.

What was the matter in Montreal?

Since last Sunday's Canadian Grand Prix there has only been one discussion point really. And not a pleasant one for F1. That even at Montreal of all places the sport was not delivering entertainment for those watching on.

Sebastian Vettel and Felipe Massa's drive through the field
were worthy
Photo: Octane Photography

Plenty too have sought to give a diagnosis for it all. Not all of it has been coherent necessarily. No doubt the odd hobby horse has been mounted. But what was actually wrong last Sunday?

For starters I'm going to go against the grain a little and say that I didn't think the race in Canada was too terrible. It was no thriller I grant you, particularly by local standards, but I didn't think it in itself was worthy entirely of the hysteria that has followed it. It had a reasonably tight fight for the win, and at least for a time mid-race the chasing Nico Rosberg looked to have Lewis Hamilton's lead under credible threat. There also was a decent amount of action further back, not least two good drives through the pack providing diverting wheel-to-wheel action. Felipe Massa's pass on Marcus Ericsson from the on-board shots thrilled, as did Sebastian Vettel's two no-holds-barred scraps with Fernando Alonso (still a lot of feeling there clearly) as well as with Nico Hulkenberg, Pastor Maldonado and others.

Nico Rosberg - failing on the rules of politics?

Right, I'm going to let you all into a secret. For my sins, I actually like politics. Not merely F1 politics, though admittedly that's an admission it itself. I actually like the party politics that in the main (and with justification) inspire much derision. Yes, I'm one of them.

Nico Rosberg has had to watch his team mate do a lot
of winning this year so far
Photo: Octane Photography

As an auxiliary benefit it comes in handy for interpreting F1 sometimes too. There often are parallels, and it shouldn't really surprise either. The manoeuvrings; the deals; getting the right people around you; getting people onside; getting 'messages' out there - all to the detriment of opponents, are clear examples of common ground.

And it's come in handy once again what with Nico Rosberg and all that, following his much wrestled over comments following last Sunday's Chinese Grand Prix.

They'll be familiar to you by now. As will many of the theories on what inspired it. Of course, it remains possible that it was all no more complex than simple sounding off, as Niki Lauda indeed insisted afterwards. And us sports observers don't half have a weakness for applying cod psychology regardless of its actual applicability.

But still, there are reasons to suspect that it instead was part of a plan. With three defeats from three to his team mate and nominal biggest rival in 2015, and that team mate/rival looking serene, the need to change things somehow presumably are at the forefront of Nico's thoughts. Further, given who he's up against too - and without disrespect - he's unlikely to win out in a straight battle of driving talents.

Japanese GP Report: Dark clouds

At such moments the sights, the sounds, the feelings, can be horribly familiar. The incongruous silence when there should be noise; still when there should be buzz; restraint when their should be celebration.

We all know it, and the horrid sense of shock and then of uselessness as we watch on, desperate. And however much we love motor racing, it also is - and always will be - dangerous. The risk can be minimised, indeed it has been vastly as we know. But it cannot be uncoupled.

All drivers were understandably sombre after the Suzuka race
Photo: Octane Photography

Perhaps against expectations - and the expected vast quantities of rain indeed arrived - we had a motor race in Suzuka today for the Japanese Grand Prix. And for the most part we had a good one. One of remarkably good judgement by all of the drivers too, in addition to their considerable bravery and skill.

But it came to a rather abrupt stop on lap 42. As intimated come the commencement time of 3pm locally the track was very wet, which resulted in a start behind the safety car, a red flag then another safety car period. But the rain had relented before the time that the cars were released definitively. The circuit as a consequence was, if still difficult, suitable for green flag action.

Living an F1 less regulated

Most of us are aware of Gilles Villeneuve, Rene Arnoux, Dijon in 1979, and all that. Even if it was well before your time you've probably seen the footage. Even if you've not seen the footage you'll likely have heard it referred to. It has gone into folklore, the F1 standard bearer for a thrilling wheel-to-wheel scrap. Motor racing in its purest, and most scintillating, form (footage is below if you're one of the unfortunates who hasn't seen it, or for the rest of you who'll likely enjoy watching it again).

Then Gilles and Rene got out of their cars afterwards and fell into each other's arms. Heck, Rene had even ran off the track at one point of the battle - no one cared. But the world's changed clearly, as has F1.


EXTRAORDINAIRE duel - Villeneuve Arnoux - Dijon79 by PAUL1902

In last Sunday's British Grand Prix Fernando Alonso soared past Sebastian Vettel as the latter was on his out lap after his final stop, in a brave and spellbinding overtake that most of us will carry with us for a long time. And that was just the start as the pair then knuckled down to dispute the place. And keep disputing it. F1 was taken to its very edges of attack and defence.

Bulls to provide the horses?

Pretty much ever since the RB10 made its first faltering attempts at turning a wheel in Jerez testing pre-season back in January, audible muttering from the Red Bull camp about its power unit partner Renault has been persistent background noise of the 2014 season so far. But even with this, at the team's home event just passed it all seemed to step up rather.

Helmut Marko wasn't just active on track last weekend
Photo: Octane Photography

First off, early in the weekend Helmut Marko when being interviewed by Martin Brundle on Sky stated that if Renault can't provide a unit on a par with the standard bearing Mercedes 'then we have to look for alternatives'. Then after a very trying time of it in the race itself team principal Christian Horner escalated hostilities further, calling both the unit's reliability and performance 'unacceptable' before adding 'the situation hasn't really improved from Melbourne' and that 'there needs to be change at Renault.'

Of course, taken at face value these are statements of the obvious, and indeed Renault deputy managing director Rob White put some words out outlining that it shared Red Bull's frustrations (though also emphasised that there is a plan in place to improve matters). But of course in reality it'll be taken to mean much more. And as James Allen noted, imagine if the Renault engine was being let down by a poor chassis and the French company was to suggest that the guilty constructor's technical director should be sacked...

An end of an era, in more ways than one

For all that the goings-on of the Canadian Grand Prix dazzled, probably the most important happening of the weekend - in terms of its implications in the broadest context - had already come and gone, before the race had even got started. Arguably nothing in the Montreal race would have trumped it.

Adrian Newey - saying goodbye
Photo: Octane Photography

The rumblings over the future of Red Bull's (and F1's) design genius Adrian Newey was resolved. He wasn't going to Ferrari, he was instead staying at Red Bull. The team's announcement couched it in the language of triumph, and a few media outlets it seemed read the statement only as far as the end of the opening line and reported it initially as such too. But gradually those who read all the way to the end started to counter them. The devil was in the detail. He was staying at Red Bull, but not as we know it.

Instead after the fundamentals of the 2015 car are in place his role in F1 will be restricted to 'advising and mentoring'. Newey will be more enveloped in 'new Red Bull Technology projects' - presumably exploring design projects in fields other than F1. In other words, if the Red Bull team couldn't have him on the Grand Prix frontline then it was making sure that no one else was going to have him either. An auxiliary benefit also is if Newey's love for F1 ever is rekindled then Red Bull will still have him under lock and key. Smart move on both counts.

Further thoughts on the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix

The promise I made, started to fade
'He's done his job, he's scored points, he's scored podiums, they've earned millions in terms of prize money, millions in terms of sponsorship, it's wrong that they haven't paid him. Pay up, look big, and stand by your deals'.

If you watched the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix on TV last Sunday you may recognise these as being the words of Martin Brundle, and on the murky matter that has lingered in Enstone shadows for months, one that suddenly had a lamp swung over it in the course of last weekend. Just what had been eating the Kimi Raikkonen-Lotus relationship: that the team had paid its charge 'zero Euro the whole year'. And, you know what? I agree absolutely with Brundle.

Kimi Raikkonen - driving for free
Photo: Octane Photography

From what I could tell most others agreed also. Though there was the odd yelp to be heard to the effect that 'yeah, but Kimi's loaded' to my mind that point is utterly irrelevant, and thankfully such yelps seemed isolated. The bottom line is that Lotus willingly and solemnly entered a contract with Kimi Raikkonen with various promises and obligations to Kimi agreed to therein, and hasn't stuck to it.

It should not be forgotten that employer-employee obligations, including those via signed contracts, work both ways. And I'm pretty sure that was Lotus in a boot-on-the-other-foot situation wherein one of its staff was not fulfilling its obligations to the team (e.g. by not turning up for work, or not doing their job properly) then Lotus would feel entirely justified in ditching them immediately. Same would go for a supplier to Lotus similarly not doing what it promised. Therefore the team should count itself lucky that Kimi didn't choose to dump Lotus just as readily.

1 - Film Review: Not just another F1 film

Yet another F1 film release? Right in the wheel tracks of the blockbuster successes of Senna and Rush, a documentary and a theatrical film respectively? Just like them based on the sport's past? What on earth can it offer over and above these? Well, in the case of 1, rather a lot as it turns out.

Even above and beyond the challenges outlined in the opening paragraph, the film-makers of 1 - a new film about the history of F1 - hardly could have asked for a more daunting set of objectives. Max Mosley told the film's director Paul Crowder at the project's outset that if he could 'capture why he's devoted 40 years of his life to F1 then he'll have succeeded'. In essence, the makers felt that their mission was to capture the essence of this the pinnacle of motor sport. Its glamour, its pace, its danger, and everything else besides. No mean feat.

Despite what it says on the tin though 1 isn't really a history of F1. Not exactly anyway. But nevertheless it can be said to have gone a long way to meeting its haughty mission statement.

Martin Brundle starts
 and ends the story
Credit: greenmashup / CC

The film starts not in the beginning, but on the starting grid of the 1996 Australian Grand Prix. Perhaps not the most obvious choice, but its reasoning soon becomes clear. The animated buzz of the assembled crowd, the rich colours resultant of the full-beam Melbourne sunshine, as well as the mass of team members and assorted hangers on crawling over the assembled cars - all in eager anticipation of the race, and season, start - are familiar. As is the gradual, aching build up of tension, eventually to be released as the cars are unleashed like feral beasts when the red light goes out.

But then...not long after we had a spectacular accident: Martin Brundle got his braking wrong and cartwheeled over several cars, his machine disintegrating as it did so. The car, by now a heap of wreckage, came to rest upside down in a gravel bed, and the seconds of time wherein there is no movement from the cockpit seem to stretch on like hours. All of the harrowing accidents, some fatal, that took place within the previous 24 months suddenly seem scarily redolent. Yet, before you know it Brundle emerges, in his own words 'without a bruise on his body' and then can be seen - accompanied by the roar of the crowd - hot-footing it down the pit lane to find Sid Watkins in order to get the OK to take the restart.

Hungaroring Preview: A close call

Think of the sort of track that gets added to the F1 calendar in modern times, and there's a definite identikit. Purpose built, super safe, gleaming facilities, no expense spared, and all bankrolled by the national government keen to 'brand' the country. You may have wondered when this all began and which F1 venue in history was the first of these? Well, the answer is probably Hungary.

Races at the Hungaroring always attract
a large and enthusiastic crowd

The Hungaroring debuted in 1986, and was a high standard facility built purposively to host an F1 race, and in just the seven months prior to the event, on a greenfield site not far outside the city of Budapest. But that was barely the half of it. It's easy to forget now, but F1's stepping behind the Iron Curtain into the 'Eastern Bloc', as Hungary was then part of, was truly groundbreaking, and a step into the almost completely unknown for both the F1 circus and its hosts. Indeed, Martin Brundle has since commented that as he and the other competitors lined up on the dummy grid preparing for the race start he noticed something almost unprecedented from an attendant F1 crowd: complete silence. Those assembled in the stands had absolutely no idea what to expect to unfold in front of them, and were thus dumbfounded.

Bernie Ecclestone had eyed a race in the Eastern Bloc for some time, and indeed as early as 1983 a street race in Moscow appeared on the provisional F1 calendar. That floundered on insurmountable bureaucracy, but Hungary, always the most outward-looking of the Eastern Bloc countries, stepped in and Bernie was sold on the idea.

Return to Ricard?: F1 re-establishes its French connection

F1 is poised to re-establish its French connection it seems. Following on quickly from the long overdue return of French drivers to the sport this year (and no fewer than three of them), the equally long overdue return of a French race sounds imminent.

France is the country of motor sport's very roots. The first ever organised motor race took place there in July 1894. Such races eventually became Grands Prix and Grandes Epreuves (the use of the French lexicon isn't coincidence), which in turn eventually became Formula One. And a French Grand Prix appeared on the F1 calendar every year aside from 1955, when it was cancelled in the wake of the Le Mans disaster, seeming to be part of the furniture. But after 2008, after years of threatening by Bernie, the unthinkable happened and the French round was dropped for the 2009 season. F1's itinerary has stepped away from its heritage and core support notably in recent times - and surely the dropping of the French round is the most egregious.

Felipe Massa - winner of the last ever
French Grand Prix, in 2008
Credit: Thijs Bekkema / CC

But the issue of the French round's return has moved on in recent days ever so slightly. France's Prime Minister Francois Fillon, himself a motor racing man - he's on the committee of the Le Mans 24 hour race and has competed in the Le Mans legends sports car race - visited the Paul Ricard circuit last week. And while the actual confirmation of the returning French Grand Prix that many anticipated was not forthcoming, it did sound like it isn't far off. Fillon's utterances indicated that money is in place and Bernie is on board, with only a small and surmountable gap in finances to be bridged. It also seems that alternation of the race with another venue (most probably Spa) is how the race will be scheduled, and that the race's venue will be Paul Ricard.

It's time to stop the block

The guys who finished in the top three at Monza last weekend have barely had a look in. Much of the comment about the race since has concerned the guys that came fourth and fifth: Lewis Hamilton and Michael Schumacher. Most pertinently, it concerned Schumacher's tactics in defending his place from Lewis Hamilton, a battle that lasted for half the race.

Schumi's extreme pushing of the boundaries of acceptability when defending is well-established, and as it was, not for the first time, he escaped serious punishment at Monza. This was an outcome that split F1 fans pretty much down the middle, between the 'it's racing, it's entertaining, let them get on with it' group in one corner and the 'it was dangerous and clearly outside the rules' in the other.

Michael Schumacher has again been in the news
Credit: Alex Comerford / CC

In my view it's beyond doubt that, given the rules, Schumi should have received some censure for his tactics. The battle certainly provided entertainment, much of Schumi's defence of positioning his car on the inside line was, given the regs are as they are, in the 'hard but fair' category, and he was greatly assisted his his car's prodigious straightline speed. But even so some of Schumacher's moves in defending his place went beyond what the regulations say are acceptable.

Just as a reminder, article 20.2 of the sporting regulations states: 'Manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as more than one change of direction to defend a position, deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction, are not permitted.' Schumacher, most notably, moved twice in defending his place ahead of Hamilton on lap 20 approaching the first Lesmo, right to the inside of the track and immediately right back to the racing line to take his apex. He did something similar, though less extreme, on laps 10, 11, 13, 15 and 21 on the run down to the Ascari complex. And of course he edged Hamilton off the track at Curve Grande on lap 16, which looked both dangerous in itself and an example of 'crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track'. Indeed, he was warned more than once by race control for his driving, the first time was even before the worst case on lap 20, and it transpires that he in all probability would have received a penalty for the lap 20 move had the stewards' attention not been elsewhere at that point (something subsequently admitted by driver steward Derek Daly - Daly talks in detail and with commendable frankness on his stewarding at Monza on The Flying Lap below).


Episode 36: Italian De-brief with Derek and Conor Daly from Smibs TV on Vimeo.
But the discussion got me thinking more widely about what should be considered acceptable in F1 when defending your position from a competitor in a race.