The Latest From Paris...

[Taku 0]

Word has it that matters are falling apart within the FIA World Council meeting in Paris today. The general hearing has already taken place, and the team principals are now coming out one by one - and are refusing to comment - but the word from within the meeting is that bad news is expected.

BAR principal Nick Fry has just come out of the meeting, with Ron Dennis expected to be the next to come out.

Minardi's Paul Stoddart came to Paris, but was refused entry to the World Council meeting.

An FIA press conference with Max Mosley is planned for 3pm local Paris time, while a press conference of the Manufacturers is expected sometime after - at which Stoddart is expected to be part of.

Rumours are that BAR is facing a ban - in which case it is anticipated that BAT and Honda would announce that they would pull out of the championship.

More as things develop...

i don't think i'm going to be able to sleep tonight...

[Ash 0]

Relax ...just chilllllll! Read this (it's from another thread):

FIA president Max Mosley has defended the decision to delay the punishment of teams for their behaviour in the United States Grand Prix tyre fiasco until September by claiming it is much fairer on the parties involved.

The seven Michelin teams were found guilty on two charges of damaging the image of F1, by not having suitable tyres for the race and wrongfully refusing to start the event, at a meeting of the FIA World Motor Sport Council on Wednesday.

But in explaining why the FIA decided to delay a decision on the punishments until an extraordinary meeting on September 14, Mosley claimed it allows the team a chance to repair the damage their actions have caused.

"It would be unfair to impose severe penalties today," he said. "By September, if nothing has been changed, then it would be fair."

Mosley claims that the priority of the FIA is to ensure that the United States Grand Prix fans are sufficiently compensated for what happened at Indianapolis, and that the teams guarantee there will be no repeat of such tyre problems at future races.

Should the teams be able to resolve those issues then the likelihood is that they will escape severe punishments in September.

"The main thing was to secure compensation for the guys in the States, that was our number one priority and to make sure F1 maintains a position in the United States," explained Mosley.

"I want to give them fair and reasonable time to sort everything out."

Mosley also made it clear that BAR would not be singled out for extra punishment, even though the outfit are under a six-month suspended ban for breaching the technical regulations earlier this year.

Referring to the fact that BAR were not alone in withdrawing from the US GP, Mosley said: "The suspended ban was for a reason and as long as they (BAR) did not transgress in a similar area then it would not be a problem. It would be unfair to single them out when the others had a problem."

[Taku 0]

World Council decision

The seven teams are guilty of failing to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres for the United States Grand Prix but with strong mitigating circumstances.

They where guilty of wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pitlane on each lap. They where not guilty of refusing to race subject to a speed restriction having regard to the absence of any detailed plan for this.

Not guilty of combining to make a demonstration for the reason that they had hoped to race until the last minute. They where not guilty of failing to inform the stewards of their intention not to start for the same reason.

The World Motorsport Council has decided to adjourn discussion of any penalty until an extraordinary meeting of the WMSC on Sept 14th. The WMSC will also examine what steps have been taken by the seven Michelin teams and their supplier to compensate the Formula 1 fans and repair the damage to the reputation of the Indianapolis Motor Sped at and the image of Formula 1; what steps have been taken by the Michelin teams to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.

thank God! bar are safe, for now........jr, we can watch magny cours with a clear conscience!

[Taku 0]

Relax ...just chilllllll! Read this (it's from another thread):

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

oh dear and i made a quick glance at the threads too...name your threads better people! you're getting poor taku excited over nothing!

i'm off to bed and shall sleep well in the knowledge that max has been outplayed within his own council, and that the stakeholders do have some influence after all. i hope come sept 14 max won't be present at proceedings.

[cavallino 2]

stupid grandprix.com, Mosley has explicitly stated BAR will not get any more penalties than other teams.

[Kay 0]

Yes, but they didn't know at that point - note the word rumours.

EDIT: Note the article was made at about 12:50.

[Jenson_Rules 0]

World Council decision

The seven teams are guilty of failing to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres for the United States Grand Prix but with strong mitigating circumstances.

They where guilty of wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pitlane on each lap. They where not guilty of refusing to race subject to a speed restriction having regard to the absence of any detailed plan for this.

Not guilty of combining to make a demonstration for the reason that they had hoped to race until the last minute. They where not guilty of failing to inform the stewards of their intention not to start for the same reason.

The World Motorsport Council has decided to adjourn discussion of any penalty until an extraordinary meeting of the WMSC on Sept 14th. The WMSC will also examine what steps have been taken by the seven Michelin teams and their supplier to compensate the Formula 1 fans and repair the damage to the reputation of the Indianapolis Motor Sped at and the image of Formula 1; what steps have been taken by the Michelin teams to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.

thank God! bar are safe, for now........jr, we can watch magny cours with a clear conscience!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We sure can

[Kay 0]

And at least I can see him race when I go to Silverstone

[Jenson_Rules 0]

And at least I can see him race when I go to Silverstone

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I cant believe that, my parents were sposed to be taking me this year, and with the possibility of going to monza as well this year. But, they cant keep to their promises! damn parents! lol

[cavallino 2]

Yes, but they didn't know at that point - note the word rumours.

EDIT: Note the article was made at about 12:50.

yes completely inaccurate baseless rumours published to get some page clicks. they did this with the BMW - sauber announcement, fortunately for them they were right that time.

[Kay 0]

yes completely inaccurate baseless rumours published to get some page clicks. they did this with the BMW - sauber announcement, fortunately for them they were right that time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not necessarily - that is presuming something and the last time you presumed something you were wrong...

[cavallino 2]

Not necessarily - that is presuming something and the last time you presumed something you were wrong...

it was to get some clicks - obvious, no presumption. the responsible thing would have been to have some verification. They wouldnt be the only ones getting rumours, but they rushed to publish anything they could get.

[Kay 0]

it was to get some clicks - obvious, no presumption. the responsible thing would have been to have some verification. They wouldnt be the only ones getting rumours, but they rushed to publish anything they could get.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well they wanted to say something - and if they had been right they would have looked good - it is just a risk and they did state at the time it was just a rumour.

[cavallino 2]

Well they wanted to say something - and if they had been right they would have looked good - it is just a risk and they did state at the time it was just a rumour.

then what were you presuming I was presuming?

damn insomnia has dulled my capacity for wordplay

[Kay 0]

That they wanted clicks and so said anything - more likely they found something out and wanted to be the first to mention the rumour if it was right - but as a result of hurrying news through {trying to inform people} they messed it up.

I was waiting for a long time for the news and they were the first to say anything but soon after a lot was said.

[cavallino 2]

with the kind of useless michelin butt licking and FIA bashing that the site has been indulging in that kind of news would be a godsend in their quest for more clicks. sample this from the site..

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15129.html

Another point which should be made is that Bridgestone may have benefited from data at Indianapolis from its sister company Firestone.

It is worth remembering that in April - before the Indianapolis 500 - the Indianapolis Motor Speedway had a test for Firestone to test its IRL tyres following the resurfacing of the track in the spring. The new surface lacked grip and this resulted in Firestone cancelling its Indy 500 tyre test after the first day when drivers reported that the track lacked grip and was too bumpy. The asphalt was then ground down to make it smoother, the delays meaning that Goodyear was asked to postpone a test which had been planned in preparation for the Brickyard 400 NASCAR race.

The grinding increases the grip and this may have been a contributory factor to Michelin's problems as the tarmac was very different in Turn 13 compared to last year.

enough rebuttals for this in my thread.

http://www.totalf1.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3233

"What would have happened if it had been the other way around and Ferrari or one of the other Bridgestone teams had gone to Charlie Whiting and said 'You need to install a chicane because our tyres won't work around the banking'?"

The question, however, is not really valid. As Michelin's request was not based on six cars, four of them running as also-rans, but on 14 cars, the majority of which were racing at the front. There is an important difference because the request was not based on performance but rather on producing a show. If 14 front-running cars had lined up on the grid at Indianapolis, there would have been some disappointed Ferrari fans, but there would have been a perfectly acceptable race for the fans to watch.

This is a very significant difference.

hypocrisy at its best, who cares about a few ferrari fans?

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15106.html

Todt's role in the proceedings is sure to be controversial as he clearly does not have the support of the other manufacturers in F1.

[Kay 0]

Every site has its bad articles.

[cavallino 2]

Every site has its bad articles.

[sarcasm] sure [/sarcasm]

[Fed up 0]

Meanwhile........

Ferrari are getting on with the job at hand

[nojvnof1 0]

yeah, looking for something to appeal later on in the year if they are still behind!

[Ash 0]

yeah, looking for something to appeal later on in the year if they are still behind! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

... and licking the FIA's ****__

[nojvnof1 0]

[cavallino 2]

yeah, looking for something to appeal later on in the year if they are still behind! 

some 6 teams appealed against a very reasonable decision recently.

[Ash 0]

some 6 teams appealed against a very reasonable decision recently.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If it was reasonable, they wouldn't be appealing now, would they? Well, if you make that stick then they are just licking the FIA's ****__

[cavallino 2]

rubbish