International views of the FIA

[rude-boy]

On the OP's question...

I have spoken to 1 American, 2 Belgians, a South African and a French friend.

All, without exception, think that the FIA got it totally wrong. Most of them think that the original decision was right and all think Ferrari should have also been punished if Maclaren was as in effect this is more of a case of failure to keep a leash on one's employees rather than someone at the top going 'how can we cheat'.

As an aside the American friend had always been a Ferrari fan but has said that they will no longer support them until they have got rid of JT.

Most of the people I have spoken to about this who are involved in the sport (not current F1 peeps I hasten to add) think what the FIA has done is a disgrace FWIW.

[flemke]

David_s said:

flemke said:

All your observations about the effect of tyres are right, so far as I know.
The thing is, the cost to the teams was mostly the cost of testing. They only did the amount of testing that they were allowed. If they're not allowed to experiment with different tyre compounds, they spend the maximum allowed testing time (and therefore money) on testing other things.
The tyremakers bore the expense of making the tyres, so there has been no meaningful savings to the teams by going to a single tyre.
The time spent testing is what ate up the teams' money, regardless of what they were testing.

As I remember, there was also the question of trying to control the increase in lap speeds. Removing tyres as an area of competition was an easy way of bringing lap speeds down, or at least trying to control any inevitable increase.

Quite so. There were a dozen ways of bringing down speeds.
My point is that the FIA does a lot less consulting with the teams to find solutions than it does dictating to them.

[skwdenyer]

flemke said:

Quite so. There were a dozen ways of bringing down speeds.
My point is that the FIA does a lot less consulting with the teams to find solutions than it does dictating to them.

Yes, there were a dozen solutions to that problem. The FIA made choices which included one which you don't, personally, agree with. This does not a conspiracy make.

As a spectator, I believe the FIA made the right choice as regards a single-tyre rule, as I can now see the relative performance of the cars and drivers, i.e. the teams, without an artificial tyre wildcard intervening.

As a business owner, I can understand why Bridgestone might want to continue and I can see why Michelin might not want to. Both are "right" in their own contexts, even if they came to different decisions.

I really see nothing to suggest that this was a pro-Ferrari stitch-up.

I have always found your posts to be well-informed and reasonable, even taking into account your decidedly pro-McLaren stance. I believe you may be right in suggesting a certain level of anti-McLaren bias in certain places. But to extend that to seeing conspiracies at every turn seems something of a stretch for the rest of us.

[flemke]

skwdenyer said:

flemke said:

Quite so. There were a dozen ways of bringing down speeds.
My point is that the FIA does a lot less consulting with the teams to find solutions than it does dictating to them.

Yes, there were a dozen solutions to that problem. The FIA made choices which included one which you don't, personally, agree with. This does not a conspiracy make.

As a spectator, I believe the FIA made the right choice as regards a single-tyre rule, as I can now see the relative performance of the cars and drivers, i.e. the teams, without an artificial tyre wildcard intervening.

As a business owner, I can understand why Bridgestone might want to continue and I can see why Michelin might not want to. Both are "right" in their own contexts, even if they came to different decisions.

I really see nothing to suggest that this was a pro-Ferrari stitch-up.

I have always found your posts to be well-informed and reasonable, even taking into account your decidedly pro-McLaren stance. I believe you may be right in suggesting a certain level of anti-McLaren bias in certain places. But to extend that to seeing conspiracies at every turn seems something of a stretch for the rest of us.

My friend, I mean no offence, but this is starting to get a bit annoying.
Since you've tried to pick me up on this for a second time on this short thread, I shall again quote myself regarding this point:

flemke said:

I don't think this particular instance was one of the many in which the FIA sought to favour Ferrari.

Could you please tell me where I am suggesting a "conspiracy theory" about the single-tyre rule?
I was trying in the above to say the contrary - that the FIA's single-tyre rule was not related to favouring Ferrari. You're obviously quite good with the English language, skw. What makes you construe the above quote to mean the opposite?

As regards my disagreeing with the "choices" that the FIA made, in this case I didn't particularly disagree about whether there is a single-tyre rule; I don't much care
I disagreed about the FIA's choice of how it goes about making decisions, of which this was an example. That doesn't mean that they will always get it wrong - sometimes even a blind hog will find an acorn.

[skwdenyer]

flemke said:

skwdenyer said:

flemke said:

Quite so. There were a dozen ways of bringing down speeds.
My point is that the FIA does a lot less consulting with the teams to find solutions than it does dictating to them.

Yes, there were a dozen solutions to that problem. The FIA made choices which included one which you don't, personally, agree with. This does not a conspiracy make.

As a spectator, I believe the FIA made the right choice as regards a single-tyre rule, as I can now see the relative performance of the cars and drivers, i.e. the teams, without an artificial tyre wildcard intervening.

As a business owner, I can understand why Bridgestone might want to continue and I can see why Michelin might not want to. Both are "right" in their own contexts, even if they came to different decisions.

I really see nothing to suggest that this was a pro-Ferrari stitch-up.

I have always found your posts to be well-informed and reasonable, even taking into account your decidedly pro-McLaren stance. I believe you may be right in suggesting a certain level of anti-McLaren bias in certain places. But to extend that to seeing conspiracies at every turn seems something of a stretch for the rest of us.

My friend, I mean no offence, but this is starting to get a bit annoying.
Since you've tried to pick me up on this for a second time on this short thread, I shall again quote myself regarding this point:

flemke said:

I don't think this particular instance was one of the many in which the FIA sought to favour Ferrari.

Could you please tell me where I am suggesting a "conspiracy theory" about the single-tyre rule?
I was trying in the above to say the contrary - that the FIA's single-tyre rule was not related to favouring Ferrari. You're obviously quite good with the English language, skw. What makes you construe the above quote to mean the opposite?

As regards my disagreeing with the "choices" that the FIA made, in this case I didn't particularly disagree about whether there is a single-tyre rule; I don't much care
I disagreed about the FIA's choice of how it goes about making decisions, of which this was an example. That doesn't mean that they will always get it wrong - sometimes even a blind hog will find an acorn.

I apologise unreservedly. I misread (multiple times, to my eternal discredit) your original point, and I extrapolated wildly in the wrong direction thereafter. My only mitigation is a sick child and consequent chronic lack of sleep, but I did you a considerable disservice nonetheless.

If you would prefer me to delete my previous posts, happy to oblige.

[flemke]

skwdenyer said:

If you would ...

No probs.
It was just that I spend enough time on PH justifying my criticisms of Ferrari that I'd like not to feel the need to justify it on the rare occasion when I've cut them some slack.

Cheers.