F1 - USA:s Grand Prix - 19/6 - Indianapolis
Sex av sju stall överklagar
Sex av de sju Michelinstallen meddelade idag att de gemensamt kommer att överklaga FIA:s dom mot dem idag. I ett uttalande släppt av BAR, Williams, Sauber, McLaren, Toyota och Renault ansåg stallen att det var fel att straffa dem för att rätt däck inte fanns på plats och att de inte ställde upp i loppet. I uttalandet sa stallen bland annat:
– Stallen förklarade för FIA att det på grund av Michelins klara skriftliga råd att det var osäkert att tävla med däcken på Indianapolis inte fanns något annat val än att inte tävla. Alla andra beslut hade varit oansvariga. 19 av årets Formel 1 förare har förklarat att de är överens med stallen. Stallen ångrar att den amerikanska publiken inte kunde se ett race med alla tio Formel 1 stall, och vi vill tacka alla de fans som har gett sitt stöd för det beslut stallen och Michelin tog av säkerhetsskäl.
Stallen hävdar också vidare att de inte bör straffas för att inte haft med sig lämpliga däck då det är Michelins ansvar. Stallen förklarade också att de kommer att överklaga FIA:s beslut som fann dem skyldiga på två av fem åtalspunkter. Det enda Michelinstall som saknades i uttalandet var Red Bull. Stallet som är det enda som saknar stöd från en biltillverkare sedan Sauber i förra veckan blev uppköpta av BMW, kommer nästa säsong att köra med Ferrarimotorer. De sägs också föra förhandlingar med Bridgestone om att byta till deras däck.
Forza Motorsport väljer att publicera stallens gemensamma pressmeddelande i helhet på engelska:
The six Formula One Michelin teams identified above are very disappointed by the decision of the World Motor Sport Council to find them guilty of two of the five charges brought against them by the FIA in relation to the 2005 U.S. Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
1) In relation to the finding that they failed to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres, the Teams point out that they reasonably relied on Michelin, an approved FIA tyre supplier and a highly reputable manufacturer of tyres worldwide, to provide suitable tyres for that race. As Michelin have already acknowledged, they were responsible for the supply of unsuitable tyres for the Indianapolis circuit. The FIA's decision accepts that there were "strong mitigating circumstances" for the Teams. In truth, those circumstances provided a complete answer to the charge, given that the Teams cannot be held responsible for what occurred.
2) In relation to the finding that the Teams wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pitlane on each lap, the Teams respond as follows. The charges suggested only one means by which the Teams could safely have raced (the use of a speed restriction). On that charge, the Teams were found not guilty. The Teams cannot understand how they can be found guilty by reference to another proposed solution, which was not part of the charges brought against them, which was not suggested by the FIA at Indianapolis, which was considered unsafe and which, in any event, would not have achieved a satisfactory race for the fans.
The Teams therefore will be lodging an appeal against each of these findings.
The Teams explained to the World Motor Sport Council that, in the light of the clear and written advice from Michelin that it was unsafe to race at Indianapolis on the tyres supplied by that company, the Teams had no choice but to decline to race. Any other decision would have been irresponsible. Nineteen of the current Formula One drivers have expressed their agreement with the decision of the Teams.
The Teams much regret that the American public were unable to enjoy a race involving all ten Formula One teams, and would like to express their thanks to the many fans who have communicated their support for the stance taken by the Teams and by Michelin on grounds of safety.
The Teams are pleased that Michelin have agreed to compensate fans who attended the race.
The Teams very much look forward to the next Grand Prix on Sunday
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
Red Bull avvaktar beslut om överklagan
Christian Horner.
Red Bull är som enda Michelinstall det enda som ännu inte har bestämt sig om de ska överklaga FIA:s dom idag eller inte. Ett par timmar efter FIA:s besked att de funnit de sju Michelinstallen skyldiga på två av fem punkter för att ha dragit vanära över sporten släppte sex av de sju stallen ett gemensamt pressbesked. Där förklarade de sitt missnöje med FIA:s beslut och sin intention att överklaga beslutet.
Red Bull saknades dock och stallchefen Christan Horner sa till Reuters att man överväger vilka alternativ man har innan man tar ett beslut.
– I princip ville vi inte ta ett förhastat beslut.
En bidragande faktor till Red Bulls beslut kan mycket väl vara att de är det enda stall som inte har stöd av en biltillverkare. De andra sex stallen har alla stöd av biltillverkare, inklusive Sauber som i förra veckan köptes av BMW. I en konflikt som alltmer ser ut som ett bråk mellan FIA och biltillverkarna i sporten har det en stor faktor. Red Bull har dessutom sedan tidigare gjort klart med Ferrari som motorleverantör nästa säsong, Ferrari som är det enda stall som valt att skriva på det nya Concordeavtalet för fortsatt tävlan i Formel 1. Red Bull sägs också vara nära ett avtal med Bridgestone för nästa säsong.
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
19 förare står bakom stallens beslut
Samtliga Michelins förare samt Minardis förare stod bakom Michelinstallens beslut om att en chikan var enda sättet som kunde möjliggöra ett lopp med samtliga stall. Det framkom i förhöret FIA höll med de sju stallen i Paris idag. Det hela arrangerades av GPDA, förarnas egen säkerhetsorganisation, ansåg också att en fartsänkning genom kurva 13 var en för farlig lösning då hastighetsskillnaden mellan bilarna på Bridgestonedäck och de på Michelindäck skulle ha blivit för stor.
Förarna ansåg också att det fanns en stor risk att vissa förare skulle använda den delen av banan som ett omkörningsställe vilket skulle trissa upp farten och öka risken. De förare som inte skrev på dokumente är Ferraris Michael Schumacher och Rubens Barrichello, samt Jordanförarna Narain Karthikeyan och Tiago Monteiro. Alla kör de på Bridgestonedäck.
Förarnas uttalande:
________________________________________
Full Statement by the 19 Drivers
BEFORE THE FIA WORLD MOTOR SPORT COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF F1 DRIVERS REGARDING THE INDIANPOLIS GRAND PRIX
Introduction
1 We the undersigned drivers make this statement in order to assist the World Motor Sport Council in its consideration of the events at the Indianapolis Grand Prix on Sunday 19th June 2005.
2 We wish in particular to respond to the suggestion that we could have raced with a speed limit (which was never defined) somehow imposed through Turn 13 on cars with Michelin tyres, or that we should have raced but the ears with Michelin tyres should have slowed down voluntarily through this Turn.
3 This suggestion would have been an unprecedented restriction in and would have been completely contrary to the competitive Formula One or any motor race that we have ever participated have been unworkable, unpoliceable and above all, unsafe.
Safety
4 Not all cars would have been subject to the speed restriction. At least 6 cars would have been going through Turn 13 as fast as possible i.e. over 320 km per hour. The other cars — if they all complied - would have had to slow suddenly going into the Turn, travel at a much slower speed through the Turn and then accelerate back to racing speed.
5 This would have meant a huge speed differential between cars at the approach of Turn 13, during Turn 13 and exiting Turn 13. Having cars travelling at dramatically different speeds at the same point on the race track would have been completely chaotic and highly dangerous.
6 There is one good racing line through Turn 13. All of us would have tried to take that line. If a car subject to the restriction had to slow down, approaching Turn 13 on the racing line, a car behind it not subject to the restriction would have had to take avoiding action and try to overtake on the Turn off the racing line. This would have put both drivers at considerable risk.
7 Given the competitive nature of a race, the speed restriction would have become a focal point for overtaking. For instance two cars both subject to the speed restriction racing each other going into or coming out of Turn 1 3 would inevitably have each tried to gain advantage by braking later or accelerating earlier. With other cars racing through the Turn at higher speeds this too would have been chaotic and very unsafe.
8 Given the nature of a race there would also have been a clear incentive for drivers to maintain speeds above the restricted speeds, particularly if they were close in the race. This would have risked damaging the Michelin tyres which would have created yet further risks.
Practicality
9 The Teams would have been unable to fit a speed limiter which would have operated round Turn 13 in the time available. It would have been left to the Drivers to attempt to accomplish the speed restriction by themselves whilst still trying to race each other. Quite apart from the safety issues explained above, none of us think that it would have been possible for a Driver to do this.
10 Unlike in a pit lane (which has an obvious and clearly marked entrance and exit) there was no clear physical marker on the race track for where any speed limit should begin or end at Turn 13. In a pit lane, we race to and from well- defined lines, and we are aware precisely when to brake and when to accelerate so as to maintain race speed before and after the pit. In Turn I 3, we would and could not have known when and where to brake and when and where to accelerate to achieve the speed restriction through the Turn. Each Driver would have had to make a judgment which would have been different on each lap depending on what was happening in the race. It would have been quite impossible for any of us to know each time whether or not we had maintained the speed restriction.
11 We also believe that it would also have been impossible for the Stewards or anyone else to tell at Turn 13 precisely when any car had slowed, and whether it complied with the speed limit throughout the restricted area.
12 For these reasons, we have no doubt that a speed restriction imposed at Turn 13 would have been impossible to comply with and impossible to police.
The day of the Grand Prix
13 On the morning of the Grand Prix, all of the Drivers attended a Drivers' briefing with representatives of the Teams. We were told of the Michelin tyre problem. Even though we all wanted to race, we accepted that the Michelin Teams could not go against the safety advice from Michelin and take the risk of serious and potentially fatal accidents.
14 We were also told of the proposal for a chicane at Turn 13. Chicanes have been successfully introduced in races in the past. We believe that a chicane would have been a perfectly workable solution in Indianapolis. Accordingly none of us objected to a chicane at the meeting.
15 Many of us were also consulted by our Teams about the FIA proposal for a speed restriction. Those who were consulted explained to their Teams that a speed restriction would not work because it would be dangerous and impractical (for the reasons set out above). The Teams in turn explained this to the FIA officials.
Conclusion
16 All of us wanted to have a proper race at Indianapolis, which is one of motor racing's most sacred venues, and to showcase Formula One to the American public. We are all extremely disappointed that we were unable to do this.
Signed on 23 June 2005 by:
Christijan Albers
Fernando Alonso
Jenson Button
David Coulthard
Pedro de la Rosa
Giancarlo Fisichella
Patrick Friesacher
Nick Heidfeld
Christian Klein
Felipe Massa
Juan Pablo Montoya
Kimi Raikkonen
Takuma Sato
Ralf Schumacher
Jarno Trulli
Jacques Villeneuve
Mark Webber
Alexander Wurz
Ricardo Zonta
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
Källa: <a href="http://www.forza-motorsport.se/" target="_blank">http://www.forza-motorsport.se/</a>
Sex av de sju Michelinstallen meddelade idag att de gemensamt kommer att överklaga FIA:s dom mot dem idag. I ett uttalande släppt av BAR, Williams, Sauber, McLaren, Toyota och Renault ansåg stallen att det var fel att straffa dem för att rätt däck inte fanns på plats och att de inte ställde upp i loppet. I uttalandet sa stallen bland annat:
– Stallen förklarade för FIA att det på grund av Michelins klara skriftliga råd att det var osäkert att tävla med däcken på Indianapolis inte fanns något annat val än att inte tävla. Alla andra beslut hade varit oansvariga. 19 av årets Formel 1 förare har förklarat att de är överens med stallen. Stallen ångrar att den amerikanska publiken inte kunde se ett race med alla tio Formel 1 stall, och vi vill tacka alla de fans som har gett sitt stöd för det beslut stallen och Michelin tog av säkerhetsskäl.
Stallen hävdar också vidare att de inte bör straffas för att inte haft med sig lämpliga däck då det är Michelins ansvar. Stallen förklarade också att de kommer att överklaga FIA:s beslut som fann dem skyldiga på två av fem åtalspunkter. Det enda Michelinstall som saknades i uttalandet var Red Bull. Stallet som är det enda som saknar stöd från en biltillverkare sedan Sauber i förra veckan blev uppköpta av BMW, kommer nästa säsong att köra med Ferrarimotorer. De sägs också föra förhandlingar med Bridgestone om att byta till deras däck.
Forza Motorsport väljer att publicera stallens gemensamma pressmeddelande i helhet på engelska:
The six Formula One Michelin teams identified above are very disappointed by the decision of the World Motor Sport Council to find them guilty of two of the five charges brought against them by the FIA in relation to the 2005 U.S. Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
1) In relation to the finding that they failed to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres, the Teams point out that they reasonably relied on Michelin, an approved FIA tyre supplier and a highly reputable manufacturer of tyres worldwide, to provide suitable tyres for that race. As Michelin have already acknowledged, they were responsible for the supply of unsuitable tyres for the Indianapolis circuit. The FIA's decision accepts that there were "strong mitigating circumstances" for the Teams. In truth, those circumstances provided a complete answer to the charge, given that the Teams cannot be held responsible for what occurred.
2) In relation to the finding that the Teams wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pitlane on each lap, the Teams respond as follows. The charges suggested only one means by which the Teams could safely have raced (the use of a speed restriction). On that charge, the Teams were found not guilty. The Teams cannot understand how they can be found guilty by reference to another proposed solution, which was not part of the charges brought against them, which was not suggested by the FIA at Indianapolis, which was considered unsafe and which, in any event, would not have achieved a satisfactory race for the fans.
The Teams therefore will be lodging an appeal against each of these findings.
The Teams explained to the World Motor Sport Council that, in the light of the clear and written advice from Michelin that it was unsafe to race at Indianapolis on the tyres supplied by that company, the Teams had no choice but to decline to race. Any other decision would have been irresponsible. Nineteen of the current Formula One drivers have expressed their agreement with the decision of the Teams.
The Teams much regret that the American public were unable to enjoy a race involving all ten Formula One teams, and would like to express their thanks to the many fans who have communicated their support for the stance taken by the Teams and by Michelin on grounds of safety.
The Teams are pleased that Michelin have agreed to compensate fans who attended the race.
The Teams very much look forward to the next Grand Prix on Sunday
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
Red Bull avvaktar beslut om överklagan
Christian Horner.
Red Bull är som enda Michelinstall det enda som ännu inte har bestämt sig om de ska överklaga FIA:s dom idag eller inte. Ett par timmar efter FIA:s besked att de funnit de sju Michelinstallen skyldiga på två av fem punkter för att ha dragit vanära över sporten släppte sex av de sju stallen ett gemensamt pressbesked. Där förklarade de sitt missnöje med FIA:s beslut och sin intention att överklaga beslutet.
Red Bull saknades dock och stallchefen Christan Horner sa till Reuters att man överväger vilka alternativ man har innan man tar ett beslut.
– I princip ville vi inte ta ett förhastat beslut.
En bidragande faktor till Red Bulls beslut kan mycket väl vara att de är det enda stall som inte har stöd av en biltillverkare. De andra sex stallen har alla stöd av biltillverkare, inklusive Sauber som i förra veckan köptes av BMW. I en konflikt som alltmer ser ut som ett bråk mellan FIA och biltillverkarna i sporten har det en stor faktor. Red Bull har dessutom sedan tidigare gjort klart med Ferrari som motorleverantör nästa säsong, Ferrari som är det enda stall som valt att skriva på det nya Concordeavtalet för fortsatt tävlan i Formel 1. Red Bull sägs också vara nära ett avtal med Bridgestone för nästa säsong.
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
19 förare står bakom stallens beslut
Samtliga Michelins förare samt Minardis förare stod bakom Michelinstallens beslut om att en chikan var enda sättet som kunde möjliggöra ett lopp med samtliga stall. Det framkom i förhöret FIA höll med de sju stallen i Paris idag. Det hela arrangerades av GPDA, förarnas egen säkerhetsorganisation, ansåg också att en fartsänkning genom kurva 13 var en för farlig lösning då hastighetsskillnaden mellan bilarna på Bridgestonedäck och de på Michelindäck skulle ha blivit för stor.
Förarna ansåg också att det fanns en stor risk att vissa förare skulle använda den delen av banan som ett omkörningsställe vilket skulle trissa upp farten och öka risken. De förare som inte skrev på dokumente är Ferraris Michael Schumacher och Rubens Barrichello, samt Jordanförarna Narain Karthikeyan och Tiago Monteiro. Alla kör de på Bridgestonedäck.
Förarnas uttalande:
________________________________________
Full Statement by the 19 Drivers
BEFORE THE FIA WORLD MOTOR SPORT COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF F1 DRIVERS REGARDING THE INDIANPOLIS GRAND PRIX
Introduction
1 We the undersigned drivers make this statement in order to assist the World Motor Sport Council in its consideration of the events at the Indianapolis Grand Prix on Sunday 19th June 2005.
2 We wish in particular to respond to the suggestion that we could have raced with a speed limit (which was never defined) somehow imposed through Turn 13 on cars with Michelin tyres, or that we should have raced but the ears with Michelin tyres should have slowed down voluntarily through this Turn.
3 This suggestion would have been an unprecedented restriction in and would have been completely contrary to the competitive Formula One or any motor race that we have ever participated have been unworkable, unpoliceable and above all, unsafe.
Safety
4 Not all cars would have been subject to the speed restriction. At least 6 cars would have been going through Turn 13 as fast as possible i.e. over 320 km per hour. The other cars — if they all complied - would have had to slow suddenly going into the Turn, travel at a much slower speed through the Turn and then accelerate back to racing speed.
5 This would have meant a huge speed differential between cars at the approach of Turn 13, during Turn 13 and exiting Turn 13. Having cars travelling at dramatically different speeds at the same point on the race track would have been completely chaotic and highly dangerous.
6 There is one good racing line through Turn 13. All of us would have tried to take that line. If a car subject to the restriction had to slow down, approaching Turn 13 on the racing line, a car behind it not subject to the restriction would have had to take avoiding action and try to overtake on the Turn off the racing line. This would have put both drivers at considerable risk.
7 Given the competitive nature of a race, the speed restriction would have become a focal point for overtaking. For instance two cars both subject to the speed restriction racing each other going into or coming out of Turn 1 3 would inevitably have each tried to gain advantage by braking later or accelerating earlier. With other cars racing through the Turn at higher speeds this too would have been chaotic and very unsafe.
8 Given the nature of a race there would also have been a clear incentive for drivers to maintain speeds above the restricted speeds, particularly if they were close in the race. This would have risked damaging the Michelin tyres which would have created yet further risks.
Practicality
9 The Teams would have been unable to fit a speed limiter which would have operated round Turn 13 in the time available. It would have been left to the Drivers to attempt to accomplish the speed restriction by themselves whilst still trying to race each other. Quite apart from the safety issues explained above, none of us think that it would have been possible for a Driver to do this.
10 Unlike in a pit lane (which has an obvious and clearly marked entrance and exit) there was no clear physical marker on the race track for where any speed limit should begin or end at Turn 13. In a pit lane, we race to and from well- defined lines, and we are aware precisely when to brake and when to accelerate so as to maintain race speed before and after the pit. In Turn I 3, we would and could not have known when and where to brake and when and where to accelerate to achieve the speed restriction through the Turn. Each Driver would have had to make a judgment which would have been different on each lap depending on what was happening in the race. It would have been quite impossible for any of us to know each time whether or not we had maintained the speed restriction.
11 We also believe that it would also have been impossible for the Stewards or anyone else to tell at Turn 13 precisely when any car had slowed, and whether it complied with the speed limit throughout the restricted area.
12 For these reasons, we have no doubt that a speed restriction imposed at Turn 13 would have been impossible to comply with and impossible to police.
The day of the Grand Prix
13 On the morning of the Grand Prix, all of the Drivers attended a Drivers' briefing with representatives of the Teams. We were told of the Michelin tyre problem. Even though we all wanted to race, we accepted that the Michelin Teams could not go against the safety advice from Michelin and take the risk of serious and potentially fatal accidents.
14 We were also told of the proposal for a chicane at Turn 13. Chicanes have been successfully introduced in races in the past. We believe that a chicane would have been a perfectly workable solution in Indianapolis. Accordingly none of us objected to a chicane at the meeting.
15 Many of us were also consulted by our Teams about the FIA proposal for a speed restriction. Those who were consulted explained to their Teams that a speed restriction would not work because it would be dangerous and impractical (for the reasons set out above). The Teams in turn explained this to the FIA officials.
Conclusion
16 All of us wanted to have a proper race at Indianapolis, which is one of motor racing's most sacred venues, and to showcase Formula One to the American public. We are all extremely disappointed that we were unable to do this.
Signed on 23 June 2005 by:
Christijan Albers
Fernando Alonso
Jenson Button
David Coulthard
Pedro de la Rosa
Giancarlo Fisichella
Patrick Friesacher
Nick Heidfeld
Christian Klein
Felipe Massa
Juan Pablo Montoya
Kimi Raikkonen
Takuma Sato
Ralf Schumacher
Jarno Trulli
Jacques Villeneuve
Mark Webber
Alexander Wurz
Ricardo Zonta
Forza Motorsport 2005-06-29 22:06
Källa: <a href="http://www.forza-motorsport.se/" target="_blank">http://www.forza-motorsport.se/</a>
ANDERS NORDSTRÖM, LUND #653
HONDA GOLD WING GL 1500 SE 1998
Såld:
HONDA PRELUDE 2.3 4WS 1992 (snyft)
HONDA GOLD WING GL 1500 SE 1998
Såld:
HONDA PRELUDE 2.3 4WS 1992 (snyft)
Åtminstone David Coulthard frågade på radion under uppvärmningen om de kommit fram till något nytt samt om det var upp till honom att välja om han skulle köra eller ej. Min uppfattning då var att han ville köra men blev inkallad i depå av teamet. Så mycket snack och efterhandskonstruktioner (iofs så var väl taktiken redan upplagd innan loppet) när försöket till utpressning inte gick hem! Jag undrar hur, i första hand, förarna kände sig när de körde in i depå och sen gick av bilarna och loppet fortsatte? Tråkigt att FIA inte kunde utdöma ett straff idag så att det kunde sättas punkt för denna affär nu! Risken blir nu att det kommer att ältas och stötas hela sommaren.
ANDERS NORDSTRÖM, LUND #653
HONDA GOLD WING GL 1500 SE 1998
Såld:
HONDA PRELUDE 2.3 4WS 1992 (snyft)
HONDA GOLD WING GL 1500 SE 1998
Såld:
HONDA PRELUDE 2.3 4WS 1992 (snyft)
