Kubica's replacement... (It's Heidfeld!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Well, to begin with the medical facilities that are provided during tests coupled with the safety track record of modern F1 cars..............

Bear in mind Robert 'lost a lot of blood' and was 'trapped in the car' for some time...............................

Also, did you notice the steep drop to the side of the road on the video posted earlier........

Sadly, Roberts accident, although freak, need not have happened.

---

The issue of the crashworthiness of S2000 rally cars — and I am, as I said in another thread, very surprised indeed that it should have been possible for the barrier to pierce the car as it did — is an entirely separate matter from whether or not he should have been allowed to compete at all. There is no need at all, other than perhaps financially, to prevent F1 drivers from undertaking such 'extra-curricular' activities. Would you seek to prevent them from skiing, for example? How would one measure the potential danger of one activity compared to another? I am delighted that Renault never stopped Kubica from rallying, and think all teams should adopt the same approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Would you seek to prevent them from skiing, for example?

---

How long, on average, do broken limbs take to heal? I'd suggest a clause in a drivers contract, vis a vis skiing, that prevents participation within 2 months of the start or during an F1 season. Thus allowing for participation in such activities, but not so that their main employment - F1 - is jeopardised should injury occur.

Personally, given the sums invested in drivers, I'd say that was common sense, and moreover good business sense?

How much do Lotus/Renault stand to lose in prize money alone due to the loss of Robert for this season?

If the teams want to be inhuman corporate monsters, sure, as long as it's clear when the driver signs the contract. But surely you wouldn't want to force the teams to add such a clause, right..?

Personally I'm delighted Robert was allowed to participate in such an activity; the drivers should still be allowed to live and have some fun even if it is at a certain risk. Sure, money this and money that and it's all very important I'm sure, but I still get a fuzzy feeling whenever there is actually a sense of humanism and good ol' fun involved in such a high profit sport in this day and age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

How long, on average, do broken limbs take to heal? I'd suggest a clause in a drivers contract, vis a vis skiing, that prevents participation within 2 months of the start or during an F1 season. Thus allowing for participation in such activities, but not so that their main employment - F1 - is jeopardised should injury occur.

---

But, as you say, what happened to Kubica was a freak occurrence. It is entirely possible that he could 'just' have broken a limb in the accident, but it turned out rather worse. An even greater probability, if we're looking at this statistically, is that he would have completed the rally unscathed. Sadly, he didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

But, as you say, what happened to Kubica was a freak occurrence. It is entirely possible that he could 'just' have broken a limb in the accident, but it turned out rather worse. An even greater probability, if we're looking at this statistically, is that he would have completed the rally unscathed. Sadly, he didn't.

---

But, if he had 'just' have broken a leg, he'd still miss the start of the season and the all important testing. If he'd broken the leg in December, chances are it would have healed.........

So, perhaps don't operate a blanket ban, just a 'sensible window of allowable time to do extra curricular stuff'........

I'm firmly on the side of letting drivers take risks. Not stupid ones, but taking part in an organised rally seems perfectly sensible. What about Adrian Newey's racing exploits? I seem to remember last year somebody fearing that he was jeapordising Red Bull's championship chances.

Getting behind the wheel helps keep drivers fit and sharp, if that brings a negligable risk then so be it. He could just as easily slipped in the shower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

But, if he had 'just' have broken a leg, he'd still miss the start of the season and the all important testing. If he'd broken the leg in December, chances are it would have healed.........

So, perhaps don't operate a blanket ban, just a 'sensible window of allowable time to do extra curricular stuff'........

---

So you would prohibit any current driver from taking part in the Goodwood Revival, then, if they wanted to (and as Dario Franchitti does)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

So you would prohibit any current driver from taking part in the Goodwood Revival, then, if they wanted to (and as Dario Franchitti does)?

---

I think so, yes, and for the reasons I stipulated before - look where Lotus Renault are right now. As for the Festival of Speed I would allow participation in this but stipulate they not drive the car on the limit for obvious reasons.

Simply because of the limited testing, there is little scope for keeping your reserve driver up to speed with current machinery. I am sure the insurance money will help, but that won't win races.

But I don't care where Renault 'are now'. Their driver is injured and needs to be replaced. They probably (surely?) won't do as well in 2011 as a result. Does this concern me? No. These things happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

But I don't care where Renault 'are now'. Their driver is injured and needs to be replaced. They probably (surely?) won't do as well in 2011 as a result. Does this concern me? No. These things happen.

---

Would it concern you if you were running the team?