it does actually... but not much of an achievement however... almost everybody around here is better than you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Printable View
it does actually... but not much of an achievement however... almost everybody around here is better than you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Even if by some strange chain of events the FIA agrees to let them miss the 4 races, there is still a grave danger that they still won't make it to the 5th race and beyond either, based on what we have observed so far. I'd say it's time to make sure we get 26 on the grid, and focus on having Stefan and "Campos" making it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by maximilian
I would imagine they would be in breach of contract with Lopez's sponsors and at best would lose some of that funding too.
This is turning into Donny Park all over again! Everyone can see that this is a desperate move fueled by nothing more that wistful thinking. I hope the FIA can grow a pair, accept they were totally wrong and give the slot to a team with;
A) a car
B) funding
C) a test date booked.
I agree, and you have explained why they are getting so much stick, no true fan would wish failure on any prospective team but with how they have handled the whole fiasco, they deserve all the criticism going their way at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
If they have asked the FIA for them to miss the first 4 races then (if their own rules are to be beleived) then that should be it, let them miss them but withold all their travel benefits, and if they continue to drag their heels and say they wont be able to make Barcelona, then by all means, kick them out and re-open the bidding for the "13th team"
As much as I would have liked to see a USF1 team make the grid I don't think they have the funds or the management skills to pull it off. If Super Aguri, Honda, Toyota and BMW couldn't make a go of it, I can't see Windsor and Anderson pulling it off.Quote:
Originally Posted by DazzlaF1
We're almost 3 weeks away from Bahrain and these guys still haven't built their car. And it was last year when they started their operation. I don't see how in 2-3 months they'll be on the grid and in a stable financial position.
Yes, as you say, certainly the criticism is deserved, but not any gloating.Quote:
Originally Posted by DazzlaF1
Wistful thinking is a wonderful practice and I will not allow it to be mocked!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
On another forum that I read some bright twit suggested that they purchase a last year car from one of the teams. Several people agreed it was a good idea.
Nobody but nobody thought to mention that last years cars do not have enough fuel capacity.
One reason I only read that forum!
When did stupid people start using the Internet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy Drifter
when there were 4 computers linked togetherQuote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
they could race untill the car run out of fuel and still get the concord money
Quite right too.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
It is Peter Windsor AKA Mr Know-it-all, after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Can't blame them for trying to think of helpful suggestions. Can't imagine a retrofitted full race tank would do much help for handling, but at least a car to start with wouldn't be a bad suggestion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy Drifter
It is a ridiculous suggestion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monaro Doorslammer
USF1 either does it the way they signed on for, or they step aside and offer the place to another competitor.
We are quickly reaching the point where the USF1 behavior changes from admirable to disgraceful.
And I'd say that when the FIA makes an announcement on USF1's unjust request to miss the first four races, they will say as much and eliminate the team from F1. This is dragging on and unfair to all the other teams.
I would have any team not making the last two tests be automatically eliminated for the season and any future request be considered onlyunder strict supervision and requirement.
Well that would be unfair i think on Campos seeing that they've got themselves sorted out and being liekly we'lls ee them in Bahrain (they may be off the pace yes, but at least they would be there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
As for the FIA kicking out USF1 for the 4 race absence request, im sure the Windsor & Anderson will attempt to sue the FIA if that happens, but they've got no case to answer, they've asked to miss the first 4 races which goes completely against the FIA's own rules and the agreement which they signed back when they were selected.
Money and grounds are required for a successful law suit - USF1 have neither.Quote:
Originally Posted by DazzlaF1
It would be too bad for Campos. The know the rules and they did not meet the requirements. It is not fair to either Virgin or Lotus.
Financing in any all ventures is the first that is required to be sorted out.
Whats the point in allowing teams that have not met requirements and will likely be far slower than any of the new teams that have kept to the agreement? Mobile chicanes are dangerous and part of F1 history. We known better now.
22 cars are fine.
Seems to me that the FIA deserves some of the blame though since they are they ones that approved of USF1 for 2010 in the first place.
I would think someone's reputation is at stake if the team fails. Or, maybe someone is hoping to have an "in" to the US market by approving of USF1 when, if my memory serves me, they did not have much financial backing last year.
The FIA is involved in the mismanagement of the selection process, but so is Bernie and the teams because nobody dared to raise their voices. As we all aware of the nanny-state that exists in the world today and in the management of F1.Quote:
Originally Posted by N. Jones
Ultimately, lefist politics in any sphere, ruins and destroys - it does so because it has a parasitic sacrificial nature that seeks out those who are outstanding or courageous and reduces them to mediocrity and nothingness.
The US response or reception to, or interest in F1 is a big as it will ever be. Anyone believing that the existence of a team called "USF1" or that being based in the heartland of Nascar or having an American driver in F1 is going to shift America towards the sport is pretending.
The peak of F1 was in the late 70's to the early 80's when there were at least two US GP's as great tracks like Watkins Glen and Long Beach and the most famous American driver in history, Mario Andretti became world champion with one of the greatest teams ever: Lotus - and even THEN F1 did not take-off.
Interest in F1 retained its usual strong core, able to fill a track but never - and will never - challenge to become a significant entity in American sport.
It is a different culture and the same reason why baseball can never become significant in England or continental Europe or why soccer will always be a "girl's sport" in the US rather than played by boys.
A greater impact will be if there is a grand prix at track that is not attached to something like the Indy 500 or whatever and establishes its own entity as did Watkins Glen.
The USF1 venture is/was a marketing gimmick that regardless if it works/ed will not impact the interest of Americans in any signficantly tangible way.
Morano: Just how do you propose a team take 2009 tub and put in a 30 to 40 percent larger fuel cell? There just is no room. Then the engine bay needs redesigning for a Cossie. The latter is no big deal but you would need a redesigned tub for fuel and it appears from all reports the USF1 do not have even their own built yet, so modifying an existing tub would be beyond them.
And these teams got the go ahead before someone with the resources of Prodrive? Theres summat seriously wrong here if this is the case
There has been so many erronous statements/claims and plain lies come out of USF1 in the last few months I am beginning to wonder if they actually have asked Jean Todt for a four race exemption.
Ken Anderson says they have, but have they?
Right now I wouldn't trust anything coming out of that bunch without proof.
This is an example of how a competent team conducts business:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/81627
Wirth admits that Virgin's reliability problems has eaten away time from their testing program, so they have to play catch-up until Bahrain. Did you read that? Full & honest explanation of the team's setbacks.
I don't think fans are asking for minute details, but just the gist.
According to Speed, USF1 did not ask permission to miss the races, they asked for clarification on the rule, which conflicts with the current Concorde Agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy Drifter
http://formula-one.speedtv.com/artic...mulls-options/
Maybe if the FIA made things more clear than diffuser regulations everyone would know what might come of this whole mess. :laugh:
Speed TV with Bob Varsha talking to Nick Craw representing the FIA said USF1 have only asked the FIA for clarification on the missing 3 race rule.
This contrdicts what the NY Times claims Ken Anderson said.
I had not heard this when I made my previous post.
Craw also says the FIA will work with USF1.
Never mind the FIA - it remains to be seen if FOR ONCE Todt actually takes a decision without referring it to committee. We have an FIA chief that is a ditherer and needs consent to do anything.
And of course exactly what are they going to do if the boss of FOM does not sign off on this bs?
I detest special interests, because it ALWAYS is at the cost of those who play fair by the rules.
And should USF1 get their special request granted how can anyone guarantee they will be ready? Are the FIA going to underwrite them too?
Windsor is beginning to look like of those kids at school that would always cry to the teacher and then get their way at the expense of the strong kids.
His stature is quickly beginning to disolve in my eyes.
Well he is pretty short to begin with. :p :
If Jean/FIA give in to USF1 then Campos can do the same thing and for that matter so could Lotus and Virgin.
I could certainly see Campos asking for a race or two exemption.
Question: What is the penalty for an unexcused race absense?
I didn't propose it. I just don't think ideas, no matter how barmy, should have been knocked down in that fashion. At least someone had a go at thinking of alternatives than use the typical strategy and call Peter Windsor a lot of names.Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy Drifter
There was a car called Toyota available to USF1 but they seemingly didn't have the money to buy it. So it's not really about the car being late, it's about the green thing. They don't have it, so old cars or whatever will not help. They're out, unfortunately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monaro Doorslammer
"Didn't they say they started working on their 2010 car before the sale of the Toyota cars"- I'm basing this on no factsQuote:
Originally Posted by DexDexter
Well its the FIA, so of course it will be a consistent and unambiguous penalty that will be apply fairly year on year :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
No one knows what the penalty is - it could range from a slap on the wrist, to a huge fine, to gods knows what.
For FIA read MAX. For some read ALLQuote:
Originally Posted by N. Jones
Easy now. We want a fair decision, not one where the incumbant calls the shots. That was Max's flaw - he thought he new best when in fact, he was just living out his fantasy and settling scores.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
That's the million-dollar question. The rule is clear, but as is so often the case there's no mention of a penalty. I could be exclusion from the Championship, it could be a $5000 fine and immediate cessation of chocolate rations. Farcical, isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
Let's be honest, even if USF1 missed the first four races, never mind three, does anybody seriously think they'd have the money or the staff to build anything remotely approaching a pair of F1 cars?
Enough is enough. They got no money, no car and still they got all this attention. Other teams like Lotus has built their car in five months whitout all this fuzz. They are testing now. Missing fore races, holy cow.
SPEED TV's views on the mess
http://link.brightcove.com/services/...id=67722813001
Exactly. Lotus and Virgin got on with the job in hand without fuss or fanfare. Ok they might not be the most competitive teams on the grid, but they'll be in Bahrain and have a solid base to build on.
If USF1 had even come close to their achievements then there might be a case for special treatment, but as it stands they haven't even built a working car. To allow them dispensation to skip races makes a mockery of the effort and professionalism shown by Lotus and Virgin.
Absolutely, i'd put Campos in that same bracket too,sure they've not tested the Dallara yet but the takeover proves they've been working their socks off just to be ready for the season opener (in other words, they've had their own problems and they're managing to overcome them), now if they did that and then found out that the Americans were allowed to miss the first 4 races, i'd forgive the Campos team for feeling a bit peeved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman
As would Lotus & Virgin, they're a few steps ahead of Campos in the fact that they've built their cars, got complete driver lineups and have taken part in the pre-season group tests, sure they've had their problems with their cars so far but at least they are there and ready to race, and for that they both deserve a hell of a lot of credit.
If Lopez (the american team's only driver at the moment) ends up moving to Campos, then thats USF1 dead in the water in my view.
imo I don't think that will be in f1 at all, there fault in the end of the day, they had a year to organisation them self, also when you have people such as Mike Gascoyne, Nick Wirth and John Booth thats a lot of confidence and reference, compared to Ken Anderson and Peter Windsor with limited reference imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman