FIA Thread

[littlebigcat]

Climb down re: driver political statement announced quietly, late in the afternoon on a Friday…go figure.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2023/02/ ... ments-ban/

Right, so it's acceptable for a driver to answer a direct question from a journalist. But no acceptable for the driver to make the same statement, in the same chair, unprompted.

Of course the journalists are only allowed to be there because the FIA issues them the passes, which can be rescinded at any point.

I'ts so transparent what they are playing at. If this this got taken to CAS it would be embarrassing to the FIA.

[214270]

Climb down re: driver political statement announced quietly, late in the afternoon on a Friday…go figure.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2023/02/ ... ments-ban/

Right, so it's acceptable for a driver to answer a direct question from a journalist. But no acceptable for the driver to make the same statement, in the same chair, unprompted.

Of course the journalists are only allowed to be there because the FIA issues them the passes, which can be rescinded at any point.

I'ts so transparent what they are playing at. If this this got taken to CAS it would be embarrassing to the FIA.

It’s a farce & frankly embarrassing at this point

[diffuser]

Climb down re: driver political statement announced quietly, late in the afternoon on a Friday…go figure.

https://www.motorsportweek.com/2023/02/ ... ments-ban/

Right, so it's acceptable for a driver to answer a direct question from a journalist. But no acceptable for the driver to make the same statement, in the same chair, unprompted.

Of course the journalists are only allowed to be there because the FIA issues them the passes, which can be rescinded at any point.

I'ts so transparent what they are playing at. If this this got taken to CAS it would be embarrassing to the FIA.

It’s a farce & frankly embarrassing at this point

I don't know about you but I can't say whatever I want to customers when I'm at work. It is expected that I'm going to be apolitical, not everyone is gonna be happy with my point of view. Those views might taint customer's opinion of the company I represent. Not sure why you're so surprised that drivers at a race weekend, are on the clock, and are expected to toe the company line.

[AR3-GP]

Right, so it's acceptable for a driver to answer a direct question from a journalist. But no acceptable for the driver to make the same statement, in the same chair, unprompted.

Of course the journalists are only allowed to be there because the FIA issues them the passes, which can be rescinded at any point.

I'ts so transparent what they are playing at. If this this got taken to CAS it would be embarrassing to the FIA.

It’s a farce & frankly embarrassing at this point

I don't know about you but I can't say whatever I want to customers when I'm at work. It is expected that I'm going to be apolitical, not everyone is gonna be happy with my point of view. Those views might taint customer's opinion of the company I represent. Not sure why you're so surprised that drivers at a race weekend, are on the clock, and are expected to be toe the company line.

I agree in many ways with this sentiment.

What it comes down to is that this is the FIA's brand and image on the line. You have to play by their rules. If you don't want to, then you remove yourself from the circus (as Vettel apparently did, aided of course by already having achieved and earned so much on the back of the FIA and FOM).

It's quite messy. FIA certainly are not against political statements. Racing in Saudi Arabia or Bahrain is a political statement. Cancelling races in Russia and China is a political statement. However the FIA/FOM is the one who gets to choose because at the end of the day it's their enterprise that the drivers are playing in.

While I often share some of the sentiments expressed by the various drivers, it would be a bigger move to just quit the sport entirely. To reject what you don't agree with given that the FIA/FOM do not intend to let you use their enterprise to say whatever you like. That would make bigger waves. Some of these drivers are huge brands in their own right. Use it. Make a break away series. If it's entertaining, I'm willing to watch it.

[maxxer]

actually with 23 races or 22 what is it now , i just switch on before start and switch off before the podium even , so i wouldnt even see any messages from drivers except on social media.

Ah remembering our Dutch Max is/was sponsored also by a company where some --- hit the fan

[mendis]

I don't understand the fuss about the gag. If drivers want to get into activism, there is nothing stopping. FIA is simply saying, don't use our platform. If I as a person of position/authority/visibility is serious about my activism, I would do it using my own platforms and if it requires me to invest in it, I would do it to build one.

FIA has to work with diverse countries, brands, governments etc., for their business and they are right to protect the interests of their organization/platform and not rub their business partners wrongly. So to that extent if they put a gag order, the prima donna drivers have to take it and move on and find another platform to carry on with their activism.

[johnny comelately]

Lets expand the discussion...
There are very few global sports organisations who are not political.
There are very few organisations who are not political.
The FIA is a vastly overinflated group. IMHO.

"Democracy in sport: An uneasy relationship with politics"

Some excerpts:
""Less democracy is sometimes better for organising a World Cup."

The words of Fifa secretary-general Jerome Valcke in the fraught build-up to Brazil 2014 may have surprised some people, but they serve as a reminder that sport's relationship with democracy is an uneasy one.

Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone is another powerful sporting figure who has made no secret of his preference for totalitarianism.
More and more sports events seem to be hosted by authoritarian states, using them to gain political legitimacy and strengthen the power and profile of their rulers

The billionaire provoked outrage in 2009 when he spoke of his admiration for Adolf Hitler for "getting things done".

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/30876799

[mrsweet]

Philosophy 101 stuff. Machiavelli 's "The Prince"? of course totalitarianism is the best for getting stuff done. But is it the right stuff. I'm certain Bernie wouldn't appreciate living under a totalitarian who disagreed with him...

That said, democracies are difficult and everything is political.

This really doesn't seem like much more than any typical company dress code/code of conduct while one is on the clock. It just much more difficult to quantify "on the clock"

[F1Krof]

Hmmm... new rules to have closer racing & more overtakes.

[Wouter]

Ben Sulayem son dead, reportedly after car crash

Multiple reports in UAE media confirmed that the son of FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem, Saif Muhammad bin Salim has died, unofficial reports claim he was killed in a car crash.

Saif dabbled in motorsport over the years and drove an ATCUAE-backed Tatuus F4 scoring 27 points and finishing 14th in the country’s Formula 4 series. He stopped racing at the end of the 2016-2017 UAE racing season.

Like his father, Saif shared a passion for fast cars as is evident on his Instagram account, which features iconic sportscars, as well as photos of his Ben Sulayem senior’s grand collection of supercars.

Sources in Dubai claim that the young Ben Sulayem was involved in a car accident, which resulted in his death on Tuesday. This, however, has yet to be officially confirmed, but today local newspapers did report the passing and mourning schedule as per Islamic traditions.

Emarat Al Youm reported: “On Tuesday, Saif Muhammad bin Salim Al-Falasi, Muhammad Ahmed bin Sulaym, moved to the side of his Lord (has died)”

An Al Khaleej report added: “It is scheduled that the body will be buried after the noon prayer today in Al Qusais cemetery in Dubai, while the condolences will be held in the mourning tent in Al Mamzar.”

.

.

From another news site (so it looks like this horrible news is true):

https://www.emaratalyoum.com/life/socie ... -1.1725848

The death of Saif Muhammad bin Salim Al-Falasi

Yesterday evening, Tuesday, Saif Muhammad bin Salim Al-Falasi, son of Muhammad Ahmed bin Sulaym, moved to the side of his Lord.

It is scheduled that the body will be buried after the noon prayer today in Al Qusais cemetery in Dubai, while the men's condolences
will be held in the mourning tent in Al Mamzar, Street No. 4,
while the women's condolences will be held in Al Mamzar.. Street No. 4, Villa No

[Wouter]

FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem is temporarily stepping away from work to mourn the death of his son,
who was killed in a traffic accident.

Local newspapers from Dubai reported on March 9 the tragic news that Saif Ben Sulayem, son of FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem, has died following a traffic accident. Both the FIA and the Ben Sulayem family have confirmed the death and asked that the family's privacy be respected.

The family enters a period of mourning according to Islamic traditions.
As a result, the FIA president says he wants to step down from his job for the time being.

[AR3-GP]

I never said that the teams have the power to tell the FIA what to inspect in a random inspection. I only said it's possible for ongoing discussions and whispers to influence the direction of the FIA, even though their processes are supposed to be independent.

No, what you actually said was "you can see that some teams have started their fishing expedition". Seems to me that you are conflating random checks to be nefarious in Red Bull's case but for everyone else it's legit.
They checked the Merc rear wing at the first race of the season (among other things).

I never said the selection process wasn't random or that another team directed the FIA to choose the Red Bull. When I said "fishing expedition" I meant that teams are always in discussion with tombazi and his technical team about how they can do a better job policing certain areas of the regulations and sometimes the FIA can react subtly in the way they do their inspection procedures (literally changing load test), overtly (impounding the Ferrari PU after a race in 2019) or even issuing technical directives as a result of other teams proving that some part of the regulations is exploitable. This happened with floors last year and engines in 2019 and 2020/2021

Also, you cannot submit a technical protest for a mechanism for which you do not understand or have proof of it's existence. The Ferrari was never protested in 2019. No car was protested over flexing floors in 2022. All that happened was a silent technical directive introduction.

If a team suspects cheating from a rival they can offer evidence and a rule which it contravenes. There is no requirement in the protest to "understand".
It is the FIA who decide on case by case basis what is acceptable means of protest.
As specified by the DAS protest by Red Bull.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... 1Vh8U.html


So the assumptions you're making in this are:
The FIA does checks under the influence of whispers and ongoing discussions.
Some teams went fishing.
The FIA waited for the random check to check an item they were tipped off by the fishing teams.

There is a difference between observing what one perceives as a regulation violation, and simply gawking at the performance of another car, as grounds for a protest. The driver was pushing the steering wheel and the toe angle was changing. They were not protesting "how it worked" and they did not need to know "how it worked". All they did was say that the driver was operating a device that made the toe angle change and that it was on camera and questioned whether it was a moveable aero device. That's essentially how protest are done and it's why no one could protest the Ferrari in 2019. There wasn't any "evidence" upon which to protest beyond "their car accelerates faster than mine". They didn't have mechanics on video putting tin foil around the fuel flow meter

Most teams start from a default position of thinking their rival is doing something suspicious to get their speed even when they don't know what that is. Some teams have pointed to the Red Bull's very low ride heights and top speeds being linked to their suspension system. You can't submit a catch all protest suggesting a car is "illegal" without any context as to in what way it is. Running low ride height and having top speed are not grounds for protest. There is no minimum rideheight in the regulations and there is no speed limit outside of the pitlane. That's the difference between protesting DAS,and protesting the idea of a Red Bull running with low ground clearance.

You realise, the FIA can simply tell Red Bull to haul their car to the stewards without any need for protest, or random checks? So there is no need to wait for Red Bulls number to come up to do this supposed inspection.
I mean the next extension to this would be the FIA doctored the random process to inspect the Red Bull.
I'd also just say I have no issue with your opinion, say what you like. But when you're adding level upon level of assumptions, Occams razor comes in handy.
Sometimes a random check can just be that.

It's true that the FIA can haul any car out on suspicion of "doing something untoward" but this is not actually practical for many reasons. It's is only in extreme cases where we see this. If I'm not mistaken the fuel system (or was it the entire power unit) of the Ferrari was "impounded" in Brazil 2019? This carries great political consequences because naturally if you don't actually know "what" is illegal, and you don't find anything, it is politically damaging to haul cars off willy nilly for "deeper inspection" especially with the way journalist are so quick to cast cheating aspersions. You have to be realistic. It has to be a pretty deep concern for the FIA to announce that they are singling out a specific car and this came to fruition in 2019 with Ferrari.

As for everything else, I don't believe the FIA suspects that Red Bull are doing anything suspicious more likely because if there is anything suspicious, it is beyond their imagination. However, I do believe that other teams think Red Bull are doing something suspicious because other teams are far better at understanding how to engineer regulations exploits. This is how it has always been. Teams always know better than the FIA how to abuse the rules. I'm sure Tombazi has gotten whispers from other teams that are vague and don't really cut a clear picture of what issue they have. These kinds of things can have an influence on how the FIA acts.


With all the rumors of silver bullets, the RB's performance, and discussion surrounding ride heights, it's not really a surprise that the FIA ended up looking at the suspension system of the REd Bull. They aren't going to haul the red bull out individually because they don't actually have any idea what they are looking for and you have to have apretty clear idea otherwise you run into the isssue of politics and PR that I mentioned earlier. So when the RB is selected at random, it's a silver platter opportunity to go fishing without having any of the baggage of hauling them out in public and embarassing yourself when you don't find anything.

The random draw gave them the RB on a silver platter. Now they FIa got to announce that they looked deeply into the suspension and didn't find anything. This serves many purposes. Can you imagine if they inspected the steering system and the wiring looms instead?

[chrisc90]

Yeah, definitely odd they specifically chose suspension. A lot of teams and media made such a song and dance about how RB must have some special suspension system as they have always rode the kerbs well, no bouncing etc.

[mendis]

Teams always know better than the FIA how to abuse the rules. I'm sure Tombazi has gotten whispers from other teams that are vague and don't really cut a clear picture of what issue they have. These kinds of things can have an influence on how the FIA acts.

This has always been the case. FIA gets tipped to look at a certain area by engineers of other teams which then triggers FIA checks. I won't be surprised if Ferrari or Mercedes tipped FIA which then lead to suspension as the target for checking. Like in 2019 when Mercedes and Red Bull that acted together to initiate enquiry against Ferrari engine. One would be naive to think the competitors aren't hunting behind each other's back and the recent checks on RB19 as just routine.

[saviour stivala]

Competitors hunting each other even behind each other's back is in-itself good for the fairness of the sports.