PDA

View Full Version : USGP - Another Theory



TedN
06-25-05, 12:53 PM
Interesting read in today's Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1119522977014&call_pageid=968867497088&col=969048871196&DPL=IvsNDS%2f7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes) . Anyone believe this is a plausable explanation? Is there any way to confirm?


Now, people have been calling and writing all week and saying things like: "What did you think about the U.S. Grand Prix?"

Well, like everybody else, I was floored. Since then, it has been fascinating to listen to F1's excuses. "No choice." "Too bad." "Awful." That sort of thing.

Before I get to my conspiracy theory (look, there has to be one because none of this makes any sense at all), I called and wrote some of my friends in the auto racing industry and tried it out on them. No one said it wasn't plausible.

So, here it is.

I think we're being snowed about the real reason those seven teams and 14 drivers bailed at Indianapolis. Yes, there was a safety issue because of concern about the tires. But auto racing is a dangerous game and people get hurt playing it.

So what happened here?

I think it became an insurance issue. I think the insurer, or insurers, pulled the plug on this race. Which meant the drivers and the teams were on their own in case of an accident.

Who, in their wildest dreams, would ever have imagined that more than half the drivers in a Grand Prix would drive into the pits before the start, get out of the cockpits, shrug their shoulders and say, collectively, "It's too dangerous, we're not going to race."

Too dangerous to race? These are racing drivers! These are the bravest of the brave!

Refusing to race? Unbelievable!

They did this in front of more than 100,000 people in the grandstands at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and many, many hundreds of millions more around the world watching on television.

Kimi Raikkonen? Chicken?

Fernando Alonso? Perfectly happy to drive to the airport while Michael Schumacher stole 10 points from him?

Incomprehensible.

Which means there's got to be more to it.

Formula One drivers are paid millions of dollars by the teams, corporate sponsors and personal sponsors. Although they pay enormous premiums, they are insured for millions in the event of death or injury.

The teams and the corporate suppliers also are insured to the hilt, particularly in the area of liability. If a wheel or a piece of a car flies into a spectator area and fans are hurt, or worse, lawsuits are guaranteed. Spectators (or their survivors) usually win.

So, Michelin became worried after Ralf Schumacher and two others had tire problems on the Friday. Michelin did everything it could to rectify the situation but could not convince the FIA to let them either replace the tires (against the rules, you know) or create a chicane that would have slowed down the cars before the critical Turn 13 (Indy's Turn One, only backwards).

At which point, Michelin had to publicly state that it could not guarantee the safety of its tires.

Moments later, you can bet, the on-site insurance reps quietly notified the drivers and the teams their insurance was being pulled.

And moments after that, you can also bet team managers and sponsors said: "There is no way we will put ourselves or our companies at risk."


Ted

Insomniac
06-25-05, 05:01 PM
I dunno, there is "racing is a dangerous sport" and driving all out on tires you know are going to fail, and since they're pretty much all that's keeping them from hitting a wall...calling them chicken is a over the top.

I also assume the insurers agreed to insure a race only run by Bridgestone teams.

And finally, if that was the case, why wouldn't anyone say it? Nice way to shift blame.

nissan gtp
06-25-05, 05:33 PM
certainly liability was as big issue after Michelin came out with the "our tires are unsafe" announcement. after that, the prospect of a solution was pretty much gone.

EDwardo
06-25-05, 07:02 PM
This doesn't explain why the IRL continues to race. Different insurance companies?

Dr. Corkski
06-25-05, 07:16 PM
Pierre Dupasquier: "I have good news."

Michelin teams: "They approved the chicane?"

Pierre Dupasquier: "No, but I just save a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to Geico."

Methanolandbrats
06-25-05, 10:15 PM
Don't know about insurance, but my point in all this is there is no way they could run with dangerous tires. First of all Indy is a horrible F1 track because of the banking and wall. F1 prides itself on runoff and safety and at Indy they drive right at an f'n wall and grab sixth gear...it's insane. Now how the hell can you do that if you are using tires which *might* fail.........you can't. The only option was to throw in the towel.

eiregosod
06-25-05, 10:29 PM
Litigation was always a big concern of the teams. Even before ralf's accident