The Turkish F1 controversy is getting F1 news spots in places where it wouldn’t have just as cricket is getting news space all over in the past week or so over the Hair-Pakistan controversy.

In an interesting piece, Grandprix.com talks on how the world looks upon Formula 1 citing examples:

It’s a sport over which hovers a cloud of conspiracy, a constant suspicion of manipulation of rules and results to suit the hidden agendas of shadowy backstage figures. And yet in spite of this, it is regarded as the pinnacle of motor sport, a multi-million pound industry commanding a vast global audience. Reaching into so many homes and with so much money at stake, it’s little wonder that Formula 1 has at times spread its tentacles into politics.

Wherever money comes in, politics is never far behind. However, what is very much evident from the citings is how the world looks at F1 as a money circus more than a race they would get a lot of thrill over. Another example quoted is of how most overtakes take place in the pit lanes rather than when the cars are being driven on the race track.

These perspectives show some of the many ways by which a sport can reach to newer audiences. You won’t get the most accurate descriptions of a sport (F1 is called driving around in circles - which would be true for Indy and not F1). However, observations from media and people who do not usually follow a sport is a rare insight and valuable.

Juan Pablo Montoya will switch to Nascar next season as CNN reports:

McLaren’s Juan Pablo Montoya will leave Formula One at the end of this season to drive in NASCAR, reuniting the Colombian with car owner Chip Ganassi, it was announced on Sunday.

Montoya excited a lot of people when he came to F1. After all, he was already a mini star. From Wiki:

While Zanardi had a miserable year in Formula One, Montoya, with Honda power and a great Reynard chassis at his disposal, took the American motorsport scene by storm. He took the 1999 title in his rookie year, something accomplished six years earlier by former Formula One Champion, Nigel Mansell.

The season that saw Montoya crowned as the youngest ever CART FedEx Championship Series Champion at the age of 24 was closely fought, especially with Dario Franchitti who led the championship going into the final race in California. Both drivers finished the season with equal number of points but having won seven races to the Scotsman’s three decided the title in the Colombian’s favor. Montoya’s tally of wins, pole positions and fastest laps meant that he was considered the fastest driver in a series which lacked electronic aids such as traction control, adaptive suspension or automatic gearboxes. However, the CART rookie also attracted criticism - notably from Michael Andretti and his team - for his aggressive style of driving.

For all it is worth, Montoya has had a disappointing F1 career. The style of Montoya’s racing is built on risk taking. While it was criticised by sections in CART as well, he was very much successful. In F1, overtaking doesn’t happen as much while on track. Most of the over taking takes place when some one is having a pit stop. So more than the risk taking, the strategies are crucial.

(more…)

Fernando Alonso was less than a second behind Schumacher. He had the faster car. He chased and chased and chased Schumacher till his car heated up. Alonso finished second.

It was brilliant watching what will be looked back upon as quite memorable formula 1 racing.

A classic if there ever was one. [Link]

Update: A lot of people are obviously blogging about this. Some people’s thoughts:

• Formula 1 Jam, a new quality Formula 1 blog.
• Bharath Kumar’s take here.
• F1 Blog on the race.
• and finally, some who who thought the race was quite boring.

I guess you can never make every one happy all the time!

Rebels - Renault, Honda, Toyota, BMW-Sauber and McLaren-Mercedes have threatened to set up a rival series after 2007.

There has been utter disarray in F1. I wrote regarding the same last year here, here and here.

Max Mosley has now set a deadline for the rebel teams. BBC adds further:

They want a bigger share of revenues, more say in F1’s future and are upset at plans to limit technology from ‘08. Mosley, president of the sport’s governing body the FIA, wants to give independent teams without support from car manufacturers more of a chance by limiting the budget needed to be competitive to around £57m a year. Ferrari’s budget, the biggest in F1, is reputed to be as much as £287m, with Toyota not far behind.

Are restrictions on technology, number of teams really the answer? In a free world, open economy it doesn’t work. The simple demand-supply works. If the F1 authorities continue to try and boss around, the break is very much a real possibility. It has happened in cricket with Packer and has threatened to happen in cricket again recently (I wrote regarding the same here, here and here). Individuals or individual bodies do not relish seeing their scope restricted. Self interest has to be looked into by the authorities in-charge. Without that, a team or an organisation cannot function. Often people try to take this the other way around and the problems arise thus.

The Belgian Grand Prix has been cancelled for the year in order for improvements to the Spa track.

Wikipedia does write on the termoil in a paragraph:

There is an ongoing thread to the presence of the Grand Prix in the Formula 1 calendar in 2006. The organiser of the event went bankrupt in late 2005, and therefor the planned improvements of the race track and the paddock have not been made. The Wallon government has stepped in and provided the necessary funds but the work will probably not be finished before the date that has been given the Belgian Grand Prix. As of Wednesday, the word is that the Formula 1 race in 2006 is called off due to necessary improvements.

If the Windies cricketing problem is pathetic, F1 is no less. The latest fiasco regarding driver safety, arising out of Indianapolis opens a can of worms.

Coulthard:

Coulthard said: “All these rules - qualifying, single lap and 10-place penalty - they are not designed to wreck races but they have.”

Is the safety concerns of the drivers of paramount importance? Yes.
Do we need another fall out in F1? No.

The best thing would be to resolve the issues fast but that is unlikely to happen.

And now 6 of the 7 F1 teams will appeal against the penalties laid on them by F1.

Why should the F1 fan support the sport any more when after such a scandalous race ensued in Indianapolis, the F1 fails to look at the bigger picture and still shows no sign of unity.

Why should I follow a sport which had a scam due to a simple fact that the teams could not agree to race with 20 cars or not race at all and further disagreements follow within F1.

What is needed is a show of solidarity, concentrating on putting a better show for the next race rather than crying over who is to be blamed for a fiasco for which joint blame should be taken by every one involved in F1.

Whats the use of fining teams when they couldnt obviously put their drivers or crowd at danger.

F1 has lost several fans in the US and all around the world irrepairably. Will giving out free tickets and compensation to fans for the fiasco which was Indianapolis really make the fans turn a new leaf?

Its the least Micheling is bound to do but what has all the fighting inside the F1 insured even after the even took place?

You miss the big picture which is that fans are being lost every day with people calling F1 a joke.