I think people are being premature in wanting Ari and slagging Todt. We don't know the circumstances of Todt's departure from Ferrari and for all we know he harbours a grudge and will be petty and vindictive when it comes to his former employer. I don't know anything about Ari so I have no opinion of his candidacy, but I can say that Todt appears to have a broader knowledge than Ari, and would appear to be the better candidate.

Quick, lock the door before he changes his mind.

Too little too late. Goodbye Rubens...Hello Senna!

How could Kubica be given the point when he finished behind Heidfeld who ran several laps with a damaged car. This is motor racing and Kubica should have caught and passed his team-mate, yet he failed to do so, and you're still giving the point to the man who was the lesser driver on the day? Exactly how does this work? We all know you're biased against Ferrari, so now you're biased against Heidfeld too? I suggest counselling.

Hey ho the witch is dead, the witch is dead, the witch is dead. Hey ho, the wicked witch is dead!

Interesting move by Mosley. Wait until the last minute then inform the teams that only the teams signed up for 2010 have a say in the rules. Well played.

Wee wee wee. How many times do we have to hear Rubens sing the same old sad songs about how hard done by he is, or how he's being conspired against and how he will do better in the next race. Rubens kept bleating about how he wasn't given a fair opportunity at Ferrari etc etc and now we see it wasn't so much Ferrari conspiring against him as it was his inability to simply get the job done. Find an excuse to retire and leave with what little dignity you have left.

And yet the Canadian GP which sold out every session was removed from the calendar. Looks good on F1.

What is most interesting is that Ferrari don't seem to understand their car. Their performance is up and down and they seem to have no idea why the car is fast and why it's slow, which is hard to understand for a team with their knowledge and expertise. It really looks like the loss of Todt, Brawn, Byrne and Schumacher has set Ferrari back far further than they ever imagined.

First Max says we can't have F1 run by a bunch of old men. Then he tells the FOTA members to go start your own series. I agree with two things Max has said! Clearly this is a sign that the apocalypse is at hand! That said, I certainly hope the FOTA members take this advise and move on. I'm sure if they announced that they were accepting tenders for the job of managing a new racing series, the FIA will think twice. I'm sure IMSA, USAC etc could do a better job than the FIA, so please FOTA, move on, it's time.

OK. So there was no blame for Piquet in this race. What about the others? He's shown that he is not F1 material and it's time for the experiment to end. Put someone else in the car and give them a chance to show what they can do.

Wackyracer is bang on. Nothing else needs to be said really.

This is probably nothing more than the other teams attempt to force Brawn to pay more than they would like to for a driver. As others have said, Jenson didn't suddenly learn how to drive so there is no reason to believe he's a better driver this year than in previous years, and by F1 standards he's nearing his best by date.

I've always been a fan of Wurz, but this is just what people feared. If this continues and teams like this actually enter the sport, F1 will become GP2. And without there being talk of a return of the 110% rule, are we going back to the days of Forti piddling around at the back of the grid 4 seconds off the pace? If this continues unchecked, F1 will quickly become irrelevant.

As the budget cap can't actually be policied (R&D expenditures can easily be hidden) I can't wait to hear everyone screaming about Ferrari cheating by spending more than the $40m. If you thought the sport was full of politics and controversy before, wait until the budget cap is introduced. It will be the worst thing the sport has ever seen...next to Max that is.

Why would anyone expect a team that's new to F1 to be able to compete with a team that has been in the sport for years? And as we've seen with Toyota, being competitive it's not just down to the available funds. New teams to a sport will struggle until they find their way and in motor racing, their sponsors. If Max's goal is to have new teams competing for wins straight out of the box, then he will ultimately destroy F1.

If FOTA rules require a unanimous decision before moving forward, suspending Williams is an obvious move. It allows FOTA to continue with their plans while allowing Williams to do what it needs to survive. I'm sure this was discussed with the FOTA members and planned long before Williams submitted their application.

Max needs to go as this latest round of proposals indicates that he is no longer up to the task. The FIA could have initiated cost cutting via rule changes if a little thought had been given to the problem. For instance, increasing the minimum weight of the car and limiting the amount of ballast that can be used would likely result in the teams using less of the exotic metals and materials they rely on to reduce the car's weight. Like replacing the carbon fibre brakes with steel brakes.

What a bunch of spineless nancyboys. Start your own series for goodness sake. Make a very public request for tenders to be submitted for the management of a new racing series (in much the same way the FIA opened tenders for a standard engine), pick one and get on with it. There are other organizaions that can manage a major racing series and probably do a far better job of it too. In addition the teams will be able to write a new charter and get the proper share of the revenue. Seems like a no-brainer so I just don't see why they don't just get on with it.

Stormwarning - as I recall at Imola in 2005 Button failed to defend his position when Schumacher came calling and Micheal passed him as if I was driving the car. Alonso on the other hand put up a great fight resulting in a race win. So if you are going to quote results, give the full story. Traxx, you make valid points, but I doubt many of us needed the inside information you refererence to know that Alonso drove the Minardi beyond it's means, or that Schumacher flattered the 2005 car.

I don't see why they consider getting rid of Nick seeing as Kubica isn't exactly setting the world on fire. And continually running Nick with a tanker trucks worth of fuel doesn't exactly allow him to show anything in the races either. Before considering driver line up changes, BMW should focus on their car and on being a little more creative with their race strategies...or at least not being so conservative with it all the time.

For me, the mark of how good a driver is, is what they do in a poor car. Jenson did nothing in a poor car and never made me think that he was driving the car beyond where it should be. So while he appears capable of doing well in a good car, that doesn't amount to much in my opinion.

But wait...Ross you had to use team orders to get Jenson the win in Spain so how good is he really. We also haven't had the pleasure of seeing Jenson fight for a position let alone a race win. Cruising around unopposed at the front of the field doesn't really seem to be a good indicator of how good or bad a driver is. As Jenson is a race driver, let's see him race.

It's amazing how people still prattel on about Ferrari's Veto power. They got that power in 2005 and have yet to use it so what's all the bleating about? And for those who think that a 40m budget cap will suddenly help back markers be competitive, they need look no further than NASCAR or IRL to see that even with a spec car, the teams with the most moeny are at the front. All a 40m budget cap will do is bring in teams who don't belong in the sport who will putter around at the back of the grid 1.5 to 2 seconds off the pace. Boy that's just what the sport needs. Consider how Williams were able to run with the big boys for years and what happened to end that run of competitiveness. They had and then lost several technical people who were tops in their fields including of course Adrian Newey. And how do you hire these people. With lots of money which isn't going to be a part of the budget cap. So the end result will be the same because why would a top tehcnical person go to work for a low budget GP2 team, when they can work for the likes of Ferrari or McLaren. Wake up people.

I almost hope Max says no so the teams can finally move on and start their own championship.

This should put an end to the Schumacher comparisons. After the parking lot incident, Michael started last and ended fifth in 2006, and that was without the advantage of KERS.

Bernie sounds scared. I don't see how Bernie would be able to sue for much seeing as the FIA president said that Ferrari are not that important to the sport.

There, so all of those who cried foul over Ferrari's veto power should just shut up about it. They are the leading brand in F1 and it's accepted by those participating, so get over it.

I think some of the people writing here are naive. If Ferrari leave F1 loses the most marketable name in the sport. Do you really think major companies are going to line up to sponsor Prodrive? Most likely the first question in the board room will be who's Prodrive and what to they do? And how will those hosting races get the required marketing without a name like Ferrari. Again people need to remember that those deciding on whether to spend the marketing dollars usually are not fans of F1. They are business people who will need to be convinced that spending money to sponsor a team or a race is a good investment. One can not simply dismiss Ferrari's marketability and without them F1 will lose it's largest corporate magnet. Sure F1 may survive, but it will be a pathetic shell of what it is now because without corporate sponsorship you have nothing.

It's good to see that at least one driver has the courage to speak out against the FIA. Hopefully more will follow suit. As Alonso says without the big teams and top drivers, it's not F1 and I doubt it can turn into a second tier series and survive.

Perhaps it's time the fans do something to let the FIA know that without us there is no F1 and we support the teams in this matter. Monaco would be a good place for a demonstration of our unhappiness as it's the jewel in the perverbial crown.

I think the biggest problem teams had was the way the FIA imposed the budget cap on them rather than it coming out of discussions with the teams. Clearly the two tier system that proposed was as Bernie said, stupid, but it's interesting that he seems to be missing the biggest bone of contention, which was the unilateral way in which the FIA is attempting to implement major rules changes. As has been said thousands of times already...time for Bernie and Max to go.

Sir Jackie summed it up perfectly when he said someone who has no interest in your company has no right to tell you how to spend your money. But what is most interesting in this is that the FIA have not done anything to help the F1 teams financially. As the smaller teams are really the ones cost cutting is tagetting, as an example, why not allow them to have each car in a different livery. Years ago Paul Stoddart said that it would be easier for him to get a title sponsor for a single car rather than for the whole team, yet the FIA rejected that request. The time has come for FOTA to break away and it's quite ironic that the team so many people seem to hate will be the ones who lead the revolution.

If this drags on, the silly season will be very interesting.

Eddie appears to be missing the point. Ferrari's current woes seem to be due more to their bungles during the race weekend than a lack of testing or reduced time in the wind tunnel. Like McLaren they started work on this years car late, but unlike McLaren they seem to have made significant performance gains in a short period of time. However those on track gains have yet to be enough to counter their pitlane mistakes. Like c13epe, I believe Ferrari like others feel that with a $40m budget cap, Formula 1 will no longer be the pinnacle of motor sports as technical innovation will be stifled and it will be little more than another spec series. I think people, Eddie included have short memories and forget the 20 years of mediocrity that Ferrari endured, so it's not all about their winning. They stayed in the sport and spent gobs of money when they were running in the second tier of teams, so one can not say that if they can't win they will leave as there is no evidence they have that mentality.

Clearly this was a case of team orders and Ross should simply inform Rubens behind closed doors that he's number 2 and if he doesn't like it he can leave. People seem to forget the penalty of roughly 30 seconds that comes with the extra pit stop. If both drivers are on a three stop strategy and then one of them is switched to a two, that means the driver left on a three stop strategy has to make up the time cost for the extra stop. As they both started on three stops and where within a few seconds of each other, there was no way Rubens was going to make a three stop strategy work, especially when he came out behind Massa and Vettel. Brawn sacrificed Rubens so that Jenson could win and it was way to obvious.

Brawn is lying as the switch to a three stop strategy cleary favoured Button. Ross quickly points out that Rubens was slower in the second stint but he fails to mention that the switch in strategy did not take into account track position. Rubens came out behind Vettel and Massa and I doubt very much that he would have been able to get past both of them, while preserving his tyres and then open up enough of a gap to beat Button to the flag. Team orders plain and simple and Ross should be man enough to say that Jenson is the number one and the strategy was designed to put Button in the best chance for a victory. Poor ol' Rubens, always a number two when it matters most.

OK, so Ross Brawn adds his name to the growing list of team principles who do not like the proposed rules. So what. Let's see what they do about it, which will most likely be nothing.

I guess Piquet won't be very happy to see these remarks.

FOTA are a bunch of weak kneed Nancy boys and they are getting exactly what they deserve. How many times do they have to be kicked in the groin by the FIA before they have spine enough to leave and start their own series?

Maybe he wanted the team to have a name other than that of it's owner. For example, I think the name Red Bull is more commercially viable than Dietrich GP or Mateschitz GP. Perhaps Bernie is saying that Ross Brawn should have put a little more thought into the team name.

Budgets will naturally cap if the rules were well written and stable. The laws of physics dictate that only so much speed can be wrung out of a design and once that point is achieved, teams will reduce their spending. Simple. it should also be noted that capping budgets is not necessarily going to put poor teams on the podium. All one has to do is watch a spec series and you'll see that the teams with the bigger budgets dominate the series just the same. What's needed is for FOTA to break away. The smaller teams won't agree to that without some assurances that they will be able to compete and that agreement will be worked out by the teams which is the way to do it.

F1 would survive without Ferrari but it would be diminshed. The proposed budget cap is untenable and as time passes more teams will likely speak out against it. It didn't take long for the FIA to do something that would bring FOTA together, and I hope they use this as a rallying cry for a break away series.

To quote that great social scientist Clubber Lang..."you ain't got nothin' I want no mo". It would seem that Dennis being out at McLaren is more than just window dressing.

The budget cap is to put it bluntly, silly. If the FIA want to reduce spending they simply need to have a well defined set of rules and keep them stable for a significant period of time. There is only so much speed that can be wrung from a car based on the rules and once teams hit the plateau they will no longer spend bucketfuls of money in an attempt to get another thousandth of a second out of their car. We see that in other series, and F1 would be no different. And how would the FIA have handled a situation like we had this year, where they told Red Bull and Renault that a two step diffuser could not be used, then turned around and allowed other teams to use it. Because Red Bull and Renault now have to implement the diffuser, if a budget cap was in place who would be responsible for the money they now have to spend? And what happens when team A has a car taken out in more than 1 race by team B? With a budget cap every dollar is precious so at what point should team 'B' become responsible for the money spent by team A to fix their cars? And don't get me started on having teams building cars to two different sets of specifications.

Much ado about nothing. Now let's hope this is the last time we hear about the FIA this year.

Rubens thinks luck was on Jenson's side today. Then Rubens is the unluckiest driver in the history of F1 as first Schumi got all the luck and now Jenson is getting it. How about, you're just not fast enough Rubens! I hope this goes a long way to shutting up all those people who claimed Ferrari held Rubens back. Bottom line is he's just not fast enough and will always end up in the role of helper monkey when paired with a skilled team-mate.

I think some people are forgetting that if the KERS stops working, the end result is extra ballast. So with a car that was significantly heavier than the competition, Massa did pretty well to be able to overtake anyone.

Not looking good considering they tested there earlier this year. With that extra time I would have expected them to look good on Friday and then slide down the charts as the weekend progressed.

RichardW, the difference is that very few if any drivers ever get caught in a lie. Usually common sense says they are lying, but having actual proof is a different matter. In Monaco 2006 Schumi claimed he made a mistake going into the corner. How can you prove he didn't THINK he made a mistake even if the telemetry says he didn't? But in this case, the radio transmissions clearly show that Lewis and Ryan lied, not once but multiple times. That said, I can't believe the FIA would hit McLaren with a large enough penalty that they would lose their sponsors and thus have to withdraw. I don't think Bernie would allow it as it would likely impact his wallet, and I don't think the other teams would allow it. A ban and a suspended ban would most likely be the result, although once can't expect the FIA to act reasonably at any time.

Lobbying for the contract to be the sole supplier for 2010 me thinks.

Whitmarsh is not exactly impartial, as Mercedes is supllying Brawn. Let's wait to see what some of the other teams say.

The further Ferrari get from Schumacher/Brawn/Todt and Byrne, the worse they get. Even though I'm a fan of the team, I can't help but feel that Luca is reaping what he so eagerly sowed when he rushed these guys out the door. Welcome back to the middle of the pack..you were missed.

I think Flavio is referring to the drivers in Renault, McLaren and Ferrari not just those on his team. Flavio should retire and get into commentating as I'd surely tune in every few weesk to hear what he has to say over the course of a race weekend.

The real loser in all of this is Red Bull. Their car is clearly the best of the single deck diffuser teams and had the FIA clarified this ruling prior to the start of the season, we might have seen RBR out front with a car of equal design to the other teams. BrawnGPs advantage is fleeting at best as the other teams will quickly catch and overtake them, as we've seen with Williams year after year. But RBR could have been different as they have lots of money behind them and they have the distinct advantage of having two teams so they effectively get double the testing than the other teams.

I hope this doesn't give the message that F1 design is the wild west and teams can look to exploit every perceived loophole in the rules. F1 could end up being mired in cases before the WMSC as every part is objected to, ruled on and appealed. Hopefully common sense will prevail.

If the FIA rule that the diffuser is illegal, how long will it be before the same old tired calls of a FIA/Ferrari conspiracy are heard?

I think people are missing the point that in situations like this the penalty usually consists of a punishment for the infraction and a message to others that this behavior will not be tolerated. In recent times, other than the recent "Spygate episode", I can't remember a case where a driver/team was caught lying to the stewards even though it probably has been happening for years. As a result, the FIA may think they need to take this opportunity to send a clear message to current and future participants in all motor sports it governs that this will not be tolerated at any level. In my opinion this is what is happening now and McLaren simply have the misfortune of being the one that got caught. I suspect the first time there is clear evidence that a driver brake tested another we will see something similar. A draconian penalty whose goal is more deterrent than punishment.

Interesting that Mr. Ryan was fired for what was clearly a very human mistake, but those involved with using the Ferrari data are still employed as are those responsible for designing such a useless car. Hopefully Mr. Ryan will go to another team and provide them with loads of McLaren information. I wonder what McLaren will do to Lewis for his part in this. Surely he must also bear some of the responsibility.

I think Brawn and Button should be listed as losers. While they are among three teams with the trick diffuser they have to press their advantage and 5 measily points for a win isn't what they needed. When the other teams get their acts together and start to haul in Brawn, those 5 lost points will be huge.

Ferrari are a shell of the team they once were. Ever since the top 4 at Ferrari either left or were pushed out, the team have been making stupid mistakes thta never would have happened during the Schumacher days. Montezemolo pushed Todt and Schumacher out and wouldn't let Brawn back so he's now reaping what he sowed.

This discussion shoudl be made public, or better yet televised so the fans know exactly what is going on. Maybe some transparency in the stewarding of races will help the fans to understand some of the garbage (not my first word choice) that's been going on.

When FOTA got together to discuss "what the fans want", I guess they should have spent some time on the wording of the rules and the enforcement of the rules. One thing just about every fan can agree on regardless of the team/driver they support is that the rules are too vague and the stewarding is erratic at best. Those reporting on F1 results should list the results as provisional until a 3 month protest and appeal period has passed.

For those that don't know, it was reported on SpeedTV this past weekend, that the three teams that came up with the different diffuser were not represented in the technical working group. Which is why they probably don't know what the spirit of the rule was. So this may not be so much a case of the other teams missing out on a better design as it is they understood what the intention of the rule was so they came up with a lesser design.

First I agree with Whitmarsh, in that questions sbout the diffuser were raised prior to the season and the FIA could have easily dealt with it then. Second, my fear is that if the appeal is rejected and the teams get the impression that it's now the wild west with the diffuser rules, we can have protest after protest throughout the season.

Kubica crashes out largely by his own hand, Heidfeld is crashed into and struggles with a damaged car, and Kubica is the winner? How does that work? Kubica screwed up and crashed out of a podium finish, he is the loser.

I think people need to consider that changing the design of the car costs money and if someone else comes up with a design that is "questionable", you will seek clarification before spending the time and money to copy it. I'd assume that many of the other teams have already done so and were simply waiting for clarification before bolting it on which highlights the stupidity of the FIA.

Mrkjf & Stormwarning, I'm sure you were saying the same thing last year when Ferrari's floor was being questioned. And if you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic.

Try to keep up Ross. Teams were grumbling about the design when your team was still a wishful thought.

What really boggles the mind is that the FIA knew well in advance that there were questions as to the legality of the part. So why not take the time before the season starts to provide a final and decisive ruling. Instead they'd prefer to have teams file protests, people who are probably not in the best position to decide to make a ruling as to the legality of the part, and then the appeal which is definetly going to come from the losing party.

Why on earth would a team sandbag. Doing so would result in them not attaining proper testign data as they won't know what the real tyre wear is, they won't know if their components can take the stresses placed upon them, they won't know the fuel consumption etc. It also doesn't make sense in regards to showing their true pace, because I don't think Ferrari for example will think that because they are faster than McLaren in testing, they can slow the pace of their development. The other teams will always strive to be as fast as they possibly can, so whether they are faster or slower than the next team is less of a factor than Bernie is hinting at.

So, the FIA ask the teams to come up with proposals. The teams finally work together and come up with a number of sound proposals to cut costs, increase transparency, improve the TV viewing experience and improve the championship. Recognizing the unprecedented cooperation among the teams, the FIA completly disregard the efforts and proposals of FOTA and implement their own poorly thought out changes. The members of FOTA probably revealed things to their competitors that they never would have otherwise, and were prepared to make what they obviously thought were significant sacrifices and people wonder why Luca is upset? It's time for FOTA to start it's own championship and restore F1 to it's place as the pinnacle of motorsports.

This is silly and can not be enforced. How is the FIA to know if a manufacturer does their R&D under the budget of the production cars, or as part of the effort of a different racing series? BMW can easily refine their F1 engine and put it under the budget of their production cars, or Ferrari can work on suspension components and put it under the budget of their LeMans effort. If the FIA couldn't even police the rule restricting improving engine performance in 2008, how are they expected to police something like a budget cap when dealing with multi-national auto makers? It's just STUPID!!

Is he new to F1? It's been this way for years. A vague rule is written, a team exploits it, one or more teams complain, the team is either made to change their car or everyone else is told they are free to do the same. I agree that the rules should not be vague, but he's been in a position to push for change for years and has done nothing so I don't understand why he's suddenly crying about it. Either change your car accordingly or shut the hell up.

When then top lap time is posted, there should be an indication of how many timed laps were run. Then we'd at least know if this was a single hot lap run on fumes of if this was a legitimate time set on let's say the 9th of 10 timed laps. Without that type of indication these times mean absolutely nothing.

Just goes to show that they don't really need the FIA and can manage their own racing series if they put their minds to it.

I love it. The car catches fire and Hamilton says "We had an issue, but I think they're fixing it and we'll be back out as soon as possible,". I think someone has been attending the Mika Hakkinen school of media relations.

Wee wee wee. After one less than impressive GP2 season did he really think he was F1 material? Then to put his eggs all in the one basket....he should replace his manager. Winning the GP2 championship is the best way to get an F1 seat and rather than depending on his last name, he should focus on earning an F1 seat with his on track accomplishments.

Once again Max is ranting simply to further his own agenda. Sure spending in F1 is astonomical, however when a large corporation decides to trim the fat, whether they spend $300 million on F1 or $100 million, it will still be seen as money that need not be spent. Motor racing is a luxury and whenever belts are being tightened it's the luxury items that go first so claiming that the high spending makes F1 a candidate for corporate cost cutting is simplifying the situation. In reality, in many cases, not having races in North America will probably make F1 spending a likely candidate for cutting before the actual amount of spending that is being done. As North America is the largest market for many F1 manufacturers and sponsors, no rcaes means the chances of seeing a measurable return on their investment will be greatly reduced, and this will probably come up as a reason for cutting F1 spending before anything else.

Budget caps can not be policed when you have manufacturers who can hide their F1 R&D by doing it under a road car budget. If Ferrari or Toyota are developing suspension components for example, they can easily make it look like the work was done for a road car and there is no way the FIA will be able to say otherwise. And of course with Max's desire to change the rules every year, how can a budget cap be considered reasonable when the teams have to redesign their cars?

These guys should focus on selling whatever it is they're on. They're going to start a team from scratch, base it in the US where it's my understanding there is only 1 FIA approved track for testing (which is in Indianapolis and gets a harsh winter), they are going to courier their cars and supplies around the world, and they are going to develop a car with 2 American drivers who have no experience in the current F1 cars? PLEASE!!!!!

I think this is more a result of the drivers having to meet the requirements of the sponsors more than anything else. Any sign of personality will quickly be stomped out if it doesn't fit with the corporate image. Tony Stewart in NASCAR was a good example of this. He was full of fire and always good for a quote until his title sponsor told him to stop or lose his deal and of course he stopped. I wonder how Lauda would have fared in today's world.

Well said, and I totally agree as I for one will walk away if the cars become spec racers.

Robbie08, I stand corrected. But that just highlights how large a hurdle it will be to start a team from scratch. Forget having the factory etc in the US, if they want to compete, they should pick up Honda since they already have the resources in place. They can then move operations where ever they want over time.

This confirms that the USF1 project is little more than a marketing exercise. Danica Patrick isn't even in the top 10 of IRL drivers so why would anyone think she has what it takes to cut it in F1. Alexander Rossi would be a far better pick and he still has a way to go to prove himself capable of driving at that level.

You would think that someone would have learned a lesson from BAR. Starting a team from scratch is a monumental task and one that should never be undertaken when there is a perfectly good team available for purchase. Their desire to have the team headquartered in the US, will likely prove to be their downfall, as it seems to be the only reason for not buying Honda's team.

Who cares what he has to say. He's only there because Alonso wanted a helper monkey in the other car, rather than a driver who could push him and possibly outpace him. The only response this stiff should be giving to any question is "I'm just happy to be here."

I also have little sympathy for him. He put all his eggs in one basket and then arrogantly refused to leave GP2 open as an option. I can see him doing that if he won the GP2 championship, but he didn't and his performance was nothing to write home about. He should have gone back to GP2 with the plan of crushing the competition so badly that no F1 team could ignore him. His arrogance will be his undoing, as he may not even have a ride in 2009 and that will basically signal the end of his F1 aspirations.

I agree with jamiec666. Unless content is missing, Max did not say that Lewis should go to Ferrari.

It's time the FIA allow teams to get title sponsors for each car rather than one for the whole team. This will allow companies to make a smaller investment in F1 while still getting their name slashed all over a car, it will allow smaller companies to consider sponsorship and it will be easier for the teams to find the sponsorship they need.

And it took them this long to figure this out?

So the marshalls are being outfitted with special gloves so they can handle the cars. What about the drivers? Is one going to be electrocuted by touching the car as they try to get out of their wrecked vehicle? I can't imagine the drivers operating their equiopment wearing "mad scientist" gloves.

Add KERS to that and you have a lot of wrecks with possibly damaged KERS systems in the rain. Sounds like a recipe for a marshal or driver to get killed.

This is the price (no pun intended) that the F1 teams are paying for not starting their own series under their own management. They are left to beg for the scraps that Bernie gives them. If they haven't gotten the clue yet, then they deserve to be treated like the red headed step child.

I had hoped that ugly commic strip paint job would have finally been retired, but alas, it appears as though my senses will be assaulted by this paint scheme for yet another year.

I'm not sure I understand your question. If each engine lasts three races and the driver gets eight engines...then that equals 24 races (8 * 3 = 24). So if the engines are capable of lasting three races each (and by the way that's three race weekends including practise and qualifying), the drivers will actually have engines to spare.

How long have you lot been following F1? Rarely is the car that is unveiled the car that is put on the track at the first race. First you don't want to show your innovations that early, and secondly the car hasn't been through a full test schedule. So everyone with a brain in their head knows that the car will be changed, sometimes radically prior to the first race.

If done correctly, this could be a very good and safe system. Personally I'd have the lollypop man wear a helmet with 5 lights in it. 1 light for each wheel and 1 for the fuel filler. The lights will be activated when the wheel lock is in place or the fuel line is removed from the car. In this way the lollypop man can keep an eye on the pitlane. It's not rocket science and I'm sure Ferrari will come up with a system that works.

rave on brother!

Newskiller, perhaps you fail to recognize that Bernie's revelations came after Luca called for him to step down. So how much of what he says can you take as gospel? Sounds more like he's trying to get even with Luca for infering that Bernie is old and washed up and no longer good for F1. And I did not imply it was a single bribe. Ferrari made a deal for themselves to get more money under what was then the current Concorde agreement in order to stick with Bernie and the FIA. As I recall, Bernie also made similar deals, although not for as much money with some of the smaller teams as he divided and conquered the teams plotting a breakaway series. Again, people have known for years that Ferrari made a better deal for themselves than the other teams did and that is called BUSINESS. However, the fact that Ferrari made a better deal for themselves does not mean that their on track accomplishments are tainted. People love to claim an FIA bias toward Ferrari but can never point to one in fact. Yet it's common knowledge that the FIA changed the rules of the sport in 2003 primarily to stop Michael Schumacher. The bottom line is that F1 is a business and Ferrari are better at treating it like a business than the other teams, and the FIA make vague and poorly worded rules that Ferrari and other teams have been able to circumvent over the years (not improving engine performance is a perfect example of that).

I can't believe you people are so thick as to think that "a" this is a sign of cheating and "b" this is a sign of FIA bias. And to think most journals report that F1 fans are smarter than those who support other series. When the manufacturers were thinking of starting a breakaway series, Bernie was smart enough to realize that Ferrari was the ONLY marquee name in F1 and whoever got Ferrari had the power. At the same time Ferrari were in tough economic times because Fiat was not being run very well, so Bernie offered Ferrari a sweetener to stay and the deal was done. This is OLD news as it was widely reported and confirmed shortly after the deal was done. Secondly, Bernie is not the FIA, so any deal Bernie makes between his companies and Ferrari have nothing to do with the FIA and their management of the sport. It should also be noted that Ferrari had their own test tracks long before any special deal with Bernie was done, and if the other teams thought to spend their money on private test facilities rather than chrome palaces and mega motor homes they may have also experienced the same success. And for anyone to think that Michael Schumacher's accomplishments on the track were manufactured is just plain stupid. He took fitness and driver preparation to new levels in F1 and if the races were being handed to him, why would he go through these extraordinary efforts. He was the most penalized driver during his time in F1 and the FIA clearly changed the rules to stop him on more than 1 occasion, so again, to imply or state that his accomplishments on the track were not earned is stupid.

One by one the traditional circuits are being squeezed off the calender due to Bernie's excessive fees, to be replaced by circuits in the Middle East and Asia funded by deep pocketed oil barons. Between Bernie and Max, F1 will be unrecognizable to the long time fan by the 2010 season.

Driving a reduction in costs could largely be achieved by increasing the minimum weight of the cars and banning exotic materials. The desire to make the car as light as possible is one of the primary reasons why costs are so high as the ability to make a part super light but retain it's strength is a very costly endeavor. I just find this effort odd, where they try to drive down costs but they are focusing on changing things that will make wholesale changes to the sport rather than first focusing on the simple things.

ka24510's ideas have merit but why not just leave the rules alone for more than 5 years and see what happens. There comes a point where a team will have squeezed all of the performance they can out of a package and at that point the spending should naturally decline. Remember McLaren saying they spent several hundred million dollars in the build up to the finally to only get 2 or 3 tenths out of the car. Eventually there will be nothing left to gain and their spending will reduce. In the meantime, the smaller teams will continue to cut into the gap to the bigger teams as they will be realizing larger performance gains than the front runners. They could also allow teams to run one sponsor per car. According to Paul Stoddart the smaller teams have a hard time finding a sponsor to cover both cars, so allowing them to have different sponsors for each car will make it easier for them to find the funds to go racing. However Max killed this idea claiming the fans wouldn't be able to determine which team a car was from. It works in other forms of racing so why are F1 fans incapable of figuring this out.

This is clearly an attempt to get the manufacturers out of F1 and go back to parts suppliers and private teams using those parts. If F1 can not be used as an R&D platform then there is little reason for a manufacturer to be in F1. By taking away development of the car electronics and now the engine and transmission there is nothing in an F1 car that can really be translated to a road car. So if this goes through I'd expect that BMW, Mercedes and Toyota will leave. Ferrari might stay due to their history with the sport etc, but since they are not in the best financial health, they may call it a day too and focus on other forms of racing.

If this goes through, I'll probably stop watching F1 as it will no longer be the sport I fell in love with. There are plenty of spec series around that I already follow and standardizing engines will make F1 just another spec series and as such there is no reason for me to go out of my way to follow it.

I think people are reading too much into this announcement and Max Mosely's calls for cost reductions. Normally if a company is in financial trouble or if they are cutting costs to survive tough times, they will eliminate spending that is not vital to the companies day to day activities. Spending on motor racing will always be one of the first things to be axed as it is a luxury not a necessity. Had F1 had relevance to road car development Honda may have been able to justify their expenditures in F1 as R&D, but once they went to a standard ECU, the last vestiges of road car R&D were eliminated. I'd imagine that any other publicly traded company will face the same pressures to get out of F1 that Honda did, as the shareholders will not see a reason to spend money on sports when their dividends are being reduced.

He had a chance at F1 and dind't do anything with it, so why should he be given a second grasp at the ring. He could only win the GP2 title when all of the talent had gone and he's old by F1 entry standards. So unless he's bringing a pot of gold to a team, there is no reason to give him a chance. Hell, I'd sign Rossi before I'd sign him.

Whatever happened to Liuzzi?

Here's an idea. How about not changing the rules every 5 minutes. Each time a rule change requires that something on the car change, the costs are actually being increased. What a bunch of knuckleheads! They could have left the cars pretty much unchanged, allowed a different floor on the car (like the GP2 floor) which would have taken care of the aero issues when following another car, put some slicks on and guess what, you have increased mechanical grip and overtaking at a fraction of the costs to the lesser teams. It's amazing how Max demands that costs be cut to help the lesser teams and then in the same breath he insists upon a list of car changes that will put a huge financial burden on these same teams.

I certainly have mixed feelings about Alonso. I usually like him on the track but his off track antics in 2007 really turned me against him. However comments like this will bring me fully into his camp again. Now all we need him to do is openly call for the resignation of Max and Bernie.

I would have been interested to hear what was said when Rubens and Schumi met.

I think it's a good thing that the circuits are starting to push back. I think Tony George was the first stating that he wasn't willing to meet Bernie's financial demands becaue he couldn't do it while charging a reasonable amount for tickets. Now other circuits are starting to push back and soon the teams will have to do something about it. I don't think Toyoto, BMW and Mercedes will be willing to lose races in North America which is their largest market and Germany.

Smart move. Laying the foundation for a long term Ferrari contract once his time at Red Bull is up. I wouldn't be surprised if after these comments, Ferrari sign him to a contract now.

We all knew this was the case and now this just makes Rubens look like a bitter man crying about how the man kept him down.

What is one to expect when the series is run by a bunch of clowns. F1 is becoming a silly joke and one has to wonder when the teams will realize this and start their own series.

What an incredibly STUPID idea. It's amazing that Bernie has built such an impressive empire when things like this come out of his head. How is this any different than simply increasing the points awarded to 1st, 2nd and 3rd places to the point where there is a significant gap between each position and a significant gap from 3rd to 4th. This is yet again another sign that Bernie has lost the plot and needs to go away, before he and the other geriatric lunatic completly ruin the sport.

I don't know why anyone thinks the new aero changes etc will improve the racing. Over the last ten years how many of the FIA's changes have actually worked? Rather than using GP2 as a proving ground for any potential changes to the car's aerodynamics, the FIA have once again forced expensive changes to the cars without proper testing. Even NASCAR took a staged approach to introducing their Car of Tomorrow, allowing teams to test with it first, then making changes to the car based on feedback, then running it in a few races, and again making changes to the car based on the feedback from the teams, before finally mandating the use of the car. My bet is that the FIA will get this wrong too and we'll see more processional racing as in my humble opinion the two things that prevent overtaking haven't been addressed. 1 being the design of the circuits and 2 being the marbles that build up off line.

Bernie and Max have been playing the F1 teams for fools for years, and it's good to see them waking up and pushing back. They should break away and form their own series. Bernie and the FIA will come knocking looking for a piece of the action and the teams can then negotiate a proper deal.

Yeah, an the team just built a car and handed it to him and said drive it. I guess when Honda test the car they don't ask the drivers for their input and modify the car accordingly. If the car is the problem, then Jenson is the problem because it's the driver's input that goes toward developing a points scoring and race winning car.

Why is this news. In the US, football and basketball players do the same thing to one another including sending hookers to their opponents rooms. Get over it. Lewis did a great job and won the WDC, move on.

A Brit racing for Ferrari. EJ has it right. If the FIA favours Ferrari, Lewis wins. If the FIA favour Brits, Lewis wins. He'll have both sides of the equation covered so it would seem to be the right move to make.

It would ahe been more genuine had he made this assertion earlier in the season. But I do agree. The points system should reward results and prompt drivers to fight for the next position. The current system kills early season racing and it has to go. There should be large gaps between 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and a large gap between 3rd and 4th as being on the podium should be considered a significant achievement.

I'm sure the reqiurement for Alonso's signature was keeping Piquet. No one in their right mind would keep Piquet after the season he had. In fighting for best of the rest or even for the team championship, both drivers need to be scoring points so this is clearly a move to satisfy Alonso.

Thos involved in F1 and those who watch sure seem to love a conspiracy story.

I don't think you can extrapolate that Hamilton is better than Schumacher because Hamilton beat Alonso and Alonso beat Schumacher. Because one could also argue that Hamilton is barely beat Massa even with teh reliability issues and mistakes made by Ferrari, and Schumacher crushed Massa. Hamilton is a very good driver who has had the good fortune to start his career with a top team and that's about all one can say as we don't know how someone else would do given the same equipment.

What a load of bollocks. If someone was going to take Hamilton out it would be Kimi, because the risk of the attacker not finishing and the fact that Massa needs to score means that Massa wouldn't be likely to risk his own chances by taking Hamilton out.

I think most people who posted comments are forgetting that Kimi may not have been told by the team to move over. He's smart enough to know what the situation is and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what is best for the team. So if a driver moves over on his own accord is it still team orders? How do you police something like that? He could make up any reason for why he let his teammate by so how can you say you'll enforce it if the team request it, but allow it if the driver does it on his own? The end result is the same so how do you enforce both scenarios? And that doesn't even include the team telling a driver to move over prior to the start of the race. Are the FIA to monitor and police every communication between a team and its driver throughout the entire season? Luca is right. They should be banned if for no other reason than they are unenforceable.

Wait a minute. Trulli is out at turn 1 of the race and you even go so far as to say he's partially to blame, yet you give him the race? What's the matter with you!

What a load fo crap. First the FIA send all teams out to come up with their own version of KERS for 2009 costing millions of dollars per team. Only for the FIA to turn around and consider a standard unit for 2010. Where is the cost savings in that?

For me it's pretty simple. Montezemolo forced Schumacher, Brawn, Todt etc, from the team and now Ferrari are a shell of what they once were. Had the old guard been in place I have no doubt that Schumacher would have easily one the last two drivers championships. Luca got what he wanted and is finging out that the wanting is not as good as the having.

I think it may eb too early for this declaration. Lewis wasn't under any pressure on Sunday so he was able to calmy take care of business. The real test will be if Ferrari are faster in Brazil and how Lewis will deal with driving for the points and not for the win.

BooHoo! Rosberg knew what he was doing when he re-signed with Williams and he has no one to blame but himself. He was the hot property and rather than thinking aobut himself and his career and signing with McLaren, he choose to be loyal to Williams. A noble gesture to be sure but career suicide. His father has been around long enough to know better and if he or Nico's other advisors failed to explain the facts of life to him, then that's his tough luck.

With the pace that Hamilton set, I personally think Rubens finishing on the lead lap makes him the star of the race. Lewis dominated all weekend so his winning in a run away was expected. But Rubens finishing on the lead lap was clearly the accomplishment of the weekend. The fact that he wasn't even mentioned shows that you have your lips firmly planted on the buttocks of one Lewis Hamilton and can't see anything else due to your view being blocked.

More whinning and bleating from F1 drivers. What a bunch of nancy boys. No wonder the stewards are always getting involved, it's like kids on the playground. Until the drivers man-up and just drive, this continuing trend of bitching, complaining and stewards trying to keep the playground peaceful will continue.

How about this...Alonso qualifies light (the driver gets to pick their strategy) and is at the front of the field. He lets Massa by but then makes it very difficult for Lewis to pass. It can be done so I don't think we can completly discount Alonso's comments, and this tactic would be legal so it can't be put down to cheating. Making it work will be the problem, but it can be done.

I think the suggestion of having an ex-driver guarantees nothing. Some drivers may see everything as an infraction and other may feel that the drivers need to be given as much leeway as possible. As I've said before, ex-particpants are not required to officiate other sports so there is no reason it's needed in F1. All that's needed is a group of professionals that know the rules and are consistent in the application of the rules. More than 3 stewards would also help to expedite things when several incidents happen on or around the same time.

I don't see why they don't look at GP2 as a place to test theories etc. The racing in GP2 is pretty exciting so the question should be why and can it translate to F1 without making wholesale changes. In my humble opinion the best thing that could be done would be to change the financial aspect of the sport to the point where manufacturers would become sellers of components rather than racers of cars. Then if the components were interchangeable, we could have customer cars with different engine/chassis combinations and hopefully a tighter grid and better racing. Basically bring back the formula that worked in the 50s and 60s.

Spacemansplif, I beg to differ. Bernie is the one who stands to profit most from a/ the championship being close to the last race and b/ Ferrari being successful. So if there is any Ferrari favoritism going on, I'd say that it's Bernie who is making it happen. Just take a look at the number of people in Ferrari gear at each race and you can see why the holder of the commercial rights would want Ferrari to do well and be in the championship hunt. Personally I don't think the FIA have the smarts to make something like that work (not that whatever is going on is going undetected).

Maybe Lewis can take a page out of Hakkinen's and Raikkonen's book. Say a lot without saying anything at all. As the "saviour" of British motorsports, I'd imagine he has a microphone shoved in his face more than most of the other drivers (I mean come on, most of them are dry as dust and have nothing to say), so his chances for putting his foot in it are far greater than the others. He just has to learn to say a lot of nothing like most F1 drivers. I think Schumi was one of the best at that in his later years. You almost always knew what he was going to say because he was going to give the party line in regards to the team, and for on-track stuff it was always "it's the same for everyone".

I agree that the plot has been lost, but I don't see why the stewards have to have experience driving an F1 car. In other sports the officials are able to competently officiate without having been ex-participants, so I don't see why F1 should be any different. Arguments like this get in the way and muddle the issue. The problem is very simple, F1 needs professional officials who's performance is reviewed and analysed after each event. The review and analysis can be done with former F1 drivers if need be so the officials can gain insight, but it's not required. I think most of us can tell the difference between a racing incident and an overly optimistic or dangerous move.

First, if the teams aren't complaining about the inconsistent and often bizarre stewards decisions, then why should we the fans worry too much about it. Second, what Lewis and McLaren are going through still doesn't match how the FIA came down on Schumi during his Benetton days, so until Lewis is being hit with race bans for aggressive driving, he should keep his mouth shut and drive. Third, what do people expect when the FIA write rules that can be considered vague at best. The fact that the governing body can penalize a team for illegal barge boards only for that team to show they are legal if measured differently shows that the rules published by the FIA are lacking in detail. But again, it's up to the teams to push for more detailed rules. But from the outside it seems fantastic that a sport that relies on engineering at such fine levels can be governed by generic and vague rules.

I agree that the stewards decision is questionable, but I question why people think the FIA are manipulating things. As the commercial rights holder, Bernie is the one who benefits most from the championship going to the last round, and as Ferrari are the marque name in F1, it's also in Bernie's best interest for Ferrari to win or at least be in the running until the very end. So if anyone is pulling strings here, I'd look to Bernie first. But as I've said before, if the teams are OK with this type of officiating, then why should we the fans care? Ask yourself when was the last time a team questioned the current method of officiating races and demanded that it be improved? Not in the last 10 years anyway, and I'd imagine it's because they all feel they will benefit from these decisions more than they will be hurt. So get over it, because this is clearly how the teams want it.

Well DarkDefender, Ferrari and STR have the same engine and do you see them battling closely on the track and overtaking one another? Of course not. This has nothing to do with improving the the racing, it's a misguided attempt to cut costs. Misguided because cost cutting measures are being forced on the teams rather than the teams coming up with them on their own. Who better to know how best to cut costs while retaining the core ideals of F1 than the teams themselves.

This is a stupid proposal. Each team will build their own engine but to a standard design??? How stupid is that and what's the point of that from a manufacturer's perspective. Why not have a single engine supplier...oh wait, that's what they have in IRL. Bernie and Max are hell bent on making F1 a spec series but we have NASCAR, IRL and GP2 for that. I think I can say without a doubt that if this rule is put in place, I'll be done with F1 because it will no longer be the sport I fell in love with 30 odd years ago. Fortunately I have MotoGP and I would suggest that anyone who loves racing check it out.

Yeah, the rich getting richer as we know that only a handful of drivers can even get close to setting the fastest lap of the session. Any proposal for a Friday reward should be attainable by all teams. How about a prize for the team that puts in the most laps on a Friday. Or awarding the prize to the team that has the best improvement between their best Friday time and their qualifying time from the previous year.

You guys fail to realize that Luca complained about circuits like Singapore prior to the race weekend starting, so his comments are not a case of sour grapes. He stated he was not a fan of Valencia and included all street circuits in his rant. He feels that the design of circuits should promote overtaking and holding a race on a street circuit because it's pretty and looks good on camera is wrong. I do believe that many of us have expressed the same sentiment. He also makes a good point that if the only way to get excitment is via the Safety Car, then F1 has a problem, and again I think that most of us agree with that.

Except that with introducing such dramtic changes to the cars (don't forget KERS), the grid will be too spaced out for any of this to matter. When will they realize that rule stability is required to allow the lesser teams to close the gap to the big teams. And major changes to the rules usually results in the grid mirroring the team's budgets and resources.

Nuno, the answer to that is obviously no, but the safety car gave Alonso a chance where previously he had none. What better way to move from the back of the field to the front on a street circuit?

I think the human element in the system needs to be reduced. If the person controlling the lights wore a helment that had 5 lights in the visor (1 for each wheel and one for the fuel rig) and each light would come one as the wheel lock is engaged and the fuel hose is removed, they could keep their eye down the pit lane and only release the car once all 5 lights were on and nothing was coming down the pit lane. With a system like that, the "lollipop person would only have to focus on the pit lane. As it stands there is too much for the lollipop person to verify before releasing the car and accidents are bound to happen regardless of the system employed.

How about this....Piquet intentionally stuffs his car into the wall shortly after his team-mate pits to put Alonso at the front of the grid. I find it a little to convienient especially when you combine that with Alonso's pit strategy. Starting toward the back of the grid on a street circuit and he doesn't start the race loaded with fuel? He's the first to pit and then his team-mate spins into the wall where no one has had any problems during the weekend? I think Flavio has put one over on everyone.

To those who think Massa would have gotten a penalty for pulling out in front of Sutil you are forgetting that they were on a street circuit and most likely Massa couldn't see completly around the corner. So he could only guess at when to pull out (the marshalls being completly useless at that race). He was at the back of the grid and out of the points so why would he rush back onto the circuit?

Good to see that unlike every other driver on the grid, Lewis has no concerns about what driving in heavy spray under artificial lights will do to ones ability to see. Perhaps if he took his participation in the GPDA a little more seriously he'd have a better idea of why the others are concerned.

There's a surprise. Maybe McLaren need a new lawyer. This guy keeps losing.

You needed an email to question the FIA's integrity?

I disagree. It's not like lewis stands to lose all of his points or a significant number of points. There are 4 races left in the championship. So even if he were to lose today's appeal, as he still has the points lead, Lewis can prove to the world that he's the best of the current crop of drivers by outscoring his opponents in the remaining races.

If your going to run your mouth the way Lewis does, then you have to expect to receive more criticism when you make a mistake. Rather than comiing to his drivers defense (don't remember Ron every doing this for DC or JPM) he should work on teaching him how to present himself to the media.

Agreed. With the money Berie and the FIA have I don't understand why they don't build a couple of showcase circuits that are similar to Spa, in that there are lots of elevation changes a good mix of long straights, fast and slow corners nd the track feels like it's going somewhere.

I guess this should calm all the talk about how the Renault engine is inferior. Looks like the problem with the Red Bulls may be the component behind the wheel.

I agree with ben84. Kovi outqualified Hammi and finished ahead of him. Thus he outperformed Hammi and should have been given the point.

Seems kind of late for Dietrich to be waiting for the Customer Car rule to be clarified. If the ruling goes against his current set-up, there is no way they can put a half way decent car on the grid for next year.

So I guess Lewis didn't have the balls to outbrake Massa on a dry track in Hungary. Lewis needs to learn to just shut up and drive. He caught a brake when he was pushed out of a gravel trap and he took a hit this time. Grow up, get over it and move on.

Hopefully this this will end the discussion as to whether Hamilton gained an advantage or not and whether he did enough to eliminate that advantage. Now, lets argue incessantly about the severity of the penalty.

It's not like Massa was the one to cause the incident or protest it. He was gifted a win just the same as if Kimi and Hamilton took each other out. You guys need to get over yourselves.

Or they can design tracks in such a way that drivers will not consider cutting the chicane to be a viable option. Personally I'm getting tired of all the grass-crete and tarmac that is being put outside of corners. The drivers should have to keep their cars within the curbs or face exclusion. The champions corner at Montreal is one of the most exciting corners in F1, simply because of the penalty that is faced if a driver gets it wrong.