GwilymJJames wrote:"Everything is fine, everything is fine, there are no problems in Bahrain, but we'll make sure all the teams have extra security when they go to Bahrain, where everything is fine, just in case everything [which is fine] is not fine [though it is]."
East Londoner wrote:Oh Damon, you complete turncoat.
tristan1117 wrote:Amnesty International Claims Bahrain Situation Has Not Improved
Which obviously means they don't think that the race is a good idea.
CoopsII wrote:Also, wasnt the Bahrain GP generally a bit of a snore-fest?
Is this how they intend to liven things up?
Martin Brundle, at the 2005 San Marino GP wrote:You can sort of imagine in four or five years time talking about these guys we've got on the front two rows of the grid today, can't you? They're very much the future of Grand Prix Racing.
Martin Brundle, at the 2005 San Marino GP wrote:You can sort of imagine in four or five years time talking about these guys we've got on the front two rows of the grid today, can't you? They're very much the future of Grand Prix Racing.
dr-baker wrote:He acknowledges that there were bombs and troubles a week or so ago in Manama, but reckons most of the rest of the country is relatively safe. He seems to think that there should not be any problems for the GP. Let's hope he's right...
Pamphlet wrote:There's a guy living in Bahrain answering questions and whatnot about the situation over there. Rrrrrrrrreddit link.
dr-baker wrote:But it still does not make it right or wrong that they are going.
Wizzie wrote:Well, Bernie doesn't think anything's wrong with Bahrain
Backmarker wrote:Super Porsche Super Cup Super Championship has pulled out of Bahrain because they don't think it's safe enough.
Klon wrote:Clever strategy by those guys. Since they do not play a major role in the Supercup, they simply left out this race, not losing much in the potential final result of the championship, while appearing as a caring company.
dr-baker wrote:Backmarker wrote:Super Porsche Super Cup Super Championship has pulled out of Bahrain because they don't think it's safe enough.
No, not quite. One of the Porsche Super Cup teams are not going to Bahrain. So far, the others will.
Backmarker wrote:I don't think I'll bother following Supercup.
JJMonty wrote:Gentlemen... let the dispute re-ignite!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17767985
CoopsII wrote:JJMonty wrote:Gentlemen... let the dispute re-ignite!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17767985
Just read that, perhaps being 100% safe at the circuit is no good if its this dangerous en route....
Wizzie wrote:He's from a family of used cars salesmen... which might as well be the mafia EurobrunMe wrote:I have no idea why I always think Tony D'Alberto is a mafia member![]()
CoopsII wrote:JJMonty wrote:Gentlemen... let the dispute re-ignite!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17767985
Just read that, perhaps being 100% safe at the circuit is no good if its this dangerous en route....
Alianora La Canta wrote:Has anyone brought up the "UniF1ed" ad campaign yet? (I'm struggling to keep track of what's been discussed where this week, for reasons explained below).
The organisers of the Bahrain Grand Prix did an ad campaign linking F1 with the unification of their country. Long story short (my blog has the long version): they broke Article 1 of the FIA Statutes in the process, as interpreted the way the FIA used to take Jerez's race from it in 1997 and fined Turkey in 2006. I persuaded a journalist to ask about the matter, and the unofficial response went along the lines of "sound concept, no time to sort it out (check comments)".
This is not some minor regulation. It's a requirement of French-registered organisations to have a clause like Article 1, and the FIA is registered in France. Therefore it would not be much of a stretch to imagine someone bringing the FIA to court if they thought they could gain something from it. Since the maximum penalty is dissolution...
I could say that continuing to force the race after the safety guarantee was compromised (as demonstrated in the Force India hire car incident) breaches Article 17 of the International Sporting Code, which effectively means this is no longer an internation race and, technically speaking, no points or benefits can be derived from it (or F1 cars used). However, I think you get my point that the FIA is so busy pushing the race on the unwilling that it's putting itself in considerable danger.
Martin Brundle, at the 2005 San Marino GP wrote:You can sort of imagine in four or five years time talking about these guys we've got on the front two rows of the grid today, can't you? They're very much the future of Grand Prix Racing.
Alianora La Canta wrote:Has anyone brought up the "UniF1ed" ad campaign yet? (I'm struggling to keep track of what's been discussed where this week, for reasons explained below).
The organisers of the Bahrain Grand Prix did an ad campaign linking F1 with the unification of their country. Long story short (my blog has the long version): they broke Article 1 of the FIA Statutes in the process, as interpreted the way the FIA used to take Jerez's race from it in 1997 and fined Turkey in 2006. I persuaded a journalist to ask about the matter, and the unofficial response went along the lines of "sound concept, no time to sort it out (check comments)".
This is not some minor regulation. It's a requirement of French-registered organisations to have a clause like Article 1, and the FIA is registered in France. Therefore it would not be much of a stretch to imagine someone bringing the FIA to court if they thought they could gain something from it. Since the maximum penalty is dissolution...
I could say that continuing to force the race after the safety guarantee was compromised (as demonstrated in the Force India hire car incident) breaches Article 17 of the International Sporting Code, which effectively means this is no longer an internation race and, technically speaking, no points or benefits can be derived from it (or F1 cars used). However, I think you get my point that the FIA is so busy pushing the race on the unwilling that it's putting itself in considerable danger.
Alianora La Canta wrote:This is not some minor regulation. It's a requirement of French-registered organisations to have a clause like Article 1, and the FIA is registered in France. Therefore it would not be much of a stretch to imagine someone bringing the FIA to court if they thought they could gain something from it. Since the maximum penalty is dissolution...
Klon wrote:Alianora La Canta wrote:This is not some minor regulation. It's a requirement of French-registered organisations to have a clause like Article 1, and the FIA is registered in France. Therefore it would not be much of a stretch to imagine someone bringing the FIA to court if they thought they could gain something from it. Since the maximum penalty is dissolution...
And that court wouldn't do jack because if that dissolution would happen, the FIA would pack all their stuff and drive 260 km eastwards and settle down in Couvin. The French gouvernment will most certainly not risk the tax Euros that the FIA is likely to provide.
Martin Brundle, at the 2005 San Marino GP wrote:You can sort of imagine in four or five years time talking about these guys we've got on the front two rows of the grid today, can't you? They're very much the future of Grand Prix Racing.
Wizzie wrote:Nah, considering the stuff Bernie's pulled off over the year, I'm certain he's somehow managed to reduce the FIA's tax bill to about 5 euros
Return to The Paul Stoddart Memorial Forum
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest