Episode 56 - Formula One Management Finally Giving the People What they Want
- File: Episode56.m4a
- Length: 32:54
- Size: 30.4 MB
- Transcript: episode56.pdf
What a race! Absolutely incredible start to the season, and as ever, we have plenty to say about the winners and losers of the weekend.
Intro
A podcast of two halves, it’s difficult to explain.
Good Week / Bad Week
It’s a good week for teams and their debut’s, Super Aguri make it to Australia, whilst Toro Rosso will be getting their new car. It’s a bad week for a couple of the drivers in McLaren and Red Bull.
News and Views
A quick catch up with Trulli’s mood, the future of the Australian Grand Prix, and Patrick Head’s “crazy” idea for reversing the grids. Also, did Pedro de la Rosa join the GPDA for something to do?
Qualifying
The ITV feed, where’s the reliability, Raikkonen, Piquet and the very green track. Plus, our predictions for the race.
The Race
Raikkonen and Massa have a very poor showing, whilst Bourdais impresses. Poor Timo Glock, what’s that bump doing there anyway? Piquet is still struggling, so why’s Flavio being nice? And we try and understand the engine/gearbox situation.
Feedback
A Fantasy Racers Sidepodcast league update, a request for a new tagline, and an Alonso / Hamilton exclusive!
Housekeeping
The schedule is now live, so even we know what’s going on. The live commenting was wonderful and we want more of the same next week.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:40 amGary Shavit said:
Why is a night race so important for TV viewing? Why not do it earlier? 9:00 - 10:00 AM in Melbourne on Sunday morning would be early evening (L.A.) to midnight (Europe) on Saturday for most of the F1 fans.
Gary Shavit
Netanya, Israel
March 17th, 2008 at 9:51 amAlex Andronov said:
Loving the podcast, especially as I got a mention! Cheers!
March 17th, 2008 at 10:47 amlou said:
yep it did
I have just looked at the constructors standings - Torro Rosso in front of Ferrari - who would have thought it? now thats a crazy race! I knew this already but reading it really hammered the point home.
March 17th, 2008 at 10:55 amArt Vandelay said:
Really digging the before / after broadcasts. You guys rock
March 17th, 2008 at 12:42 pmKris said:
I’ve probably got my English blinkers on, but I don’t see how they expect ratings to have improved this year by starting 90 mins later: - this moves the race start *deeper* into the middle of the night, so instead of being able to have a few drinks, roll home and watch the race I had to invent an odd “2 hours of sleep, watch race, 4 hours of sleep” arrangement.
Starting another 90 mins later wouldnt really help either… I went to bed a little while after 6am this year, finishing at 7:30 would simply mean more daylight and more difficulty sleeping.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:29 pmChristine said:
I’m liking this idea, unless Bernie has something against the race taking place on a Saturday.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:39 pmScott Dryden said:
I thought it was interesting in Autosport a couple of weeks back that Charles Bradley (deputy editor) predicted that Piquet would be the first high-profile sacking of 2008. After all, as the likes of Lehto, Verstappen and Trulli can testify, Briatore isn’t exactly adverse to changing drivers mid-season.
You’re right, though, in that Piquet does at least appear to have more support than Kovalainen did early on last season. I think an exchange that took place between Murray Walker and Briatore (broadcast on Channel 10) before last year’s Australian Grand Prix explains a lot.
Walker: Everyone’s saying that the pressure is really on Giancarlo Fisichella; replacing Alonso. Is he up to it?
Briatore: It’s not easy, you know, for him [bursts into laughter]. We try… we try to keep him calm.
Briatore didn’t exactly come across as confident of Fisichella’s ability to lead the team, whereas you’d imagine he has more faith in Alonso’s capacity to take the strain if his team-mate isn’t up to the job. As a result, he’ll probably be more relaxed about Piqeut taking his time to settle in than he was with Kovalainen.
March 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pmSteven Roy said:
Piquet is in the team because a sponsor insisted so Flavio needs to be nice about him. I think the sponsor in question was introduced to the team by Piquet senior and wouldn’t be surprised to see the team become Team Piquet the next time Carlos Ghosn decides he doesn’t like F1 any more.
It seems odd that teams that produce engines and gearboxes that are reliable enough to finish the race get penalised by not getting a free engine for the next race where those that have done a worse job get a free change. How is this meant to promote reliability? If you are going to have multi-race components, which you should not, but if you are there has to be some kind of penalty for not making those components last.
As an exapmple. Team 1 blows its engine in to a million pieces during a race causing a safety car and trashing 4 other drivers races gets no penalty in the next race. Team 2 gets its engine through the first race and through qualifying for the next race then has to change it after discovering a problem after the session is complete. Why should they be penalised for having a more reliable engine than team 1? It is bizarre.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:07 pmme said:
agreed, at present, the absolute worst thing that can happen to a team is to finish outside of the points.
if you’re running 11th or 12th you may as well stick it in the wall.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:49 pmScott Dryden said:
Interesting. On the face of it, Briatore appears to be getting a good deal, as Piquet’s a promising young competitor - far from your typical pay driver.
Dig a little deeper, though, and is everything as it seems? In junior categories, he’s always run with his father’s well funded team, but has never been that competitive out of the box. This is a driver who’s always taken at least one year in a formula to get himself consistently on the pace.
It’s also not been the case that he’s been up against vastly more experienced drivers during his first year in other categories. When competing in British Formula 3 for the first time, rookie Jamie Green had the edge (whereas Piquet was the reigning SudAm F3 champion). And then, in GP2 he was out-performed by Neel Jani, Adam Carroll, Alexandre Premat, Heikki Kovalainen and Nico Rosberg - all drivers competing in their inaugural year in the series.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:44 pmshaun said:
Hi sidepodcast,
Thanks for the mention in your audio show - it always give me a bit of a buzz when i hear a shout-out my way.
You feature great blog sites ( reff : circus F1) on the sidepodcast TV program.I would like to put Blog F1 forward for a featured site - if of course this is a regular feature.Blog F1 interacts with your various features and that’s how i got to hear about the site.The young lad that runs it really knows his stuff - and his write up about the Melbourne GP was outstanding.Your audio blog and Blog F1 are the first sites i have recommended to friends of mine who live abroad and can’t watch the GP or don’t get English commentary, or miss the race, ect
me, you were spot on with your Saturday prediction about the BMW drivers.What about the next race?.Might pop into the Bookies…
March 17th, 2008 at 6:24 pmme said:
it is a regular feature, and we can certainly feature ollie’s site. i wouldn’t say he’s young though
March 17th, 2008 at 6:25 pmChristine said:
That’s so cheeky!!
March 17th, 2008 at 6:49 pmSteven Roy said:
Scott,
Piquet isn’t the only ‘promising young driver’ who needs two seasons to win a championship. Lewis Hamilton had the same reputation until he hit GP2. Every other formula he was in his first season was nothing special but he always won the championship at the second attempt. It will be interesting to see how much he improves in his second F1 season.
Piquet senior arrived from Brazil with his own F3 team rather than drive for an existing team. Clearly his son has the same plan. I think he will end up being quite good but we need to see what he can do in a ‘neutral’ team. Of course if as I expect Renault becomes Team Piquet/Team Carlos Slim Helu then we may never find out.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:51 pmClive said:
How about getting away from the time-defined subtitle completely - wouldn’t “Your essential F1 podcast” be snappier and fudge the weekly/daily thing?
March 17th, 2008 at 7:09 pmlou said:
Have you checked out the highlights on ITV-F1.com? There pretty good if im honest, they even have hightlights from FP1 and 2! so if you miss either one its a good place to go. As well as doing a gerneral race review clip they have also done some of the major happenings that went on, for example they have a fotage of Glocks accident. I can imagine it may be useful to you if you are needing to look at something again for the podcast.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:26 pmTom said:
Hamillton DID cost mclaren the champpionship. Or atleast his dad did, If he hadn’t complained about the hungary incident then alonsoow ould have got an extra 2 points. Then alonso wouldn’t have gotten angry and released the emails and cost mclaren $100 million, the constructors world championship and alonso as a driver. And it was all started off by hamilton not letting alonso past at the beggining of Q3 at hungary, like he was told to, many times.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:13 pmSteven Roy said:
I have heard this theory before and it is rubbish. The theory is that Anthony Hamilton put in a protest to the FIA. It is impossible for him to put in any kind of protest. As I understand the rules Lewis Hamilton cannot put in a protest. Only an entrant (team) has the right to protest.
For some reason Alonso fans don’t think it was completely obvious to anyone watching what Alonso was doing. Martin Brundle understood it and explained it before Alonso left the pit. There was no reason for Anthony Hamilton to protest even if it were possible because Alonso’s actions were guaranteed to wind up Max because he likes the championship to be seen as totally fair even if it isn’t.
Alonso lost the championship because he spun off in the rain not because somebody’s daddy complained about him.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:20 pmScott Dryden said:
Although there are exceptions, often the poorer drivers get found out more and more as they move up the ladder, whereas those with genuine pace thrive. I remember the likes of Jackie Stewart eulogising over Jan Magnussen during his time in British Formula 3, referring to him as the best since Senna.
Piquet struggled badly during his first season of GP2, whereas Hamilton took to the category with relative ease. I do agree with you about the former being ‘quite good’, though. Drivers develop at different rates too, although I’ve not seen enough from Piquet so far to believe he can be placed in the same category as Alonso, Raikkonen, Massa, Hamilton, Rosberg, Heidfeld, Kubica, Kovalainen and Vettel.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pmScott Dryden said:
There are two key factors to consider here:
* Alonso’s remark about finding it strange that the team protested against itself (you hardly have to possess great deductive powers to understand what he was alleging).
* Reporting in the mainstream media of this theory as being fact. A quick Google search for the keywords ‘anthony hamilton protested alonso’ brings up this as the top result:
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/motorsport/story/0,,2143420,00.html
It’s worth thinking back to camp Hamilton’s reaction over allegations that he swore at Dennis using the pit-to-car radio. With this in mind, it seems utterly inconceivable to me that - if the above was incorrect - a statement wouldn’t have been released on the matter, given how Hamilton’s image was protected on the mere issue of alleged swearing at his boss.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:42 pmthe Blue Orange Lion said:
Yeah, Piquet situation IS an intriguing one, I agree. French RF1 paddock pass on RF1 team blog hinted that Nelson got the job because of some corporate sponsor and it was more like a marketing decision which cannot be fully explained on the blog (maybe selling cars in Brazil which is huge market, I dunno, just guessing), RF1 PP also said he felt Fisichella or Kovalainen were better drivers, something like this, my French isn’t perfect yet.
Maybe hiring Yamamoto was not such a bad idea, if Nelson’s performances go from bad to worse (which would be another case of Jan Magnussen syndrome - I certainly don’t want NP Jr. to fail, don’t get me wrong) then having a guy who actually competed in F1 could prove to be quite handy, aye?
Like Yoong / Davidson situation in 2002, Nelson needs to take some time off and a very happy Sakon replaces him somewhere around Barcelona race??? Just “possilibities”.
Hey, I’m curious - a question to Me & Christine: did you know Force India website features Sidepodcast & F1Minute in F1 Blogs section on the right? Advertising or do you think they like you?
http://www.forceindiaf1.com/default.aspx
Sidepodcast : Your Weekly F1 Podcast
F1 Minute : Bytesize Formula 1 News
Rediscover Formula One (sounds like a nice proposition but I already did, pity! Ha-ha!)
etc.
March 17th, 2008 at 9:54 pmSteven Roy said:
I always assumed the reark about the team protesting itself related to Ron Dennis phoning Max after he was threatened by Alonso. It must have seemed odd from Alonso’s perspective that he thought he had Ron backed in to a corner clearly expecting Ron to roll over and let him be number one and Ron Instead phoned Max and handed over the evidence that McLaren had Ferrari info.
I know the Anthony Hamilton protest story has appeared in all sorts of papers. As far as I can see it first appeared in the Spanish press and every other country picked up on it after that. But regardless what the newspapers say driver’s fathers or manager’s cannot make a protest. They can whinge and moan but there is no way for them to protest. I still can’t understand why anyone would think a protest was needed as it was blatantly obvious what was going on and equally obvious how Max would react to anything other than a red car doing it.
Personally I don’t think the FIA should have got involved and how they decided to penalise the constructor is utterly beyond me. Alonso parks in the pits and the team lose all its constructors points. Schumacher parks on the racing line at Monaco to stop Alonso getting a fast qualifying time and there is no constructors penalty.
March 17th, 2008 at 11:51 pmAlex Andronov said:
Scott,
Just read that article quickly and it doesn’t seem to suggest it as fact at all. It seems to be suggesting that other papers have alleged it.
The FIA’s international sporting code which applies in this matter says:
So it can’t have been Anthony. As far as I’m aware a competitor is a team. Most of the way through the document it refers to “competitors or drivers” here it only says “competitors” implying it is a team.
That would rather suggest Stephen Roy is correct - it was probably Max. I couldn’t totally rule out Lewis though, these documents are very labyrinthine.
Alex.
March 18th, 2008 at 12:39 amme said:
not advertising this time. i think they’re extending a hand to the community.
v.v.nice of them, wish more teams would do the same.
March 18th, 2008 at 2:14 amDan Brunell said:
Force India has just gone up a couple of notches in my book. Just took a look through their website… nice to see someone who gets it. A nice site for the fans and not just for the sponsors…
March 18th, 2008 at 3:00 pmSteven Roy said:
Normally any rules relating to motor racing refer to the entrant rather than the competitor but it all means the team for F1. That was Max’s excuse for penalising McLaren in Hungary as the entrant (or competitor) is responsible for the conduct of their drivers. Although it is beyond me how McLaren were supposed to make Alonso move or for that matter how they were supposed to make Hamilton pull over and let Alonso past as agreed.
March 19th, 2008 at 1:52 amScott Dryden said:
I accept what you say completely that Anthony Hamilton is in no way entitled to launch a protest, nor should race stewards act off information someone in his position provides. Personally though, I suspect the latter scenario occurred, as I just don’t have that much faith in the FIA’s judicial procures or those who are supposed enforce them.