A PERSONAL ACCOUNT OF EVENTS SURROUNDING THE
2005 US GRAND PRIX
Much has been said about the farce that occurred
on Sunday, June 19, in Indianapolis, and I feel that in the interests of
transparency, it would be worthwhile for someone who was actually present,
and participated in the discussions leading up to the start of the Grand
Prix, to provide a truthful account of what took place, both for the
100,000-plus fans who were present, and for the hundreds of millions of
people watching on television around the world.
While this is a genuine attempt to provide a factual timeline of the
relevant events that took place, should any minor detail or sequence be
disputed, it will not, in my opinion, affect in any way this account of
events that led up to arguably the most damaging spectacle in the recent
history of Formula One.
Background
For those who have not followed the recent political developments in Formula
One, it is fair to say that, for over a year now, the majority of teams have
felt at odds with the actions of the FIA and its President, Max Mosley,
concerning the regulations, and the way in which those regulations have been
introduced, or are proposed to be introduced. Not a weekend has gone by
where some, or all, of the teams are not discussing or disputing these
regulations. This is so much the case that it is common knowledge the
manufacturers have proposed their own series commencing January 1, 2008, and
this is supported by at least two of the independent teams. The general
perception is that, in many instances, these issues have become personal,
and it is my opinion that was a serious contributory factor to the failure
to find a solution that would have allowed all 20 cars to compete in
Sunday’s United States Grand Prix.
The Facts
Friday, June 17
I noticed that Ricardo Zonta’s Toyota had stopped, but in all honesty, did
not pay any attention to the reasons why; however, I actually witnessed Ralf
Schumacher’s accident, both on the monitors, and more significantly, I could
see what took place from my position on the pit wall. This necessitated a
red flag, and in the numerous replays on the monitors, it looked very much
like the cause of the accident was a punctured rear tyre.
Throughout the afternoon, numerous people in the paddock suggested it was a
tyre failure and commented that it was similar to the serious accident which
befell Ralf Schumacher during the 2004 US Grand Prix. Later that evening was
the first time I was aware of a potential problem with the Michelin tyres at
this event. In all honesty, I didn’t pay a great deal of attention, as our
team is on Bridgestone tyres.
Saturday, June 18
On arriving at the circuit, the word throughout the paddock was that there
was a potential problem with the rear tyres supplied to all Michelin teams
for this event, and it became evident as the first and second sessions were
run that most of the affected teams were being very conservative with the
amount of on-track running they were doing. In addition, Toyota announced
that it had substituted Ricardo Zonta for Ralf Schumacher, who would take no
further part in the event. Speculation was rife in the paddock that some
Michelin teams might not take part in qualifying. Also, during the practice
session, I was informed there would be a Team Principals’ meeting with
Bernie Ecclestone at 1430 hrs after qualifying, which I incorrectly assumed
would centre around the Michelin issue.
Qualifying took place, and indeed, all 20 cars qualified for Sunday’s Grand
Prix.
At approximately 1420 hrs, I attended Bernie’s office, and with
representatives present from all other teams, including Ferrari, the meeting
commenced. Surprisingly, the main topic of conversation was the number of
events and calendar for 2006, followed by a suggestion that a meeting be
convened at the next Grand Prix to discuss two issues only – firstly, a
proposal for a single-tyre supplier in Formula One, and secondly, whether or
not it would be desirable to qualify with or without a race fuel load in
2006. Only at the very end of the meeting did the Michelin tyre issue arise,
and in fairness, it was not discussed in any great detail. I personally
found this strange, but as I have stated, it did not affect Minardi
directly, and therefore I had no reason to pursue the matter.
Throughout Saturday evening, there was considerable speculation in the
paddock that the tyre issue was much more serious than at first thought, and
people were talking about a fresh shipment of tyres being flown overnight
from France, and what penalty the Michelin teams would take should those
tyres be used. By the time I left the paddock, people were taking bets on
Minardi and Jordan scoring points!
Later that evening, I checked with our Sporting Director on what
developments had occurred, and was told that the issue was indeed very
serious, and the possibility existed that the Michelin teams would not take
part in the race.
Sunday, June 19
I arrived at the circuit at 0815 hrs, only to find the paddock was buzzing
with stories suggesting the Michelin teams would be unable to take part in
the Grand Prix. I was then handed a copy of correspondence between Michelin,
the FIA, and the Michelin teams that revealed the true extent of the
problem. By now, journalists were asking if Minardi would agree to a
variation of the regulations to allow the Michelin teams to compete, and
what penalties I felt would be appropriate.
A planned Minardi press briefing took place at 0930 hrs, and as it was
ending, I was summoned to an urgent meeting, along with Jordan, with Bernie
Ecclestone, the two most senior Michelin representatives present at the
circuit, IMS President Tony George, Team Principals, and technical
representatives from the Michelin teams. At this meeting, Michelin, to its
credit, admitted that the tyres available were unable to complete a race
distance around the Indianapolis circuit without a change to the track
configuration, so as to reduce the speed coming out of the last turn onto
the banking. Much background information was provided as to the enormous
efforts that Michelin, with support from its teams, had undertaken in the
preceding 48 hours to try and resolve the problem, but it was clear that all
those efforts had failed to produce a suitable solution that wouldn’t
involve support from the non-Michelin teams, and ultimately, the FIA.
What was requested of the Bridgestone teams was to allow a chicane to be
constructed at Turn 13, which would then allow Michelin to advise their
teams that, in their opinion, the tyres would be able to complete the race
distance. It was made very clear that this was the only viable option
available, as previous suggestions from the FIA, such as speed-limiting the
Michelin cars through Turn 13, could, and probably would, give rise to a
monumental accident. This idea, as well as one concerning the possibility of
pit stops every 10 laps, were dismissed, and discussion returned to the only
sensible solution – a chicane. During this discussion, a technical
representative with specific knowledge of the Indianapolis circuit, together
with representatives from IMS, were tasked with preparing the design of a
chicane, and Bernie Ecclestone agreed to speak with the one Team Principal
not present, Mr Todt, and to inform the FIA President, Max Mosley, who was
not present at Indianapolis, of the planned solution to allow the successful
running of the US Grand Prix. With only a few hours now remaining to the
start of the race, we agreed to reconvene as soon as Bernie had responses
from Messrs Todt and Mosley.
At approximately 1055 hrs, Bernie informed us that not only would Mr Todt
not agree, stating that it was not a Ferrari problem, but an FIA and a
Michelin problem, but also Mr Mosley had stated that if any attempts were
made to alter the circuit, he would cancel the Grand Prix forthwith. These
words had a familiar tone to me, as they were similar to those I had heard
around midnight on the Friday preceding the 2005 Australian Grand Prix, when
I was told by all the senior FIA representatives present that the Australian
Grand Prix would be cancelled forthwith if I did not withdraw pending legal
action between Minardi and the FIA. Once again, Mr Mosley was not present at
that Grand Prix! It is fair to say at this point that the vast majority of
people present in the room both felt and stated that Mr Mosley had
completely overstepped the mark, had no idea whatsoever of the gravity of
the situation, and furthermore, cared even less about the US Grand Prix, its
organisers, the fans, and indeed, the hundreds of millions of television
viewers around the world who were going to be affected by his intransigence.
By this time, the nine teams had discussed running a non-championship race,
or a race in which the Michelin teams could not score points, and even a
race whereby only the Michelin teams used the new chicane, and indeed, every
other possible option that would allow 20 cars to participate and put on a
show, thereby not causing the enormous damage to Formula One that all those
present knew would otherwise occur.
By now, most present felt the only option was to install the chicane and
race, if necessary, without Ferrari, but with 18 cars, in what would
undoubtedly be a non-championship race. We discussed with Bernie the effects
of the FIA withdrawing its staff, and agreed among ourselves a Race
Director, a Safety Car driver, and other essential positions, and all agreed
that, under the circumstances, what was of paramount importance was that the
race must go ahead. All further agreed that since we would most likely be
denied FIA facilities, such as scales and post-race scrutineering, every
competitor would instruct his team and drivers to conduct themselves in the
spirit of providing an entertaining race for the good of Formula One.
At this point, we called for all 20 drivers, and indeed, all 20 arrived, at
which point we informed them of our plan. While I cannot testify that each
and every driver agreed with what we were proposing, what I can say with
certainty is that no driver disagreed, and indeed, members of the Grand Prix
Drivers’ Association discussed overseeing the construction of a suitable
chicane. Jean Todt was the only significant team individual not present, and
the Ferrari drivers stated this decision was up to Mr Todt.
I feel it is important to stress that, at this stage, and mindful of the
total impossibility – call it force majeure if you wish – of 14 cars being
able to compete in the race, the nine teams represented agreed they would
not take part in the race unless a solution was found in the interests of
Formula One as a global sport, as it was clear to all present that the
sport, and not the politics, had to prevail if we were to avoid an impending
disaster.
After a short break, we reconvened without the drivers. When I arrived in
Bernie’s office, Flavio Briatore was on the telephone to Mr Mosley, and it
was quite clear from the body language of the others gathered in the room
that Mr Mosley was having none of our suggestions. At the conclusion of the
telephone call, it was obvious that many of those in the room had lost all
faith in Mr Mosley and his ability to perform his function as President of
the FIA in respect of Formula One matters.
I’m sure this sentence will be treated with contempt by Mr Mosley, but what
must be realised is that there are various reasons that other Team
Principals, and the most senior people in Formula One, will not say publicly
what they openly feel privately about Mr Mosley, his politics and his
governance of the sport. There is a great temptation to go into those
reasons in detail, but that is for another day. Suffice to say, those
gathered at Indianapolis felt Mr Mosley, and to a lesser degree, the lack of
co-operation from Mr Todt, were about to be responsible for the greatest
FIAsco in Formula One’s recent history.
Discussions then took place concerning the other telephone calls with Mr
Mosley from, among others, Bernie Ecclestone, Ron Dennis and Tony George,
and it was clearly revealed to what extent Mr Mosley was prepared to go in
order to achieve his aims. To my total disgust, it was stated that Mosley
had informed Mr Martin, the FIA’s most senior representative in the USA,
that if any kind of non-championship race was run, or any alteration made to
the circuit, the US Grand Prix, and indeed, all FIA-regulated motorsport in
the US, would be under threat – again, exactly the same tactic that was used
in threatening the Australian Grand Prix and Australian motorsport in March
of this year.
By now, it was evident Mosley had bullied the US Grand Prix promoter into
submission, Bernie Ecclestone was powerless to intervene, and all efforts of
the Team Principals, with the exception of Jean Todt, had failed to save the
2005 US Grand Prix.
At this point, the pit lane had opened and a hasty discussion took place
concerning whether or not the Michelin teams would go to the grid. A radio
had been delivered to me by team personnel at this stage, and I was able to
know which cars were going to the grid. It is interesting to note that the
Jordan Team Principal was not present at this time, and indeed, it was the
Jordans that first proceeded to the grid, followed by the Ferraris. After
discussion with Bernie Ecclestone, it was agreed the Michelin teams would go
to the grid, but were absolutely prevented from participating in the race
because of the tyre situation.
We then proceeded to the grid, at which point I asked Jordan’s Colin Kolles
if he intended to stand by the other teams or participate in the race. In no
uncertain terms, I was told Jordan would be racing. I was also approached by
a Bridgestone representative, who informed me that Bridgestone wished us to
race. This left me with one of the most difficult decisions I have had to
take during my time in F1, as I did not want to race, but given my current
relationship with Mr Mosley, felt certain heavy sanctions would follow if I
did not. I made it clear to Bernie Ecclestone, and several Team Principals,
that if the Jordans either went off or retired, I would withdraw the Minardi
cars from the race.
It is important for people to realise that Minardi, the seven Michelin
teams, Bernie Ecclestone, and the promoters did not agree with Mr Mosley’s
tactics. For the reasons previously outlined, it may take some considerable
time, if ever, for this to be admitted, but there is no question in my mind
that the farce that occurred on Sunday, June 19, 2005 at Indianapolis was
the responsibility of the FIA President, Max Mosley, and compounded by the
lack of support from Jean Todt.
For the avoidance of doubt, in my opinion, Michelin was responsible enough
to admit that the problem was of their creation. When one considers that
even the replacement, Barcelona-specification tyres that were shipped to IMS,
when tested, apparently exhibited the same characteristics as those that
originally failed, this clearly is a case of force majeure, as I do not for
a moment believe that Michelin intentionally brought tyres to the event that
were unsuitable for competition.
Far more importantly, however, Mosley refused to accept any of the solutions
offered, and that refusal was, I believe, politically motivated. Therefore,
I feel he failed in his duty, and that is why I have called for his
resignation.
Much discussion and debate will undoubtedly take place over the coming weeks
and months, but I believe this is a truthful and honest account of the
facts, and not the fiction, surrounding the responsibility for this FIAsco.
People can now make up their own minds!
Paul Stoddart
June 20, 2005
