Fernando Alonso, McLaren, Circuit de Catalunya, 2015

Dennis regrets “inaccurate” Alonso crash remarks

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

Fernando Alonso, McLaren, Circuit de Catalunya, 2015In the round-up: Ron Dennis admits his remarks denying Fernando Alonso suffered a concussion in his pre-season testing crash were “inaccurate”.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Dennis: I failed with Alonso concussion denial (The Telegraph)

"It was not the best performance by me. I understand why the press beat me up for being inaccurate."

Newey's son to team up with Schumacher junior (Reuters)

"Formula One designer Adrian Newey's teenage son Harrison will be team mate to Michael Schumacher's 15-year-old son Mick in German Formula Four this season."

Renault against radical Formula One rule changes for 2017 (Autosport)

"Obviously we will take any changes into account but if we had to choose we would prefer to keep some stability."

Giedo van der Garde Q&A: 'I’m looking forward to getting back behind the wheel...' (Adam Cooper's F1 Blog)

"I don’t see any problems because in the end we had a good year last year, not only the results (of testing), on a personal side it was very good. I don’t see any problems with it."

Mr Right, or Mr Right Now? (ESPN)

"Sauber's financial woes are no secret. That van der Garde has prioritised his own interests over those of the team - and the employment prospects of the 300-plus people working at Hinwil - has not gone unnoticed within the rarefied confines of the paddock."

Todt & Saillant: le dénouement part 1 (A former F1 doc writes)

"Philippe (Streiff), a staunch defender of Todt and Saillant, was unceremoniously thrown under the bus, like an old newspaper."

Australian Grand Prix Betting: Champ Lewis Hamilton Returns As Favourite (Unibet)

Read my Australian Grand Prix preview for Unibet.

Tweets

https://twitter.com/_markgallagher/status/575555278936080384

Comment of the day

The van der Garde story is producing more headlines F1 doesn’t need:

Too bad, I like Sauber as a team and Kaltenborn as principal, but this smacks of bad faith and it’s just one more drop in F1’s bad news bucket.
@Maciek

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Daniel, Garf, Michael Griffin, Monkzie, Nitin24, Obi-Spa Kenobi and Dodge5847!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Michael Schumacher led a one-two for Ferrari in the first round of the 2000 season, 15 years ago today. McLaren drivers Mika Hakkinen and David Coulthard led the early stages but both dropped out with engine failures.

Meanwhile Jenson Button’s first race came to an early end:

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 91 comments on “Dennis regrets “inaccurate” Alonso crash remarks”

    1. Newey teaming up with Schumacher, who’d have thought.

      1. I was hoping Newey Jnr would be a 20-something aerodynamicist who saw potential in Mick and their plan was to join up and smash all the records set by their fathers

      2. That’s motorsports royalty.

    2. That article on vdG is nonsense. If vdG “stepped aside” for the good of Sauber as a team, his career in F1 is over. So in the worst case, even if all other teams shun him, he gets the result he was about to get. By getting the drive, if he does well, no one will care *how* he got the drive. If he does badly, he’s out, which is what he would have had anyway. So the idea that vdG should have “stepped aside” is ridiculous on its face.

      1. Sauber will ignore the courts decision and he won’t run in Melbourne anyway.

        1. ColdFly F1 (@)
          12th March 2015, 0:41

          @yoshif8tures, Why?
          Better only breaching 1 contract than 3. Sauber just needs to get an agreement with the 3rd (non-)driver and their backers. Sauber does not want to forego the sponsorship of the other backers, miss a chance of points (just look at last year), and get some valuable racing experience.

          The only solution is via a mutual agreement. Sauber got themselves into this mess, and now need to take some humble pie/pain pills to get them out of it.

          PS the judge as already decided their decision (upholding the arbitration outcome) is valid for all countries, not just Australia (Victoria)!

          1. ColdFly F1 (@)
            12th March 2015, 1:23

            Fate of #F1 driver Giedo van der Garde will be revealed at 4.30pm when @SCVSupremeCourt delivers judgment in @SauberF1Team appeal.

            Judge tells Sauber lawyer the team should be taking steps in preparation for van der Garde to race, in case it loses the appeal.

            1. ColdFly F1 (@)
              12th March 2015, 1:24

              link and that is 4.30pm OZ time (11hrs ahead of the UK)

        2. which will achieve what exactly?

          1. @hohum, Judging by the fact that the court has now ordered Sauber to hand over a list of their assets in Australia that can be seized if they refuse to let van der Garde compete, not to mention that van der Garde has now applied for a contempt order against Kaltenborn that could see her being arrested if van der Garde is blocked from competing, ignoring the court order would result in Sauber’s TP in jail and the team being forced to withdraw from the race due to having no cars to race.

            At this rate, it makes you wonder what Sauber can do – either bench one of the other drivers and risk a lawsuit from them (given that their lawyers have complained that Sauber never told them about the arbitration proceedings), or refuse and have the bailiffs seize everything on Friday.

      2. Nobody can ever sue his way into a cockpit. He won´t drive. It´s just that when the court decides he should drive he will have a further case after not driving, getting compensation. If Sauber can pay that, that is.

        1. GB (@bgp001ruled)
          12th March 2015, 2:45

          @crammond yes they can! vdg will!!! he doesnt want money: he could have gone that way directly, instead of suing them for the seat so that he can claim money!!!! he is thinking career, not finances!

          1. Exactly!

            Saying something like this:

            “Sauber’s financial woes are no secret. That van der Garde has prioritised his own interests over those of the team – and the employment prospects of the 300-plus people working at Hinwil – has not gone unnoticed within the rarefied confines of the paddock.”

            is totally irrelevant.

            Sauber promised him a drive and put that on paper. Now Sauber have to respect that.

            A racing driver wants to drive, and we should respect Van der Garde for going as far as he did to realise his dream.

            1. I think it is more a case of by forcing one of the other drivers out, they will have brought more money to the team than van der Garde, so the team is out of pocket that way. Plus whoever doesn’t drive (out of the three) not only takes their sponsorship with them but also will have a claim for compensation. Whether van der Garde’s intention is just “to drive”, this has further financial consequences than the possibility of just wanting compensation for not being allowed to drive.

          2. @bgp001ruled

            Maybe he would like to drive, but no way he will. And he knows that. A F1-team doesn´t put a driver into the seat because he has a legal right to be there, furthermore Nasr and Ericsson have that right, too. As unfortunate as this is, but I highly suspect Sauber have calculated that through, including expectable fines, and still thought it was worth it.

      3. The real motive here is to take over Sauber, JDVG being a trojan horse of sorts. He’ll end up with shares in the new team and a potential seat if things go as his backers have planned all along. Sauber is a great buy if you can force them into administration.

        1. Yeah, this version makes much more sense than “being selfish and not thinking on the 300 jobs”.
          If his sponsor (McGregor) can close the deal then these employees will stay where they are.

          Who i hardly believe will stay is Mrs Kaltenhorn. Under her direction Peter Sauber may lose control over his own team.

      4. Vdg is the victim here, he and sutil. Sauber shouldn’t have lied and take their money. Their aim is too survive, but they went too far. I salute vdg for taking what is his. Its not going to work out right for either, which is regrettable. Corporate fail i say, 1 rich men beat a dozen rich f1 barons.

      5. Peppermint-Lemon (@)
        12th March 2015, 7:31

        Agreed, a BS article, badly written.

      6. rename it Sober.

      7. His career is already over. Unless you’re Alonso, you don’t get away with things like this. Not saying that he’s wrong per se, as clearly he has a contract, just that if I were a team principle in a sport as unscrupulous as Formula One, I wouldn’t want him near my team.

    3. Paul (@frankjaeger)
      12th March 2015, 0:15

      Anybody have any idea what P1+P2 are usually GMT? I’m guessing 6am odd here? I’m deliberating whether i’ll be fit to go into lectures the same morning haha

      Those 2000 cars are crazy stubby in comparison, I didn’t realise the modern chassis were so elongated in comparison

      1. @frankjaeger11pm gmt. The modern cars don’t refuel. This is why they look ungainly long.

    4. Maybe Ron shouldn’t have said anything about the crash in the first place. Now he as caused a few problems with himself and the press, and usually the press wins.

      1. The press made a big deal out of nothing really. Ron isn’t a doctor. He insisted Alonso didn’t have a concussion because the exams showed nothing. In all matters Alonso really seemed perfectly fine. There was nothing showing anything in his head.
        BUT he had small memory loss and the doctors concluded that he had a light concussion that the scans simply can’t show because there is nothing much to show since it was just the brain being shaken and little and then ending up as usual. That shake could be called concussion and caused the memory and fainting problems but as per examination it can be shown and the person seems perfectly fine.

        So yes, medically Ron has a point. Alonso doesn’t have anything but he did had a concussion if you are a doctor and know to read more than just an x-ray.

    5. Translation of Ronspeak;

      I’m really sorry for deliberately lying to the press and deliberately distorting the truth.

      Inaccurate?
      Imagine a child caught lying to his mother using that defence or even in a court of law.

      I’m sorry for my inaccuracy your honour,

      That just doesn’t fly.

      1. Yep… I’m sure nobody has ever lied unknowingly in their life before /s. And everyone is also a medical expert at the same time /s.

      2. He didn’t lie at anything. The exams showed nothing so he assumed there was nothing because his no doctor to know that you can have a concussion even when nothing is shown after being examined.

    6. That article in ESPN is one pathetic nonsense.
      If anyone needs to put team’s interests before their own, it’s the captain of the ship, or in this case Monisha. If she feels so strongly about saving all those people, maybe she could have parted with some of her share of the team ownership, in exchange for some finances.
      As someone who was fortunate enough to learn the lesson with just 2 months paycheck at stake, I can say that you should NEVER part with a single penny of your own paycheck, before owners part with 100% of theirs. Because it’s their business and not yours, and they are the ones who should be making special sacrifices, not you. If they are not going to part with all they have for their own business, why should you part with anything you have for someone else’s business? You are not an owner, or a partner or a general manager or whatever. If they can’t see it fit to part with some sum of money themselves, why should it be expected of you to invest an equal amount of time or money for something that isn’t even yours, and for a situation that was non of your making.

      1. Brilliant comment!

        Not just a great a response to the article, but also a solid piece of advice for the future

      2. Best comment I’ve seen so far on this topic. All other commentary didn’t sit right with me but you made it crystal clear.

      3. Well said Biggsy. Especially if van de Garde’s sponsors (and/or his father-in-law) indeed have the aim of buying (a stake in) Sauber, and wanted ownership in return for more money last year already – apparently Sauber didn’t want to give that up last year, but then they have to also deal with the consequences now.

      4. Also the article ignored that his career in F1 was already over if he just went away anyway so by not making friends in the paddock doesn’t make things any worse for him. He had nothing to lose, therefore is irrelevant if other teams will also dislike what he did.

    7. Re: Alonso and Dennis….

      This is exactly what I alluded to in my comment 4 days ago:

        1. Agreed, in these times, total transparency is best, or you’ll get called out on it. @mach1

        2. ColdFly F1 (@)
          12th March 2015, 1:01

          Good comment – you deserve the CO4DA (it’s like the pole trophy, nice to have but not as good as the ‘real one’)

      1. Nobody seems to think it strange that Alonso is training on the other side of the world. I’m sorry but training is no excuse to miss the season opener with the team paying you north of 30mil a year. There is still something suspect about the situation. Any rationalization of Alonso missing this event has no more plausibility than there is a deep riff between his side and Mclaren and/or Honda and it’s due to the topic of this post, transparency. Flavio is Alonsos manager and just gave a statement that Mclaren is still withholding information.

        There is also the Ferrari onboard video that has only been described as ‘SPOOKY’.

        1. No I don’t think it is strange nor suspect at all. I believe FA has been asymptomatic. He was cleared to drive but his doctors’ advice was to not risk another knock on the head just yet. I believe he could have ignored that advice and been driving but decided to take the advice instead. The article here the other day said it was his decision. Ie. no big conspiracy (not that I’m clear on what sinister things some think might be going on.)

          Briatore saying Mac is withholding info does not have to mean something sinister either. The crash was either a mistake by FA or something mechanical, and I don’t know that they are obliged to share said mechanical issue. The car has been far from rock solid and they have only just launched. Any number of unpredictable things could have happened with the brakes or software etc. and its something they’ll have to get past, and will.

          1. You’ve missed the point. He has no medical reason to not be track side with his team. Him not showing up in oz should be a clear indication that there is a rift between him and some entity within the team OR he is literally the worst sportsman in F1. Training is no excuse, he would have been in his peak condition at the time of his accident, he can trAin anywhere on the planet. He is deliberately choosing to be on the opposite side of the planet, pay attention.

            1. what do you mean no medical reason ? you are deep into conspiracy theories aren’t you, wow!!!

              Its on doctors advise hes not in car in Aus. Training is not the excuse, not getting concussed for 2nd time with-in 21 days of the first which can be fatal sometimes is the reason, sounds good enuf reason to me. And btw he tweets his training pics n info all the time.

            2. Ok, so what kind of sportsman doesn’t show up to support his team. They pay him 30/40/50? Million a year, he has a private jet. What is the medical condition that prevents him from being in the pit with his team?. Very selfish, but I guess you’re right, this is alonso.

            3. It’s probably better for his rehabilitation to avoid the trip to Australia with jetlag and all. Sleeping well is probably important when recovering from concussion.

            4. Aside from the fact that his presence would generate massive media attention and would be an unnecessary distraction for McLaren.

              Boullier said Alonso would be doing the simulator work, no?

          2. Also you don’t know what mclaren would be obliged to share with Alonso? Do you work for mclaren?. Flavio was clear the information not released was between him and his client, not mclaren and the world. Nice spin efforts, but I’d appreciate you addressing the question, why isn’t alonso showing up in oz?

        2. He’s recovering from a concussion and you’re asking why he hasn’t needlessly taken a 20-odd hour flight to Melbourne? I’d’ve thought the answer to that was obvious.

          1. He can tweet his work out schedule but he can’t take a 20 hr flight first class or private? Alonso is making a choice here and actions speak louder than words or any tweet.

          2. Needlessly might not be the word to describe your 30+ million dollar keystone athlete and team leader to show up to the first race with this new role to galvanize and support the team ahead of their debut with a new works engine partner.

          3. I don’t think you’re being serious here. How is sending a tweet comparable to getting on a flight to the other side of the world?

            The very fact that Alonso is an expensive investment is exactly why they’re not going to risk impeding his recovery by doing something as needless – which is exactly the word – as what you’re suggesting.

            1. How is flying to Dubai and attending boat shows more valuable than being a team leader? Come on Keith you have to admit it’s just a little suspect. The guy is FINE, for travel, training, he can drive an f1 car in two weeks but can’t attend a race this week? I can’t believe you’re being serious. I know as a journalist you have a poker face and it’s right for you to not fan flames without evidence – but Really, recovery and viewing the data remotely is very political statement and Alonso is the best at this.

            2. I want to agree, but training itself isn’t without risk, including the cycling he’s mentioned. I’m sure he could train in Melbourne too. If travelling to Melbourne isn’t on, perhaps being at MTC for the race would be a reasonable alternative?

            3. Another factor (and thinking about it, quite a fair one) might be privacy.

            4. Here you go Keith, the guy who’s in no medical condition to fly in a private jet to support the team paying him 30+ million. Which by the way on Quantas is a 7hr and 45 minute flight – the exact same time as it takes to get to malaysia.

              https://twitter.com/alo_oficial/status/576002087827329024

              The guy in that photo has no other reason to not be in australia other than – he doesnt want to be there. Why? Perhaps the FIA investigation will answer this, perhaps Vettels onboard video footage has some answers.

          4. He took a flight from Spain to Dubai, attends boat shows, trains. Poor guy, I apologize for suggesting that it’s a bit unsportsman like to not support your team when you’ve been medically cleared to do pretty much everything except drive an f1 car (can’t get a concussion on a road bike now can you) Get well Alonso and enjoy those short flights from Dubai to your next playground!

            1. It’s a lot less likely on a road bike than a F1 car. Besides, if McLaren thought Alonso could train better/healthier in Melbourne than wherever he chooses to be, they’d have waved his contract at him to make sure he attended. They didn’t because they figured it was better to let Alonso find his own way back to health.

            2. Well, first of all with the Dubai climate and facilities, I am sure that they can offer Fernando all comfort and support needed to prepare himself @layercake. And lets not forget that the Middle east has become a very much frequented hub for transfers between flights from Europe to the far east.

              In other words: Alonso flew half way to have a nice base. He can then easily get a flight from there to Malaysia, and it won’t be a 12+hour affair. And its close to Bahrain too, so he can make a bit of a base there for several months.

              Doctors advised them to not risk things, and surely its logical to follow that advice instead of risking his career and life in ignoring them. There is nothing “strange” there.

            3. @Layercake What a disingenuous load of hooey, including your fake apology for calling FA ‘a bit unsportsmanlike’ when in fact you called him ‘literally the worst sportsman in F1’. You can’t even quote yourself right, and you tell ME to pay attention?

            4. People need to stop acting like alonso is on the edge of life. He’ll be piloting an F1 car at 200mph in a few weeks, he is literally probably in the best shape of his life right now, or very close. If he were anywhere near as frail and sad as the commentors here are describing then he shouldnt be driving an F1 car for the next 6mos. Alonso is choosing to be as a far away from ron/that car/possibly honda as he can be, on purpose. He’s never been a sportsman – he’s alonso.

    8. There is nothing wrong with prioritizing your own interests. What Sauber tried to do was theft, and I can’t even fathom why people are trying to defend them. It’s not Giedo’s fault that Sauber are in such a poor financial situation, but ironically he’s part of the reason Sauber are still functioning.

    9. “Sauber’s financial woes are no secret. That van der Garde has prioritised his own interests over those of the team – and the employment prospects of the 300-plus people working at Hinwil – has not gone unnoticed within the rarefied confines of the paddock.”

      That article is pure nonsense ! Van der Garde also has people behind him supporting his career, but no, we should secure the team’s future, a future that’s put in jeopardy not by Van der Garde, nor Sauber itself, but rather by F1’s current bussiness.

      So it’s okay for Van der Garde to step down and avoid claiming what he rightly owns, so F1 broken system doesn’t eat up another team. Instead of going to the root of the problem, you call the driver “selfish”…

      Besides, if you want to save your bussiness, don’t make such a blatant mistake… This coming from a team headed by a lawyer stinks badly.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        12th March 2015, 1:07

        fully agree. (@fer-no65)
        And as mentioned above, vdG’s backers helped Sauber financially last year. The argument could potentially be reversed, with vdG’s money last year and commitment of more this year, the 300 people would already sit home since Christmas last year.

        But I guess that is why I stopped reading ESPNF1.

      2. Exactly, VDG had no control of the teams business or budget but he still contributed enough to keep the team going through 2014 despite having to wait until 2015 to get a racing seat, having already sat-out 1 years racing he cannot be compensated by a simple refund of what he paid Sauber (assuming they can) for a deal involving a year out of racing (2014) compensated for by a years racing in 2015.
        Racing drivers can pay to drive only because as a racing driver they can gain publicity for business’, campaigns and products, if they are not in the public eye they lose their sponsors, 2015 may well be VdG last year as an F1 driver but if he can’t drive in 15 it will mean his career ended in 13.

      3. I would think that if Sauber had offered the VdGarde “team” the chance to up their “bid” prior to taking on Nasr, especially if it was highlighted that there probably wouldn’t be a car to drive for the year if they couldn’t would have been sufficient to either get more money from honouring the original deal with VdGarde or be a reason to cancel that deal in mutual agreement and sign Nasr anyway if they coudn’t.

        I can only guess that the reason they didn’t was the fear of VdGarde wanting (part of) the money he supplied them for 2014 back. But sticking your head in the sand has never been a viable strategy, and even less so in cases like these. And given that VdGarde sort of paid up front too, just like Ericsson did, its hard to fault him for wanting them to honour an agreement.

        But its very interesting to see how “the paddock” views the situation, I have seen several comments in more or less the same line, so it seems VdGarde might be stirring the pot and changing the rules for the long term here (much like cases where others were fighting for their rights) and not be valued for that until much later.

    10. omarR-pepper
      12th March 2015, 1:10

      Van der Garde has entered into a Piquet-Jr situation. I know he hasn’t done anything wrong, it was Sauber who breached the contract, but teams are going to see him as the one who pointed his finger to “accuse”. And as mentioned in one of the comments above, Sauber will have to settle an agreement with him, but not letting him drive to enter into another legal problem with one of its current drivers… and then VdG will be set aside.
      He had better starts looking for another category.

      1. ColdFly F1 (@)
        12th March 2015, 1:21

        I was skeptical when I first heard about the court case, and though vdG was just trying to maximise his pay-out (like deliberately leaving it to the last minute).
        But the more I read about it, the more I understand and support his actions. His interview in the Adam Cooper blog also helped, as vdG seems to be willing to build bridges.
        Sauber is clearly in the wrong here, and they need to drive a negotiated solution.

        To me Piquet-JR and even Sutil ( the glassing incident) are in a different ‘leprosy’ league than vdG.

      2. And yet Alonso and Ron Dennis are teamed up again, Maclaren need the package Alonso brings, so why wouldn’t another team that needs the package VdG brings team up with him? of course if they were planning to cheat their driver they might prefer someone else.

        1. VdG is no Alonso. Alonso is probably the only person in the paddock apart from maybe Lewis Hamilton who could have pulled that off.

      3. It reminds me a bit of the Bosman case– the football player who took his teams to the EU-courts to fight for his right to choose his own team without having to pay the transfer fee (until then teams had treated the players more or less as their property in selling and dealmaking)
        At the time Bosman was derided more or less universally by clubs and by other players. But it changed the way clubs operate for good

        1. Yes, I agree that is an apt comparison @bascb, though here at least the ‘players’, ie. the drivers more or less seem to be agreeing with what van de Garde does (see Sky interview JB, Perez both say Sauber in the wrong; Massa wanting to not say much but agreeing in principle).

    11. Ron Dennis – a dodge wrapped in an obfuscation surrounded by a manipulation.

    12. The writer of the ESPN Sauber/vdG article acts as though vdG is the origin of this predicament. It is easy to understand why Sauber made some of the decisions they did, but, the burden was and is still on them to resolve the situation with vdG. Sauber initiated the contracts with all of the drivers involved. Sauber did not adequately resolve the contract with vdG before officially announcing new drivers with new contracts. Agree or disagree with the course vdG has taken to deal with this, he is not responsible for the original problem. What else could he have done? Don’t sue to race and still not get paid? None of his options seem like a win/win.

      I do not believe vdG will race in Melbourne or any other races this season for Sauber) unless a new unforeseen agreement is reached, doubtful). Why? Because letting vdG race would only open Sauber up to new litigation similar to what they are already involved in. This could also potentially put any moneys brought in by one or the other of the new drivers at risk.

      This is such a sad and clumsy way for Sauber to start the new season. It is somewhat a result of the greed of FOM and the unfair distribution of prize funds. But, that just rings like a poor excuse at this point in time.

      1. If they want to avoid having to pay something to one of their three drivers, they could just make a new contract with Van der Garde for 2016 for example and in exchange, Van der Garde stops his claims for the 2015 season.

        Everyone happy: Ericcson and Nasr get to drive this year and Van der Garde gets a seat next year.

        1. @paeschli – That is exactly what they need, a creative solution that can work for all parties.

        2. What you said is a smart solution but i doubt egos will allow it.

    13. Remember the day Ron Dennis told the media: We make history, you write about it.

      Ron, your arrogance is second only to BE. It is ok to have a big ego, but you have to know when to tone it down. And, when you are caught lying, does not state inaccurate. Admit you lied. It is much more dignifying.

      1. He didn’t lie. That’s really what he thought. He thought that there was no concussion because the exams showed nothing. His no doctor and didn’t realize there was more than that.
        And admitting he was wrong at what he said showed he hasn’t got the ego you people think. The guy is the most misunderstood individual in F1 i swear. His nothing like Bernie at all. His extremely honest and straightforward but just because he has a little OCD people think his some big villain when his nothing like that at all.

    14. About Kate Walker’s article, it surely got some strong points…

      Formula One is a team sport, after all, and no one driver is more important than the survival of a team. Whether or not the label is deserved, van der Garde has painted himself as a trouble-maker, a liability, a man who will sacrifice the many to save himself.

      Yet, F1 is still a sport, no matter how much of a corporate circus it has become. Sports are supposed to uphold certain values. There’s a distinct line between right and wrong and we all know where Sauber stands right now. If what she wrote comes true, it’ll just strengthen our belief that F1’s truly rotten to the core.

    15. I’d like to see that ESPN reporter act in his employers best interest by not writing such rubbish.

      Anyone who puts an employer above their own interests is a fool unless that employer is doing work for the good of humanity.

      If he’d accepted his fate and left it be then sure all those jobs may be fine. But why should he care about a bunch of people saving their jobs at his expense? They’ve clearly not been loyal to him so to hell with them.

      And if the team had collapsed then they would have been bought for sure. If that still happens they still will be bought, but Kaltenborn is finished.

    16. So the author of that ESPN article is basically justifying for any 300+ employee company close to bankruptcy that it is okay for them to steal money.

      If a company goes bankrupt doing things legally the company is bankrupt. There is no excuse to start doing things illegally

    17. German AMuS has drawings of what the Mercedes idea for a protectional ring above/around the drivers head would look like.

      I think it acutally looks quite good, and certainly would be worth testing to see how it works in real

      1. @bascb This is the 1st I’ve of heard of this idea and looking at the image I can’t actually see what sort of extra protection if any it would supply. Any extra info on what it’s supposed to do?

        I’ll admit it looks pretty cool though

        1. The “ring” is there to make sure that objects (like the tyre that killed Surtees or the spring that hit Massa) are deflected, while at the same time leaving the cockpit open enough to stay a “open wheel, open cockpit” series

          The ring has hinges at the back for getting out of the car @yossarian. After the research by the FIA institute the conclusion was that some kind of roll cage would be the best way to solve these things, but no one was happy with the proposal of how such a rollcage would look and how it would work on the car, especially in regards to visibility and easy evacuation of the driver.
          Mercedes have now come up with this as a follow up idea.

    18. Hang on a minute. Did I just read Ron Dennis admitting to an error of judgement?

      1. “Error in judgement”,I call it a lie.He was asked a straight forward question and he lied in response to it.

    19. Kate Walker is a tabloid “journalist”. All of her articles are rubbish. I guess they keep her because she can create her garbage on short notice.
      If you want interesting and well-written articles made by an actual journalist who knows his trade, read Maurice Hamilton’s.

      1. Well I guess she has a point in some way, but it’s a bit of a daft one: “Driver contracts mean nothing if the teams future is at stake”. Of course ignoring the fact that Sauber could have thought of that before hiring van der Garde and Sutil.

        What I find most ludicrous is the suggestion that this is hurting his career. Like sitting out a full season with no drive at all wouldn’t actually end his career. Also, for instance Button seems to be doing just fine after all the legal battles he’s been through over his contracts. Or Raikkonen and Alonso who actually returned to the teams they were kicked out of. Not that it did them much good yet, but still.

    20. Is it me or did Jenson Button put his car in reverse before it stopped in that video?

    21. Regarding the COTD, Who on earth likes Kaltenborn? Even before all this mess came out with GvdG.

      Hasn’t she pretty much run the team into the ground? They went from midfielders to backmarkers in just the two seasons that she has been heading the team.

    22. Lewis Hamilton column on BBC sport website, title “I don’t want £1m a week”

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/31850325

      Of course not, why would he want a paycut? ;)

    Comments are closed.