Ben Sulayem says ‘inhuman’ criticism is ‘because I am doing the right thing’

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem has denied accusations of sexism and dismissed criticism of the governing body’s handling of the controversial 2021 championship decider.

In brief

Ben Sulayem responds to sexism allegations

A comment made on the FIA president’s former official website,, was republished earlier this year in a newspaper article. It said Ben Sulayem does not “women who think they are smarter than men, for they are not in truth”. He was subsequently accused by another newspaper of sexism and bullying.

Ben Sulayem, whose also suffered the death of his son Saif earlier this year, said: “The attack on me earlier this year was inhuman, with the tragedy that I had,” he told the Press Association. He believes he is being targeted “Because I am doing the right thing.”

He also defended the decision not to alter the result of the 2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix after race director Michael Masi failed to follow the FIA’s rules while arranging a final-lap restart in which the outcome of the world championship changed.

He drew comparison to the England’s victory against West Germany in the 1966 football World Cup final, in which the winners’ penultimate goal was disputed: “Was that correct? Did they change it? No.’ Did they give it to Germany? Nein.”

Formula E revises its Berlin track

Berlin is the only city to have hosted a race in every Formula E season since the championship’s creation in 2014, and next year there will be a revised layout of the circuit based at Tempelhof Airport.

The layout used for the inaugural Berlin EPrix in 2015 was not retained for the following year, since the race relocated to a street circuit based around Karl-Marx-Allee, and when FE returned to Tempelhof in 2017 it used a significantly differently layout that has also been run in reverse for races since 2020. That year the city hosted a triple-header of races, and the third one used the regular layout but with extra corners added to the middle sector.

For 2024 the start/finish straight and pit lane will be relocated to where the back straight was, and there will be 15 rather than the usual 10 corners as several of the longer sweeps have been broken up to feature multiple apexes. As a result the track will be 210 metres longer

Australian F4 to be revived next year

Australia’s Formula 4 championship is set to be relaunched in 2024 with a five-round season that includes races abroad.

The nation’s motorsport governing body was originally responsible for the series when it ran from 2015 to 2019, and came under scrutiny as entry lists shrank in the final season despite an Australian Grand Prix support slot. It called off the 2020 campaign in September 2019, and no effort was made to revive the series in later years.

Now Chinese promoter Top Speed, which is already responsible for the United Arab Emirates and South East Asia’s F4 championships, has announced its plans to revive Australian F4. It will use the Tatuus T-421 car that features in many European series, and begin with two rounds at The Bend Motorsport Park, followed by races at Queensland Raceway, Sydney Motorsport Park and and then former Malaysian Grand Prix venue Sepang.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from X (formerly Twitter), TikTok and more:


McLaren CEO Zak Brown said the team’s culture was holding them back when he first stepped into the role. #F1 #Formula1 #McLaren #mclarenf1 #McLarenRacing #ZakBrown #CEO #leadership #AbuDhabi #abudhabigp #racing @McLaren

♬ original sound – Fortune Magazine

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Alex Albon has called 2023 his “strongest year in F1” after single-handedly scoring enough points to earn Williams seventh place in the constructors’ standings.

Although his last stint at a top team did not go to plan, being dropped at the end of his first full season with Red Bull, he has rebuilt his reputation as a driver to rely on for points since moving to Williams and that could put him on the radar of rivals in the future.

His stock has risen massively this season. Relentless performances on every Saturday to push the car as high up the grid as possible, and some great defensive drives on Sunday to bring home the points. If he manages a similar performance next season, there’s no doubt that he’ll be on the radar of the top three teams for 2025 and beyond.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Alex White, Crispin, Djdaveyp85, Prisoner Monkeys, Wes, Villalon and Putti Spiii!

On this day in motorsport

  • 30 years ago today McLaren tested Philippe Alliot, Yannick Dalmas, Oliver Gavin and Gareth Rees at a wet Silverstone

Author information

Ida Wood
Often found in junior single-seater paddocks around Europe doing journalism and television commentary, or dabbling in teaching photography back in the UK. Currently based...

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

63 comments on “Ben Sulayem says ‘inhuman’ criticism is ‘because I am doing the right thing’”

  1. ‘I hate when women think they are smarter than us’. But they hate when men think they are smarter than them.

    That’s it? That’s really what he’s going with… But women say the same thing about men? Wow… What a defense.
    Who decided to let him off the leash again?

    1. It’s gone well beyond time to give up this 20+ year old non-story.
      The lengths people go to just to discredit others is truly disgusting and shameful. Let him be.

      Your ire should be directed at those digging up this garbage and republishing it over and over now that he’s in a position of power.
      This site included.

      1. Maybe you should find somewhere else to hang out.

      2. S, the allegations of sexist behaviour that are being referenced are those raised against Sulayem in 2022 in relation to Shaila-Ann Rao’s resignation from the FIA.

        Ann Rao is stated as having submitted a complaint to Carmelo Sanz de Barros, the president of the FIA Senate, that Sulayem had made sexist remarks about various individuals whilst acting as president of the FIA. de Barros is accused of having then tried to bury that complaint, mainly because he owes his job as president of the FIA Senate to Sulayem and didn’t want to risk losing the job by investigating Sulayem.

        However, it would appear that one of the automotive clubs in Europe became aware of the letter and submitted it to the FIA’s Ethics Committee. The FIA Ethics Committee, in turn, appears to have considered the allegations seriously, but it would appear that the investigation did not go ahead because of a split vote on the committee – with some implying that those who voted against holding an investigation were those who owed their jobs to Sulayem.

        Robert Darbelnet, who was one of the longest serving members of the FIA’s Ethics Committee, is in turn reported to have been so disappointed at the failure of the FIA’s Ethics Committee to act that he resigned from the committee in protest, even though his current term on the committee didn’t expire until 2026.

        What we are dealing with, therefore, are not 20+ year old allegations – we are dealing with allegations that Sulayem has continued to act in a sexist manner as recently as last year and whilst engaging in activities in his role as President of the FIA. It is entirely warranted for those allegations to be investigated when the complaints are related to his current conduct in office.

    2. I mean, the man thinks intelligence is somehow inherently related to what gender you are. I don’t think you need to expect much better from him.

      1. “I mean, the man thinks intelligence is somehow inherently related to what gender you are. ”
        To say ‘somehow inherently’ is the most ignorant thing to say ever. Every biological difference between men and women is inherent. Men are not just “somehow inherently” taller than women, nor don’t they “somehow inherently” have larger brains.
        Why so much vitriol on the subject?

        1. The larger brain of an elephant doesn’t make it a smarter than a human. I doubt some humans though.
          The larger brain of a man is used at 2% capacity.
          Except when there is a beautiful woman around, then the central processing unit is interrupted completely.
          So there is that

          1. Wow. First, that’s sexist, second, the “myth” is that only about 10% of the human brain is used, but in reality, fMRI scans have shown that nearly all the brain is active, most of the time.

            Similarly, the male brain continues functioning just fine in the presence of a beautiful woman, but the focus might change a bit.

            “The larger brain of an elephant doesn’t make it a smarter than a human.”
            That’s because elephants don’t have human brains, or do they? ;)
            Men do have human brains though. And those human brains are bigger than women’s human brains.
            I can’t make it simpler for you, George.

          3. The comments section of this place is turning into an absolute dumpster fire. I miss the F1F of old. The conversations were a darn sight more mature back in 2006.

        2. Coventry Climax
          29th November 2023, 11:02

          I think there’s
          A) nothing wrong with what @sjaakfoo commented on this. He said that Ben Sulayem seems to think there’s an inherent relation between intelligence and gender somehow. I agree with that comment. The ‘most ignorant thing to say ever’ would be on Ben Sulayem, not on sjaakfoo. Read again.
          B) there’s a rather large community – that you’re maybe unaware of?- that would utterly disagree with what you call an ‘ignorant thing to say’.
          You’d be wise to polish up your language skills as well as your knowledge of the concept of gender before accusing others of ignorance – or using vitriol.

          1. He said that Ben Sulayem seems to think there’s an inherent relation between intelligence and gender somehow.

            Unfortunately, Ben Sulayem has probably read a number of the studies that have come to the conclusion that there is a gender based effect on capabilities. He’s probably not read the studies that have come to the conclusion that there is no difference.

            How anyone can pull out meaningful info from many of these studies is a puzzle.
            To give an example that I know detail on:
            Beer/alcohol consumption – every study refers back to a set of base data that they use to produce the famous J curve of health/mortality results (ref. for one example)
            The base data dates back to surveys in the last century (I discussed this with one of the 1990’s survey workers at the time), and includes lung cancer as a cause of death for drinkers. Personally, I tend to swallow my beer rather than inhale it, and I’ve always been a non-smoker, so it made me wonder if people drinking in the smokier pubs of the era would have secondary smoking health effects.
            I pointed out that feature and suggested re-checking the base data for people who drank in smoke filled pubs. They did, the results were different, and the funders closed down the project.
            Since all the projects were funded by anti-alcohol groups, they had no use for a survey that gave results that weakened their case.

            Who funded the studies that suggested anything negative about a possible gender based difference??

          2. @SteveP, I doubt old Ben has read any studies on the matter, would put my money on him relying on his inherent & vastly superior knowledge of such things.

          3. Just to clarify: brain size in humans is related to body size, not sex. Moreover, bigger brains are not necessarily a sign of greater intelligence. Males are generally larger than females, so their brains tend to be a bit bigger. But a large woman will have a bigger brain than a small man. Are we going to say that small men are less intelligent than large men? Robin Dunbar is one of the world authorities on this – well worth checking out.

          4. You may be interested to know that brain size is also related to neurology – an autistic woman may well have a larger brain than a neurotypical man of the same size. Neither neurotypical nor autistic neurotypes have had any smartness differences revealed in relation to each other (the differences are in how the smartness is produced rather than the amount that is there).

            There is also the point that according to studies made on the species in question, snails are better at counting than horses, despite the latter having larger brains (both in absolute size and in proportion to their bodies). Also note that no gender differences were found in this matter. If it is unwise to assume the intellectual capabilities of non-human animals from brain size or gender, surely it is also unwise to believe humans are any different. Especially if one if in charge of an organisation whose Statute 1 forbids discrimination by gender.

            (And no, Ben, people who accuse someone in power of doing wrong generally aren’t doing it because of contrariness. They’re doing it because they actually believe the person in power has done the wrong thing. If the right thing actually was done, proof would be a better response than an unsupported doubling-down).

    3. Him saying women aren’t smarter than men, doesn’t mean that women can’t be as smart as men. I take it as they aren’t inherently smarter than men just because they are women. Neither are men inherently smarter than women.

      1. well the thing is how he was asked for his dislikes, and out of all the millions of possibilities he picked that one. And he said “for in truth they are not” (smarter than men). So women being smart was a bit of an issue. And of course he’s Muslim, and a good part of Islam is an excuse for men to be selfish with women, so it was important to him for women to be inferior not smarter.

        But quite likely mixing so much with Western cultures has opened his mind since then, tho of course he still has to have his manly beard so perhaps women can catch up, as long as they don’t get past. Perhaps he supposes that if a group could be selfish with another group, they would be

        1. a good part of Islam is an excuse for men to be selfish with women,

          Can anyone name a religiously based group that doesn’t ignore the central tenets of the actual religion and use that to justify their personal bias?
          I could insert Judaism or Christianity in place of “Islam” and then when we count for each example the stack of pages of peoples names in each case would be pretty high.

          My view on organised religion is a distant one, by choice.

          1. yes i agree it’s all made up isn’t it. Any religion is a power structure, a gang, with shepherds and sheep, and it’s used to be selfish, having power with ‘faith’ that doesn’t need evidence. Islam is just a bit behind, culturally, but that’s his background.

            And part of it is being less honest too, i mean a faith is a lie to start with, and it’s still annoying that FIA/F1 get away with blaming Michael Masi when it was obviously him being told to quickly change it so there’d be a fresh new WDC, by someone at the top. And he mustn’t tell, so he got another job, with his NDA

          2. Coventry Climax
            29th November 2023, 22:59

            I think of the concept of religion -the ‘brand’ is irrelevant- as: The oldest and most successful conspiracy theory known.

    4. There may be a language issue here. If I said, “people hate it when someone else thinks they’re smarter”, there would be very little to argue with.

      As a society, “we” (by which I mean most of western Europe and the USA) believe that our culture is the only valid one, and we judge everyone else by our standards. To make things worse, we assume that everyone speaks English as well as we do, and we scrutinize what everyone says looking for the same nuances we use.

      I’m not necessarily defending ben Sulayem. I’m suggesting that allowing for the language and cultural differences, he should be given the benefit of the doubt, and what he says interpreted in the most positive light, rather than the most negative (another cultural foible of modern society).

      1. Coventry Climax
        29th November 2023, 23:15

        Two of the requirements for a high level international job are the ability to express oneself in preferably more than one internationally commonly spoken language as well as being able to deal with sensitive matters with care, insight and tact.

        Suggesting we should give the man some slack because of language differences implies that English is not in his set of skills, nor is sound judgement when using that language to discuss sensitive matters.

      2. grat, the issue is that a lot of people are interpreting it in the light most likely to be true given their experiences of the actions and attitudes that accompany people who say that sort of thing. Which for women used to be more belittled by men the better their thinking is and the more compelling their evidence happens to be, is never going to be positive…

  2. Albon looked pretty good this year but his teammate was the worst on the grid, by far. If Williams keep Sargeant for another year, it will be another very low benchmark for Albon. And the top teams know it.

    1. Maybe a low benchmark initially, but necessarily beyond anymore, as Sargeant will/would be better with a full season behind him.

      1. I didn’t notice any significant improvement other than driving a faster car during the second part of the season.
        In the season ratings he still sits behind De Vries.

        1. Who cares about ratings as he finished ahead in points, which matters more anyway.

          1. I somehow didn’t get ‘not’ before necessary in my original reply.

          2. Who cares about ratings as he finished ahead in points

            I’m just pointing out that your comment that Sargeant not being “necessarily beyond (Albon) anymore” is quite contradictory to the opinion of most others.
            I used the ratings of this site as an example of this.

            Interesting that a frequent poster like yourself argues that driver performance should be measured solely by WDC points rather than taking into account the car they drive and amount of rounds they participated in (like in a driver ranking/rating).
            But even based on merely analysing WDC points you’ll notice that Sargeant is still miles behind Albon (1pt vs 16pts during the 2nd part of the season; a bigger absolute gap than during the initial part).

        2. I agree regarding sargeant being terrible, it speaks volume about williams being as far as I saw unsure whether keeping him for 2024, despite them being way less harsh than red bull with drivers.

        3. volumes*

  3. While Albon has rebuilt his reputation at Williams, it is on the back of having the 2 weakest teammates across 2 years. I don’t think he is on the radar of top 3 / top 4 teams just yet. Of the drivers of the top 4 teams, he was better than only Perez. All the other 7 were better than him.

    His career trajectory seems similar to Gasly (with a 2 year lag) who everyone was crediting with rebuilding his reputation at Toro Rosso / Alpha Tauri after 2019.

    Eventually, I think he is good enough to be in an Aston Martin, Alpine.

    1. Good points, although he definitely performed worse than Perez in comparison & even worse than Gasly, considering he received more time & support.

    2. Exactly, his benchmarks are particularly poor and as De Vries showed, the Williams of the last two or three years isn’t necessarily the worst car (as it was before that).

      For example, Räikkönen did very well at Lotus after his return, was picked up by Ferrari again… and was then consistently way behind Alonso and Vettel. Only then did people start to speculate if those cars might have been much better than previously thought.

      Our put another way, if Red Bull was racing with Pérez and Latifi, nobody would know what that car could really do.

      1. if Red Bull was racing with Pérez and Latifi, nobody would know what that car could really do.

        We would know because if Perez and Latifi are 1-2 in world championship, the car is a rocket!

        And they would be 1-2 as well. Note that Perez is second with 50 points advantage over third in this car. If Perez can be second in this car, any F1 driver can as well.

        1. There’s that! This is indeed a bit of an extreme case, though we’d still be wondering if could have done what Verstappen did.

          1. If Vestappen wasn’t there the team would build themselves around whoever else they decide is golden boy and we’d still be seeing the maximum out of the car from there and a suspicious lack out of the other car.

        2. Yes, this would be a 1961 ferrari case. I’m not sure if the year is 1961, but it was one of the most dominant cars ever built and they had 3 drivers at the time, none of which was top notch and I think 2 mediocre ones, even so it was extremely dominant, let alone with the lineup of the 1988 mclaren for example.

      2. if Red Bull was racing with Pérez and Latifi, nobody would know what that car could really do.

        That assumes that both of those drivers would be treated as Perez currently is – a secondary concern merely filling a mandatory seat in a single-driver team.
        Whoever is No.1 in the team gets a car that exploits their driving style at the expense of the No.2 driver – thus has been Red Bull’s MO for most of their time in F1.

        If Perez were No.1, he’d almost certainly be much more comfortable, confident and – as a result – faster and more consistent than he currently is.

  4. I didn’t know Australian F4 also exists & yesterday, I found out a Danish equivalent.
    I already knew British, French, Spanish, Italian, German, US, Japanese, & UAE F4s exist, so I wonder how many different F4 categories exist.

    Regarding COTD: Maybe Ferrari, Mercedes, or Mclaren, but certainly not RB simply because they aren’t known to giving second chances in their main team to demoted drivers, which even Marko pointed out by saying he already had his chance this year.
    He shouldn’t have blown that (after having already gained experience through roughly half a season), without which he’d just have completed his fourth full season in the team.

      1. Proofread first?

        1. This happens to multiple people, the problem is the lack of edit button, not having to check stuff before posting, mistakes may happen and tools exist to correct them on most sites.

  5. Coventry Climax
    29th November 2023, 10:42

    They may not have the reputation, but fact is, Perez has been given ‘second’ chances over and over again, especially when taking into consideration that Red Bull do -normally- not hesitate to make in-season driver changes.
    Why he got these repeat chances is completely beyond me. But that’s with the information we have. I’m sure there’s a financial side we don’t get to see.

    But indeed, I don’t expect to see Albon back at Red Bull, be it team A or B. Arguably though, he’d still be an improvement over Perez. Way more consistent, way less costly crashes, way less misplaced ego. But then, who wouldn’t be an improvement over Perez? Discounting all the Latifi’s of this era, ofcourse.

    Russel qualified the Williams way up quite frequently as well, which earned him his nickname of ‘mr Friday’. Noone compared his achievements there to his teammate, or said anything about the car probably being better than the driver showed. It does mean though, that the one lap speed of the Williams is probably not too bad. But having a decent dragster is not the same as having a decent F1 car. Albon has been doing quite a decent job there too. Sure, he’s not the best of the best, but for (the more recent) Williams, he’s a very decent driver and one they can rely on in order to get their car further up, not just on the grid, but also up the order when the flag drops. He’s shown to be able to do a more than decent job on tyres too.
    For us, there’s no way we can tell about Albon’s real contribution to the Williams development, but fact is, the car has improved. That’s an area where -as far as we know- Russel can’t make claims, over at Mercedes, and he’s a long way off of upgrading his nick name to ‘mr Sunday’. But again, that does not mean he’s not contributed.

    But the teams know, and we’ll see where Albon ends up in a couple of years. And even that will still leave space for discussion on how much of it all was a matter of money. See Perez.
    I think Albon is at the right spot at the moment, and he’d be wise to recognise that and stay with them for the time being.

    1. Why he got these repeat chances is completely beyond me.

      It’s better for them. Max has no pressure and can drive without being on the limit. Hence, no mistakes, no DNFs.

      If the second RB seat was filled with a top driver, they would risk conflicts, DNFs.

      They need Perez to fulfill their next objective: 100% wins for RB and 100% wins for Max. Only Perez can help them achieve that.

      1. Coventry Climax
        30th November 2023, 0:02

        Can’t thank you enough for explaining all that to me. And you apparently have inside information on Red Bull’s next objective too! Care to share your source?

        The full quote should have been:

        Why he got these repeat chances is completely beyond me. But that’s with the information we have.

        This is what is commonly called ‘taking things out of context’.

        1. Here:

          > “There’s still something to strive for,” Horner told media after Sunday’s finale.

          I don’t need to have inside information on Red Bull’s next objective because there’s not many objectives they can choose from. 100% wins is the only big one they haven’t achieved.

          And Perez is the one that can help them get there.

          1. Coventry Climax
            30th November 2023, 22:39

            No he isn’t. Should Verstappen have a mechanical failure, Perez is not guaranteed -by a long shot- to get the victory.
            The maximum available performance would be scoring one-two’s in every session of a season. It’s a dead certain that’s never going to happen with Perez. Maybe not with Verstappen either, but he’s come quite close already this year.

    2. The simpler answer is: who are they gonna replace him with? I wouldn’t trust ricciardo to perform yet, and certainly not tsunoda, they could only go for someone from outside the red bull group, like norris, but in that case they would have 2 roosters in a henhouse.

      1. They don’t want to replace Perez with top performer.

        They want to replace Perez with mediocre performer who would not stirr the pot. Not many to choose from.

    3. He was probably given “second chances” because they knew with all things being equal Perez could match Vestappen as was seen earlier in the year. Problem for Perez is they didn’t want him to.

  6. This guy is corrupt as they come perfect for the FIA ghouls and its ok my sexist remarks have changed because I said so! Yeah right.

  7. Coventry Climax
    29th November 2023, 11:13

    I’m sorry for your loss, mr Ben Sulayem, but what the heck is the relation between tragedy and being a medieval sexist?

    Also, mr. Ben Sulayem, the word ‘inhuman’ solely applies to things that humans do to either one another or to all other species on this planet. We never read about those darn dolphins waging war again on tuna. Or sparrows massively polluting the environment all species have to live in. Or polar bears invading kolibri territory, claiming it’s been their land historically, way back in the ice ages.
    So the word ‘inhuman’ actually is as human as human gets.

    1. Actually, there is evidence that dolphins (porpoises) are capable of kidnap and rape. Orcas aren’t particularly “nice” creatures, and locusts, rats, and toads have been known to devastate agricultural regions (although that’s just survival / reproduction instinct).

      Considering as how women only received the vote 100 years ago, and were considered to suffer from “hysteria” (Now, THAT is a sexist term!), and have only been taken seriously since World War II, are you sure “medieval” is the right adjective?

      1. Considering as how women only received the vote 100 years ago

        Less than 100 years:
        Before 1928 there were property ownership requirements.
        History is more recent than many people think.

      2. Coventry Climax
        29th November 2023, 23:58

        Interesting, about dolphins, although both ‘kidnap’ and ‘rape’ are concepts typically conceived by mankind. I’d be interested in research as to the reason for this behavior with dolphins. Usually though, there’s ‘survival of the fittest reasons’ behind it.
        With mankind (interesting word as well): There’s quite a lot of parents out there that shouldn’t even be parents and have kids that would be better off in another family. No, I’m not referring to Ukranian kids.

        Orca’s are predators, like shark and other animals of prey. The concept ‘nice’ is completely irrelevant here. They have a distinct role in the foodchain as well as the maintenance and evolution of species.
        Damaging human crop or stock is a logical result of man concentrating one type of plant or animal on a restricted space. Birdflu, mad cow disease, blue tongue (ovine orbivirus infection), potato rot, etc are all examples.
        If we accuse an organism taking advantage of that, be it virus, bacteria, or any other living creature of being inhuman, we might as well include ourselves, because we’re taking advantage of it too. it’s just we don’t like others to do the same.

        Given it took quite a bit of time for men to recognise women have rights too, I intended ‘medieval’ to classify as being particularly primitive regarding the subject. In the light of what Ben Sulayem said and apparently thinks, yes, I think it’s quite an appropriate adjective.

  8. there’s obviously a conspiracy among F1 and its tame media not to ask WHY MASI HAD TO SIGN AN NDA

    anyone would think that, after he made the right decision not to unlap cars, somebody called him

    1. Exactly. An NDA is a big question mark but very few seem to care.

      1. and he’s never tried to explain has he. Not ever, not once

    2. anyone would think that, after he made the right decision not to unlap cars,

      Correction: ” … after he made the wrong decision not to unlap selected cars,

      Picking allowed options was in the RD remit, some was not an option

      1. it was the right decision to start with. He said no unlapping so that the race could finish under green. Then he changed it. And by then the only way to finish under green was to unlap only selected cars as you say AND go green without a clear lap after the SC came in.

        Since then the story has been fixed, pretending he broke the rules in order to finish under green, when that was exactly his plan to start with. And pretending it was his ‘mistake’, when once you put it together it’s obvious someone at the top called him, then is keeping him quiet with a job and the NDA nobody dares ask about if they want a paddock pass ever

    3. @zann NDAs sometimes have clauses preventing the question from being asked, and in some countries (including the UK), not asking about them is itself legally binding on anyone who reasonably should have known of the restriction (which includes credentialed journalists in the paddock).

  9. I just hope Indycar doesn’t start to go down the Champcar route of just adding more street circuits at the expense of road circuits & especially ovals.

    The one thing i’d love to see Indycar doing in terms of circuits is adding 1-2 bigger ovals as those cars on a track like Michigan with a good aero package (That doesn’t encourage pack racing) can produce some of the best, most thrilling racing you’ll ever see.

    Oh & i’d love to see Cleveland brought back as that’s a track that always delivered fantastic races. The 1995 race there is one of the best Indycar races i’ve ever seen.

Comments are closed.