Formula 1 drivers have sharply criticised FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem over his calls for them to watch their language and demanded “transparency” over what the sport’s governing body does with the money it makes from fines.
The Grand Prix Drivers Association issued a statement on Thursday complaining about Ben Sulayem’s recent criticism of profanity used by some drivers, including during races on their radios. The statement also refers to the FIA’s clampdown on drivers wearing jewellery during races and compliance with regulations regarding fireproof underwear, which followed Ben Sulayem’s election at the end of 2021.“There is a difference between swearing intended to insult others and more casual swearing, such as you might use to describe bad weather, or indeed an inanimate object such as a Formula 1 car, or a driving situation,” said the statement.
Charles Leclerc was fined €5,000 during the Brazilian Grand Prix weekend for swearing in an official FIA press conference at the previous round. Max Verstappen was ordered to perform an act of public work for the FIA after he swore during a pre-race press conference at the Singapore Grand Prix.
However the drivers indicated they are unhappy with comments Ben Sulayem has made to and about them. “We urge the FIA president to also consider his own tone and language when talking to our member drivers, or indeed about them, whether in a public forum or otherwise,” they said. “Further, our members are adults, they do not need to be given instructions via the media, about matters as trivial as the wearing of jewellery and underpants.”
The drivers called for clarity over what how the FIA uses the money raised from fines levied on drivers and teams. The FIA increased the maximum fine it can issue them to €1 million this year.
“The GPDA has, on countless occasions, expressed its view that driver monetary fines are not appropriate for our sport,” they continued. “For the past three years, we have called upon the FIA president to share the details and strategy regarding how the FIA’s financial fines are allocated and where the funds are spent.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
“We have also relayed our concerns about the negative image financial fines bring to the sport. We once again request that the FIA president provides financial transparency and direct, open dialogue with us. All stakeholders (FIA, F1, the teams and the GPDA) should jointly determine how and where the money is spent for the benefit of our sport.”
GPDA statement regarding ‘driver misconduct’
“As is the case with every sport, competitors must abide by the referee’s decision, whether they like it or not, indeed whether they agree with it or not,” said the GPDA in a statement. “That is how sport works. The drivers (our members) are no different, and fully understand that.
“Our members are professional drivers, racing in Formula 1, the pinnacle of international motorsport. They are the gladiators and every racing weekend they put on a great show for the fans.”
“With regards to swearing, there is a difference between swearing intended to insult others and more casual swearing, such as you might use to describe bad weather, or indeed an inanimate object such as a Formula 1 car, or a driving situation.
“We urge the FIA president to also consider his own tone and language when talking to our member drivers, or indeed about them, whether in a public forum or otherwise. Further, our members are adults, they do not need to be given instructions via the media, about matters as trivial as the wearing of jewellery and underpants.
“The GPDA has, on countless occasions, expressed its view that driver monetary fines are not appropriate for our sport. For the past three years, we have called upon the FIA president to share the details and strategy regarding how the FIA’s financial fines are allocated and where the funds are spent. We have also relayed our concerns about the negative image financial fines bring to the sport. We once again request that the FIA president provides financial transparency and direct, open dialogue with us. All stakeholders (FIA, FI, the teams and the GPDA) should jointly determine how and where the money is spent for the benefit of our sport.
“The GPDA wishes to collaborate in a constructive way with all the stakeholders, including the FIA president, in order to promote our great sport for the benefit of everyone who works in it, pays for it, watches it, and indeed loves it. We are playing our part.”
Best regards,
The directors and chairman of the GPDA on behalf of the grand prix drivers
*RacingUnited for our safety, our sport, our fans.
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Formula 1
- I could have won races earlier but I wanted to win with McLaren – Norris
- Qualifying stats: McLaren on top as Alonso and Hulkenberg star in midfield
- Sainz and Ferrari face “Mission Impossible” in constructors’ title decider
- Farewells, family and a first – F1 drivers’ helmets for the 2024 Abu Dhabi GP
- “Stressful”: Perez and Piastri vexed by stewards’ U-turns over deleted lap times
notagrumpyfan
7th November 2024, 11:25
They can add my name as fan to this statement.
Alternatively, I might walk around in my underwear on a busy square.
Jungle
9th November 2024, 10:52
Whats with the underwear part? I have heard about the wearing of jewellery being discussed before….fire proof underwear???
BasCB (@bascb)
7th November 2024, 11:38
Count me on board as well, yeah.
Craig
7th November 2024, 11:41
My opinion hasn’t really shifted on the matter. When a driver is before the media asked a question they’re not just representing themselves, they’re representing their team as well the team’s and in some cases their own personal sponsors, so ultimately should be showing a bit of professionalism.
That being said, the FIA’s attempt to clamp down on the occasional inappropriate word is simply ridiculous. You could argue some the drivers could be told to grow up as they’re being childish but they don’t need policing in the manner the FIA seems to be looking towards.
Doh
7th November 2024, 18:47
I see both your paints as fair, especially the first. But I don’t understand this issue with underwear and jewellery. Wasn’t all that on safety grounds. And the monetary fines issue is really odd too.. what else? Would they prefer penalty points adding to the risk of missing a GP? Have they even thought this part through?
pcxmac (@pcxmac)
8th November 2024, 17:25
the jewelry issue, being a safety concern, can only be due to possibility of electricution and like their ring blowing off their finger or a earing blowing out their earlobe. But to be honest, if its’ to that point, the driver is pretty much toast, literally.
The drivers made a good point about the FIA spending all their fine money, in an unaccountable fashion. There really isn’t much to argue with. The FIA are corrupt, and finding ways to control people and take their money. They are no different than the corrupt FIFA during all those allegations. When governing authorities lose the ability to govern rational, they become parasites, and eventually atrophy sets in and the whole show begins to go south. This isn’t just limited to the FIA, of course the large investment firms circling over F1 like vultures (vulture capitalism) are also looking to take their piece of the pie.
Root for the drivers, all of them, cause the game is rigged against them, and everyone watching.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:32
I don’t think the drivers have ever been convinced of jewellery having anything to do with safety, given that wedding rings are still permitted.
The underwear is safety-related, and definitely won’t change as a result of this.
I think the drivers would prefer the FIA to think before levying any penalty at all for conduct that they do not regard as its business – and it seems from their words that swearing is one of those areas. (For infractions that actually relate to the racing, I understand they prefer sporting penalties or reprimands, according to the nature of the infraction. Possibly community service if it’s really severe, like the one that got added to Michael Schumacher’s loss of 2nd in the 1997 Drivers’ World Championship when he hit Jacques Villeneuve).
anon
9th November 2024, 9:33
Doh, the insistence on the drivers wearing fireproof underwear was on safety grounds, with those efforts being strengthened following Grosjean’s crash.
With regards to jewellery, it is worth noting that the original directive from the FIA did not mention anything about banning it on safety grounds: in fact, it doesn’t give a reason for the decision and simply states that drivers are not to wear jewellery in the cockpit.
It did lead to speculation at the time that the reason for the ban wasn’t safety – it was noted that the sport was now visiting a number of countries which had a negative view on men wearing jewellery, and the ban was therefore an effort to generate goodwill with those countries.
Riker (@corsair)
7th November 2024, 11:46
Just like with any other sport – in pre-race and post-race interviews you need to keep that language appropriate.
However – language during the race/match/game is a different matter entirely. The broadcaster has the ability to monitor and choose whether or not to broadcast audio. Policing that communication isn’t right.
notagrumpyfan
7th November 2024, 12:27
And what about the ‘underpants’ mentioned in the GDPA statement? :P
tielemst
7th November 2024, 14:25
I think the point being made is that they themselves want to decide as grown-ups what they think is appropriate. Adults can do that. If I say a wordt that people find offensive and they tell me about it I will either apologize or tell them to grow a pair. The consequenses are for me and for me only. If parents don’t want their children to hear it, they should forbid them watching F1 press conferences.
SteveP
7th November 2024, 18:11
I’ve previously referred to the fines being the equivalent of 10p /10c in the office swear box when you consider the drivers pay versus ours.
When offices run that kind of “fine” system, it is always a joint decision on where the money goes at year-end or when the box/jar is full. The suggestion that they collectively decide where the money goes seems totally reasonable – or does MBS want to keep siphoning it somewhere that no one else would approve?
notagrumpyfan
7th November 2024, 18:26
I sincerely hope you earn more than that :P
SteveP
9th November 2024, 13:50
I’ve always earned more than I’m paid, especially so if you use some of the upper management as a yardstick.
Actually I think the typical office fine is more toward the folding cash these days, not that our office has such a system. Might be profitable. Think room-full-of-techies and stuff going wrong.
I think you get the drift though – a 5,000 Euro fine is pocket change for them.
Doh
7th November 2024, 18:48
They aren’t policing team radio are they?
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:33
The FIA has expressed a desire to start doing so.
SteveP
9th November 2024, 13:54
Excellent idea – FIA police it, blank out the indelicate bits, and get fined if they let anything through.
Alternately, they could just, like, not broadcast it?
MichaelN
7th November 2024, 19:20
There no doubt that this is a trivial matter. The president getting involved appears petulant and needless. What this sounds like is one of the hosts complaining to him personally during one of the events, and him feeling compelled to back a member organisation of the FIA, likely one who voted for him.
And on that, he isn’t wrong. The F1 circus is paid handsomly to perform their act, and the least they can do is show up and be gentlemenly about it. Behave like the guests they are. It’s a small ask given the millions and millions these guys get. They have to behave 25×3 days a year. Boohoo.
SteveP
9th November 2024, 14:08
Guests do not get fined for non-appearance.
It’s not a guest appearance, it’s a command performance.
Very rarely do TV/radio organisations transmit live where untoward events/speech may occur.
F1 does not transmit driver radio live, and there is no requirement to transmit driver and TP interviews live.
If they want totally clean, wholesome TV/radio, then transmitting absolutely live implies a massive lack of thought and leaves you wondering if they are safe to wander the world unsupervised.
S
7th November 2024, 12:01
I am officially on the FIA’s side of this matter.
The naughty schoolboys don’t get to run the school – that would be the role of the leader (ie, the President).
The drivers would do well to be reminded that they willingly choose to participate in the FIA’s racing series and structure of their own accord, under full acceptance of the FIA’s rules and regulations (including the Sporting Code and codes of conduct in regard to media presentation). Doing so opens them up to enormous benefits and a great range of opportunities they will never get anywhere else.
As for the fines – it is of no consequence what the FIA does with the relatively tiny pittance the drivers pay as punishment for their breach of conduct. That money is spent on the same things all other FIA income is spent on – the GPDA requesting detailed and itemised allocations of expenditure is beyond petty.
Peat Smoke
8th November 2024, 9:58
I see your point, and I think you’re right in principle. However there’s the case is more about power, and the FIA’s President has none. Liberty and the teams have been running the show, which the failed Andretti bid showed. The drivers know that and they’ve just used it to their advantage. The teams will side with them, so will do Liberty if push comes to shove. I think they have fans on their side. MBS is a king no one obeys.
S
8th November 2024, 12:14
I disagree in regard to the power held by the FIA president. He has a lot, but has shown great restraint for a number of reasons. He has reminded everyone of the FIA’s and F1’s rules and asked for compliance, and even issued exemptions out of goodwill – but the FIA could easily strip drivers of their racing licences instead if they really wanted to exert their power. That would obviously cause alienation, which is not in anyone’s best interests – so they’ve settled on a softer solution for now. It’s a balance, and it is about much more than just the few most notable issues raised in recent years – and certainly about much more than one person’s ego or personal values.
The Andretti saga (or to be more accurate, the ‘new team’ saga) showed that even with complete and equal access to the all the events of the F1 World Championship, every single team still totally relies on the income from commercial payments and media exposure to have a business case for operating in F1 at all. So much so that all the existing teams are prepared to fight that hard for their 10% of it, and even impose severe anti-competitive restrictions on top of that.
Liberty/FOM can not and did not prevent Andretti from putting cars on the track and earning WCC/WDC points – but they did use their one and only lever to exert power over the FIA: Money. And by doing so, they kept the existing teams on their side.
I do find it quite amusing that, as you say, the fans take Liberty’s side on a lot of issues – simply because most of the aspects of F1 that fans are commonly complaining about are Liberty’s (specifically, the CRH’s) doing. The FIA exists for sporting and regulatory reasons, while Liberty are there purely to squeeze as much money as possible from the FIA’s product.
Peat Smoke
8th November 2024, 16:59
Sorry. I wasn’t clear. What I meant was: fans support drivers on the swearing issue.
I think MBS has only power on paper, and the Andretti saga showed it. He has even switched sides and said that the best way of joining for Andretti is to buy one of the teams. That’s a sign of weakness. It’s clear that the teams and Liberty and now the drivers treat him more like an annoyance, rather than a man they have to reckon with.
S
9th November 2024, 4:47
But it doesn’t. The FIA did everything within their control to allow Andretti (or any other suitable 11th team) to participate in F1, and were entirely successful.
That Andretti were commercially rejected by what is essentially a third party contractor to F1 is not at all anything to do with the FIA.
The only reason Andretti won’t be on the grid as planned is because the FIA were legally blocked (by the EU) from handling the commercial aspects of their own racing series. And this matter is absolute proof that Liberty are operating in an even more anti-competitive manner than the FIA or Bernie ever did.
No – he has conceded that the FIA granting Andretti entry to the championship is purely regulatory. It does not entitle Andretti to access to commercial payments, media access or prize money.
Purchasing an existing team, however, does (most likely) solve that problem.
The sign of weakness you speak of is entirely on Liberty’s side, not the FIA’s. They rejected Andretti simply because they don’t want to upset the existing teams. Happy teams are more likely to agree with whatever crazy suggestions Liberty comes up with to change F1 – such as sprint races, for example.
If that’s the case, then it says much more about them and their own egos than it does about the FIA president.
SteveP
9th November 2024, 14:23
With the rules in place, and the response from FOM, I’d say the first avenue for Andretti / Cadillac would be to turn up at the application stage with a complete bid – i.e. one that included a Cadillac PU to make the chassis move round the track.
HW Small
8th November 2024, 11:56
I think the issue of fines is relevant because the top drivers get paid many millions whilst the young or lower rank drivers get orders of magnitude less.
Therefore a $20,000 fine for Hamilton is probably less than the interest he earns during a race, whereas a $5,000 fine for Colapinto is massive.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:33
The problem is that the schoolboys consider the schoolmaster to be more naughty than the schoolboys.
Alan Thomson
8th November 2024, 23:43
I would like to see you try and keep your language clean during the heat of a race. I don’t believe you could.
Picasso 1.9D FTW (@picasso-19d-ftw)
7th November 2024, 12:38
That “or otherwise” could be to be pointing to incidents we’ll be unaware of. Has he lost his temper with drivers in private? No idea, but that wording seems to hint at it.
My take is also very conventional: what they say over the radio is no-one’s business other than the driver and the team, and if it’s broadcast then that’s entirely FOM’s look-out. At the same time, the GDPA is entirely correct in arguing that what’s important is how you address an individual either directly or when talking about them – tone and respect do matter, on all sides.
Ideals (@ideals)
7th November 2024, 13:19
I mean he’s around every race, so obviously he’s interacting with the drivers at various official and unofficial meetings throughout the year.
Robert Williams (@weiliwen)
7th November 2024, 13:07
The sooner that man is out of F1, the better.
Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
7th November 2024, 13:08
Good.
Jere (@jerejj)
7th November 2024, 13:14
I couldn’t agree more with this statement letter & the underpants part even made me laugh a bit.
Nulla Pax (@nullapax)
7th November 2024, 14:05
This man would have all drivers behave as his personal property, and he would happily ban women from …. well …. from freedom basically.
I have no issues with Foreigners.
I have issues with Zealots.
Phil Norman (@phil-f1-21)
7th November 2024, 14:36
I think most people would agree with GPDA. These people are adults. They know what it right and correct and need to be treated as such. It is just common sense. We don’t need the advice of Ben Sulayem on trivial matters like this.
Leo B
7th November 2024, 15:27
These drivers need to grow up. Yes we all use all kinds of language among ourselves but when it is a news conference or a TV interview, it takes a thoroughly unprofessional person to use swear words willy nilly. It is not difficult at all to observe grown up ways in public.
These constant attacks by drivers on Sulayem are a bit disturbing. Are they racially motivated?
notagrumpyfan
7th November 2024, 17:44
Why even think they could be racially motivated when most commenters put forward clear arguments against his words and actions?
And it’s probably a bit culturally ignorant for someone to think that using swear words is unprofessional. Even in the English language there are major differences how various words and phrases are considered offensive or not between Americans, Brits, Australians, etc. And then to think that the majority of drivers have English only as their second or third language.
ludewig
8th November 2024, 0:26
@notagrumpyfan
It’s because Leo is a woke person, so he considers everything through the lens of race and gender. There is a word for looking at people that way, rather than seeing them as individuals.
Jay
8th November 2024, 3:53
COTD
SteveP
7th November 2024, 17:55
LOL. Hamilton was one of the ones kicking back at Sulayem – specifically that he (MBS) was introducing racial stereotypes with negative connotations.
MBS has the problem that he was raised in a society where discrimination is normal. Like stains on clothing, it can be difficult to remove from your mind (no matter how hard you might try. Or not)
MichaelN
7th November 2024, 19:11
What does Hamilton have to do with this? These issues aren’t binary. Hamilton and Sulayem have no commonality on this issue.
Some of the antipathy towards Ben Suleyem is undoubtedly motivated by him being from the UAE. This happens all the time among certain segments of the audience. But of course the real issue is always money.
Ben Sulayem upset Liberty when he cautioned against a potential overvalued sale of FOM. Everything that happened after that is entirely predictable.
But Ben Sulayem doesn’t answer to Liberty nor a dozen millionaires racing cars. He has the overwhelming support of the FIA members.
SteveP
9th November 2024, 14:31
He was the one that took issue with the MBS comment about rappers.
My antipathy is to the statements he’s made. If he wants to stand by his statements, then he deserves the critical responses.
If he wants to backtrack and say he “misspoke” it would demonstrate that he at least realised he was out of step with the world and has to “wind his neck in” as the saying goes.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:40
Leo B, you appear to assume that the use of swear words willy-nilly is the entire explanation, even though it has only happened twice and one of those was known to be a driver answering a journalist’s direct question truthfully (in other words, doing his professional obligation at that event). At most, it might be half the explanation (in Verstappen’s case) and even that is doubtful given his objection to a regulation he sees as improper.
Ben Sulayem asking people to lie in press conferences is unprofessional. Also, his manner of introducing the swearing ban was itself racist. May I remind you he started the attacks against the drivers?
This is not a situation where appealing to race is likely to aid Ben’s cause.
S
10th November 2024, 12:29
Can you provide evidence of this?
He has not asked anyone to lie – only to select vocabulary appropriate to the setting and intended audience.
The official press conference is a professional setting, after all, which exists primarily to supply the global media market with corporate-friendly content and show F1 in a positive light (even if only for the benefit of its corporate partners).
Racist?
And what did he start? Did he not merely respond to statements that were already made publicly by some drivers?
He could have chosen his own words better, for sure – however his point is that F1 is intended for a general G-rated audience and is in a position where it must act as more of a standard or ideal (ie set a positive example) rather than merely joining in with the race to the bottom (socially speaking).
If you wish to persist in highlighting the FIA president in a negative manner, at least be honest and factual about it.
Moi
7th November 2024, 15:49
Publicly telling a Saudi to ‘watch his tone’. Yes, that’s going to work out fine…
Robert Williams (@weiliwen)
7th November 2024, 15:57
No, I think it was a wise move. he needs the drivers more than they need him. They could refuse to drive; the teams would get new drivers, but it’d be like the NFL strike season, where a bunch of nobodies were recruited at the last moment. In an F1 race car, how will that work out? They might have to have the first race with go-karts. But at least teenagers driving them will be more easily cowed by this tyrant.
Arthur Egges
7th November 2024, 16:26
The teams could not easily use alternative drivers because most would lack a superlicense. But I think you are right that Ben needs the drivers more than they need him.
MichaelN
7th November 2024, 19:13
The drivers in F1 are nobodies without F1.
How many people stopped watching F1 because Häkkinen started racing in GT cars? Three?
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:41
That was because there was a replacement available.
A lot more would stop watching if half the grid couldn’t be replaced without the FIA suddenly changing its own regulations.
S
8th November 2024, 8:20
Not sure how you’ve come to that conclusion.
Without the FIA, including their series and their licensing system, what will the drivers actually do with their time?
The only significant market they could retain a racing career in would be the USA.
The FIA will always own and operate F1, no matter who participates in it – and even if someone started up a competing series, they’d still be obliged to operate in concert with (ie, with the blessing of) the FIA anyway.
Robert Williams (@weiliwen)
8th November 2024, 13:25
They wouldn’t have to: If they went on strike, the issue would be solved in 12 hours.
S
9th November 2024, 4:55
Indeed. It wouldn’t take any longer than that to find 20 new drivers.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:42
Without the FIA, a replacement (possibly several replacements) would appear in due course. Some F1 drivers would go do other things in the mean time, but the ones who’d lose out aren’t the ones in this argument.
S
9th November 2024, 5:02
Sure. How exactly?
You almost seem like you don’t understand what the FIA is and does, who it is made up of and who it works with.
A handful of car racing series makes up only a small part of the FIA.
MichaelN
7th November 2024, 19:12
He’s no more Saudi than Russell is a Norwegian.
Stephen Taylor
7th November 2024, 21:57
MBS is Emirati not Saudi
Illusive (@illusive)
7th November 2024, 16:05
Louder.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
7th November 2024, 16:19
Ah common ground, I agree with everyone here.
If only I could agree with 75 million people….
SteveP
7th November 2024, 17:57
Maybe that one was rigged/stolen…
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
7th November 2024, 20:06
SteveP
sadly, it was not
Velocityboy (@velocityboy)
7th November 2024, 16:45
If the drivers were acting Iike the adults they claim to be, they would know that there is a time and place for coarse language. Behave like an adult and you’ll be treated like one.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:43
@velocityboy That has been thoroughly disproven already.
Red Andy (@red-andy)
7th November 2024, 17:20
I don’t think it helps the drivers here to conflate the clampdown on swearing with matters like the wearing of jewellery and fireproof underwear. The latter are safety matters (certainly not “trivialities”) and very much within the FIA’s remit.
That being said, they are right that these issues do not need to be aired in the media. There are surely more appropriate ways for the FIA President to make his views known.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:44
@red-andy The drivers think the FIA is not telling the truth to them about the jewellery issue, just as they do not think the truth is being told to them about where the money from fines goes or about the “general standards” of swearing (that turn out to be not as standard as all that).
The underwear one is unhelpful because the safety need for that is fairly obvious.
James Bond (@jamesbond)
7th November 2024, 18:02
Has it ever happened? Drivers going on strike?
Red Andy (@red-andy)
7th November 2024, 19:03
1982 South African GP, over new superlicence conditions.
João
7th November 2024, 19:17
Look at the press conferences, it’s a damn nightclub lounge, all it’s missing is a tray of daiquiris for the drivers! Being placed in that context, especially after the exertions of race/quali, of course the drivers instinctively relax a bit, and for most of them English is a second language anyway so a less formal use of language is completely natural.
Clay (@clayt)
7th November 2024, 20:07
Drivers should take a page from the John Force playbook regarding their tighty whities.
NHRA driver John Force was accused of using illegal traction control on his dragster.
Of course they found nothing when the car was inspected, so they accused him of carrying the electronics on his body.
https://youtu.be/7mYHyuNVFQw?t=89
David BR (@david-br)
7th November 2024, 22:36
Have to admit, I turn to F1 sometimes for trivia like this to distract myself from things like a would-be dictator getting into government (I’m talking about Musk by the way…)
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
8th November 2024, 0:34
@david-br small things like that.
to hear people talk about why they voted is practically absurd. It’s akin to voting for him because one expects him to win 10 WDCs with Red Bull. Of course, I’m also talking about Musk…
Jay
8th November 2024, 4:07
The way to defeat people like Musk is less censorship. Twitter wouldn’t be so popular if other sites weren’t as censorious. It’s also kind of funny how some Billionaires are fine while others are demonized. I just read a thread on a social media site that heavily leans the other direction. It was about a multi billionaire who has a Billion dollars worth of private Yachts. Not a peep about climate, not a peep about being a horrible person who peddles distractions to kids, nothing about him paying more taxes(or how he’s a tax cheat!), normal people see differences in how they are treated!
I wonder why one gets ire and the other doesn’t? In fact, you might get banned for talking bad about certain billionaires, and their massive climate footprint. Funny world we live in.
Mayrton
8th November 2024, 7:41
Never mind this. Why are we not discussing the penalties handed out in Brasil and it’s enormous bias surrounding it? Just because they didn’t capitalise on it, it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Makes a topic like this seem incredibly insignificant as it is at worst a nuisance. Genuinely twisting, turning & freely interpreting the regulations to create more profit, is way more damaging to the sport than handing out a few fines to millionaires.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:45
Because the GPDA agreed this before Sunday of the Brazilian Grand Prix started. I am sure the issues surrounding that are in the queue. (Technically all the issues the GPDA are airing here are longstanding objections).
SteveP
9th November 2024, 14:49
I do agree, why aren’t we discussing why Norris was given a fine and a reprimand, for doing the same thing that Sainz did in 2023 without any form of penalty?
Must be anti-British bias. :P
Mayrton
10th November 2024, 10:11
No matter how you look at it indeed, all is fine.. what isn’t fine is that it is not being discussed at all. Imagine it having been Max making this starting infringement (let alone the Red flag and VSC situation preceding the race which were far worse).. this site would by now have produced at least 20 articles on how Max is a menace and not following the rules and getting favoured. But no.. turning a blind eye. silence and looking the other way.
SteveP
10th November 2024, 10:55
That, sir, is a two-way street.
You choose to ignore things that don’t fit your world view and imagine slights that don’t exist.
Step back, look at what you’re doing, take many deep breaths and try and consider dispassionately what is happening.
This is an article about the GPDA producing an open letter to MBS, which reads as something of a rebuke. Do you not consider it significant that the GPDA have produced an open letter of rebuke, rather than a private communication – which suggests that the private version already happened and MBS ignored it, or responded negatively?
S
10th November 2024, 12:37
Or that it is quite common in today’s society simply to air one’s grievances in the public domain first, in order to win over the court of public opinion and pressure the other party into submission. A form of bullying – there’s no other way to put it.
It wasn’t very long ago that peer pressure was finally seen as the evil aspect of society that it is, and yet today it is regularly the first point of action.
Either way, only the parties involved know what has been discussed in private (if anything) – and what they hope to achieve by making this public.
Because that’s who this is for – the public, not the FIA.
SteveP
11th November 2024, 18:55
Or, quite frequently, the guilty party wants to keep it all secret.
Bullies thrive in dark corners, not the bright light of public view.
Public knowledge of the driver’s position on the items in the letter.
MBS is free to put his position forward to the same audience.
floodo1 (@floodo1)
8th November 2024, 12:17
There’s some real prudes in the comments
baasbas
8th November 2024, 19:06
At the moment of the press conference all adrenaline should be at normal levels again.. most of the time at least. Therefore, it seems appropriate to me that drivers receive feedback on their language. Sure, casual swearing as they say is not too bad. Well, then you also can do the press conference without swearing. This can be proven easily. Send in a school class of small children. Let them ask the questions (lets be honest, most questions are at that level anyway). I’ll bet you’ll get swear free answers. That said, policing them with fines is absolutely ridiculous.
So maybe I don’t fully agree with the drivers on this point, but I’ll take ANY point if it results in taking MBS a peg down.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
8th November 2024, 21:47
Adrenaline doesn’t return to normal for an hour after hard exertion (such as the drivers are expected to do in races), which not only covers the pre- and post-podium TV interviews, but at least the first half of their window for speaking to the written and spoken press after those are done.
joe (@geeijoe)
9th November 2024, 7:44
This statement from the GPDA confirms the one thing I suspected, no-one, least of all the drivers have respect for Ben. This is actually embarrassing being told by these young adults to watch your tone as head of the FIA. They’d never talk to Jean Todt, Max Morsely in that manner.
SteveP
9th November 2024, 15:07
Primarily because there would be no reason to do so. Todt and Moseley were good enough people managers to know that you get the best out of people by being firm but nice and that treating people as indentured servants, or minions will bring a revolt sooner or later.
As ye* sow, so shall ye reap. Or if you want to modernise – you put it out there, and it’s going to come back at you.
* Damn. Where’s the thorn character when you need it?
Aleksandar
9th November 2024, 13:08
I wish they went even harder with the statement.
With that said, I will note that any racing series out there requires you to be picture perfect with your racing equipment. If you fail a random check, and these do happen on occasion, they will disqualify you for lacking proper equipment. It goes so far that even proper equipment in good condition will not suffice if it’s homologation happened to expire a month ago.
I mostly disagree with that, and the equipment strictness in general when it is the wearing individual who bears the full consequence of something happening, but it is true that the sport would suffer as well if someone were to die because of it.
A layer of Nomex fireproof clothing gives you around 3 seconds before you get 3rd degree burns. Underwear is a layer, suits are 3 layers. So it is far from trivial.
Tristan
10th November 2024, 14:44
Jewellery, underwear and million dollar fines, only in F1 can you put them together in a serious statement.
KarenCampbell
13th November 2024, 1:00
I’m not sure why the drivers are so adamant about their right to display their lack of emotional control. I’m also not sure whey every pundit seems to want to excuse them by saying that their competitive spirit makes them unable to keep that control. I’ve watched sumo avidly for decades. Never once have I seen a wrestler lose control, even after losing a deciding match in a tournament (and you can’t tell me that the pressure of a 350lb man slamming into you at the speed of a truck doesn’t bring a massive amount of anxiety equal to anything in F1). I can only recall once that Wayne Gretzky ever lost his cool. There are numerous examples of athletes who handle themselves graciously. So, let’s stop with the lame excuse. Either we want drivers to act like this, or we don’t. If we do, why do we?