Formula 1 2022

[PaulRhB]

22 minutes ago, SR71 said:

I look forward to the first RB22 qualifying session;

 

 

Blimey you don’t get any letup do you? It’s trying to dive off into the grass every few seconds on the straights! The drivers face is calm throughout 🤣

Super clip thanks 

[Sidecar Racer]

42 minutes ago, SR71 said:

I look forward to the first RB22 qualifying session;

 

 

 

 Just a normal Sunday afternoon drive .     😲

 

 

[didcot]

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.breaking-mick-schumacher-to-join-mercedes-as-reserve-driver-for-2023.4jZSgiaWq55MerCrPv9ueX.html

 

Mich Schumacher for Mercedes reserve driver.

[OnTheBranchline]

5 hours ago, didcot said:

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.breaking-mick-schumacher-to-join-mercedes-as-reserve-driver-for-2023.4jZSgiaWq55MerCrPv9ueX.html

 

Mich Schumacher for Mercedes reserve driver.

 

Probably for the best although I am not sure about an Albon/Ocon-esque redemption arch (they showed more than Mick has truthfully). 

[Andrew P]

[didcot]

Yes, yes, yes, leave me alone I know what I'm doing!

[Oldddudders]

Well, that's one Team Principal that won't become a pitwall media-tart!

[Andrew P]

4 hours ago, didcot said:

Yes, yes, yes, leave me alone I know what I'm doing!

 

 

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Well, that's one Team Principal that won't become a pitwall media-tart!

If of course it is true,  after all it was on Facebook. 🤣

[didcot]

I did check to see if it was April 1st!

[Sidecar Racer]

[OnTheBranchline]

FIA bans drivers from making ‘political statements’ without permission

 

just in case you thought the FIA was better than FIFA.

[Reorte]

39 minutes ago, OnTheBranchline said:

FIA bans drivers from making ‘political statements’ without permission

 

just in case you thought the FIA was better than FIFA.

Generally speaking I'm of the opinion that the events themselves aren't the place for such statements (and if there are any directly related to an event then the appropriate response is to very publically boycott it). In the wider surround (if that makes any sense) it's a different issue.

[OnTheBranchline]

3 hours ago, Reorte said:

Generally speaking I'm of the opinion that the events themselves aren't the place for such statements (and if there are any directly related to an event then the appropriate response is to very publically boycott it). In the wider surround (if that makes any sense) it's a different issue.

 

But then, what is the right time/place? We could use that logic for everything like movies themselves aren't the place for such statements or the classroom isn't the place for such statements. 

 

As long as it's not impeding on the actual event itself,  like for example laying on the track like those protestors at the British Grand Prix, I don't see the problem. Whether or not people are uncomfortable to hear about and discuss those issues is their problem. 

 

But F1 has become increasingly tone-deft in light of where most of the newer circuits have been set up (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc). Anyone remember the missle attack where Saudi Arabia basically forced F1 to race? 

Edited December 20, 2022 by OnTheBranchline

[Oldddudders]

Once again we see the depth of greed among drivers. If all 22 had refused to drive those venues where human rights are not observed, the FIA would have been stuffed. Too much self-interest among drivers, and too many eggshells to be trodden on as a result. 

 

Presumably Marcus Rashford's efforts for childrens' meals would also have been banned?

[OnTheBranchline]

3 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Once again we see the depth of greed among drivers. If all 22 had refused to drive those venues where human rights are not observed, the FIA would have been stuffed. Too much self-interest among drivers, and too many eggshells to be trodden on as a result. 

 

Presumably Marcus Rashford's efforts for childrens' meals would also have been banned?

 

They tried that in Saudi Arabia, and they were told that they would not be allowed to leave the country if they didn't race.

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, Oldddudders said:

Once again we see the depth of greed among drivers. If all 22 had refused to drive those venues where human rights are not observed, the FIA would have been stuffed. Too much self-interest among drivers, and too many eggshells to be trodden on as a result.

And I'd have been very pleased if they'd have done so. The difference there is that the problems are the races themselves. It wouldn't be about using as a platform for other issues.

 

Quote

Presumably Marcus Rashford's efforts for childrens' meals would also have been banned?

Everything I heard about that (although admittedly I don't follow football closely so there may have been other stuff for all I know) was outside of, not part of, matches, in interviews etc. (not post match interviews about the game). And good for him for doing that. If he'd been pushing those efforts during matches I'd disagree about using those occasions.

 

F1 drivers, especially the top ones, have a big enough public profile that they have plenty of opportunities where they can promote meaningful causes. But races are when they're at work. I don't think many businesses would be happy if their employees were using their jobs as a platform for promoting their own causes, no matter how worthwhile they are.

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, OnTheBranchline said:

 

They tried that in Saudi Arabia, and they were told that they would not be allowed to leave the country if they didn't race.

The response to that should be a refusal to set foot in the place next time then.

[RedgateModels]

2 minutes ago, Reorte said:

I don't think many businesses would be happy if their employees were using their jobs as a platform for promoting their own causes, no matter how worthwhile they are.

 

Absolutely, my previous employer had a very strict code of conduct to protect the corporate image. Lads sacked for being seen drinking in pubs in work uniform on the way home etc

[woodenhead]

Just now, Reorte said:

The response to that should be a refusal to set foot in the place next time then.

That's not how it works unfortunately, human rights abuses, terrible working conditions, modern day slavery are generally imparted by the ultra rich on the rest of us, the same people keeping other people sweet in organisations like the IOC, FIFA and the FIA.  The former don't care and the latter are well insulated from the rest of us so don't care either.

[OnTheBranchline]

7 minutes ago, Reorte said:

And I'd have been very pleased if they'd have done so. The difference there is that the problems are the races themselves. It wouldn't be about using as a platform for other issues.

 

Everything I heard about that (although admittedly I don't follow football closely so there may have been other stuff for all I know) was outside of, not part of, matches, in interviews etc. (not post match interviews about the game). And good for him for doing that. If he'd been pushing those efforts during matches I'd disagree about using those occasions.

 

F1 drivers, especially the top ones, have a big enough public profile that they have plenty of opportunities where they can promote meaningful causes. But races are when they're at work. I don't think many businesses would be happy if their employees were using their jobs as a platform for promoting their own causes, no matter how worthwhile they are.

 

But what if their employees bring new fans in? As long as something like "I support the Russian invasion" or "Hitler isn't such a bad guy", then what's the harm. 

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, woodenhead said:

That's not how it works unfortunately, human rights abuses, terrible working conditions, modern day slavery are generally imparted by the ultra rich on the rest of us, the same people keeping other people sweet in organisations like the IOC, FIFA and the FIA.  The former don't care and the latter are well insulated from the rest of us so don't care either.

Getting a race is quite prestigious, so drivers boycotting it would have far more effect than you or me refusing to go there, and I meant the drivers.  If they were told they wouldn't be able to leave if they didn't race, well, that's pretty damned serious, and a response of "OK, we'll race" and then refusing to go there again once they got home would be significant I think. It might well damage those drivers' careers, but they're not in the same position as those who are actually suffering from those abuses, where they have to put up with them just to (hopefully) survive.

 

I was pretty disgusted by the World Cup too; all I could do was refuse to watch any of it. But as I said I draw a distinction between an event where the event is part of the problem, and using one as a platform for an unrelated cause.

[woodenhead]

Just now, Reorte said:

Getting a race is quite prestigious, so drivers boycotting it would have far more effect than you or me refusing to go there, and I meant the drivers.  If they were told they wouldn't be able to leave if they didn't race, well, that's pretty damned serious, and a response of "OK, we'll race" and then refusing to go there again once they got home would be significant I think. It might well damage those drivers' careers, but they're not in the same position as those who are actually suffering from those abuses, where they have to put up with them just to (hopefully) survive.

 

I was pretty disgusted by the World Cup too; all I could do was refuse to watch any of it. But as I said I draw a distinction between an event where the event is part of the problem, and using one as a platform for an unrelated cause.

I was referring to the FIA in this case which was probably complicit.

 

The FIA don't want the drivers raising questions about conduct of the hosting countries as the F1 circus is part of sportwashing away the abuses of that country and it's a great way to 'spend' money.  Buying into football, racing and Olympics is the latest way that these countries are making themselves look 'forward' and welcoming when they are anything but that if you don't meet a specific criteria.

[OnTheBranchline]

5 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I was referring to the FIA in this case which was probably complicit.

 

The FIA don't want the drivers raising questions about conduct of the hosting countries as the F1 circus is part of sportwashing away the abuses of that country and it's a great way to 'spend' money.  Buying into football, racing and Olympics is the latest way that these countries are making themselves look 'forward' and welcoming when they are anything but that if you don't meet a specific criteria.

 

No different than a billionaire donating their wealth (getting their names on libraries/buildings, etc) - usually the ultra rich had really questionable business practices to get rich (i.e. caused suffering) and now are buying forgiveness. 

Edited December 20, 2022 by OnTheBranchline

[Reorte]

13 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I was referring to the FIA in this case which was probably complicit.

 

The FIA don't want the drivers raising questions about conduct of the hosting countries as the F1 circus is part of sportwashing away the abuses of that country and it's a great way to 'spend' money.  Buying into football, racing and Olympics is the latest way that these countries are making themselves look 'forward' and welcoming when they are anything but that if you don't meet a specific criteria.

This is why I come back to the distinction between saying something about an event itself and using the event to promote unrelated causes. I'm all for events such as F1 races or the World Cup being dragged in to the light to expose their own corruption when they're actually happening, of not letting them being used to whitewash and legitimise unacceptable behaviour, and I'm disappointed even with people who watched them.

[woodenhead]

2 minutes ago, Reorte said:

This is why I come back to the distinction between saying something about an event itself and using the event to promote unrelated causes. I'm all for events such as F1 races or the World Cup being dragged in to the light to expose their own corruption when they're actually happening, of not letting them being used to whitewash and legitimise unacceptable behaviour, and I'm disappointed even with people who watched them.

It's a difficult one to balance - do it outside of F1 and are you running the risk of being arrested when you step foot in the country, do it within the umbrella of a complicit FIA and it's going to be pretty public if you are stopped and arrested by the authorities.  Also the most publicity comes from doing it at an actual event, rather like bending the knee.

 

The drivers are in a unique position in F1, look at Colin Kaepernick - he lost his livelyhood, but F1 drivers bring money to the team so the team need the driver as much as the driver needs the team.  That relationship makes it easier for the drivers to speak out as they are protected by the team who need their skills as well as the money they bring in sponsorship, and sponsors are a lot more conscious of public opinion than the leaders of any authoritarian regime.