Coulthard: Driver's strike in the second half of the season?

[Inigo Montoya]

http://www.gazzetta.it/Motori/Auto/F...oulthard.shtml

Sorry, its in Italian. I'll translate the important bits:

"I hope this meeting happens - we want safety to be the first priority. There is the concrete possibility of a driver's strike if we are constrained to drive even when safety is not up to our standards. We hope that it does come to this, but we will do what is necessary. What happened at Indy was a shock to all of us.
The strike could happen in the second part of the season. "


Note that this was an interview in English translated to Italian, and back to English (by me).

This is insane.

[Inigo Montoya]

Here is the link

to the original story...

He also thinks that there is something to the Jenson to Ferrari rumours.

[Gt_R]

At a time when F1 is trying to repair itself, with Michelin refunding, FIA and 7 teams getting common agreement etc, and Paul Stoddart for a good week finally kept quiet for DC to come out and hint of a strike isn't really helpful in stablizing the situation.

I hope the meeting occur too, and that safety is and must be a top priority... there's never too much of it. But if DC can't have half the grid attend the meeting, why would Max still want to attend? The drivers foremost must be responsible and enthusiastic in such safety issues which fundamentally concerns them...and should attend such an important meeting to voice their toughts to FIA.

I agree that safety during testing seem to be below par. Not being fully informed of current testing arrangements, IMO, it would be important that if more than 1 team is involved in testing, a proper safety team appointed by the FIA must be present. (and paid for by the teams present in testing). Tracks such as Barcelona and Jerez and Silverstone which are frequently used for testing should also have a ready team of marshals (volunteers are fine but at least are properly trained). Teams should ensure that the standard of safety at testing not be far off from the standards during race weekends.

[BootsOntheSide]

I doubt a strike would take place, I think DC is using his position int he GPDA to pressure Max into making the changes they believe are required. Still, considerng the amount of testing laps the top teams have turned in recent years, they don't seem to have caused many injuries compared to the races.

[Kicking-back]

DC is the chairman of the GPDA - he's just reminding Max of the stakes.

[djinvicta]

Maybe it wont be DCs year then?

[Russfeld]

The stakes are DC goes on strike and Liuzzi replaces him in the car. Who loses if the drivers strike? the drivers, and then ultimately the fans. The FIA isnt affected by the health of F1.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya

Here is the link

to the original story...

He also thinks that there is something to the Jenson to Ferrari rumours.

If anyone would know about the Ferrari-Jenson situation he would, they are of course close friends. I just do not see it myself but then!!!!

As far as driver strikes are concerned they are not going to happen IMHO I feel David is just stretching his legs, poor timing that this subject has to come up at this time after all the recent USGP etc etc stuff. It was Max's idea to cancel the meeting at Silverstone, which I thought was a silly ego driven move.

[Kicking-back]

There won't be a strike - the drivers will get the agreement they want on testing safety.

[Adam43]

If they need any drivers, I'll do it. And at a snip.

Seriously (although I am available), what the drivers want with regards to testing is only sensible and just.

[Dutton]

Originally Posted by Gt_R

...safety is and must be a top priority... there's never too much of it...

I am not the sure that is entirely true.

[BootsOntheSide]

Interesting words Dutton. If a rule change produced a 5% safety improvement but a 20% loss in excitement (I know these things are hard to quantify, but you know the kinds of things I mean), I wouldn't support it - not in the current era of excellent safety in F1. This also links into a quote Stirling Moss made a few years ago, relating to the deliberate collisions in championship deciders - in his day nobody would risk that, because there was no certainty of both drivers walking away (and, no matter how negative one's feelings about Prost/Senna/Schumacher (delete as applicable) may be, you couldn't reasonably claim that they would wish injury on their rivals). Similarly, Jacques feels that less danger makes it less exciting, and I suspect many would agree.

[Knowlesy]

I'd agree with you from a racing point of view Boots.

But testing is a different kettle of fish. As things are, tests are quite dangerous with the minimal backup staff and marshalling. This is the issue here.

Actual GP weekend safety is undoubtedly fine as it is (possibly too safe?).

[Dutton]

That is the general gist of what I was thinking, although the JV case (which I suspected may come up at some point) I don't go along with. It just doesn't figure. I don't think safety itself dictates exitement levels (as in, Jacques, I believe, was trying to argue the thought that something is dangerous is what makes it exciting).

I was really more thinking in terms of if safety has to be the be all and end all.... well, ultiamtely, there should be no races. Or else the tracks should all have corners that are identical, all the cars should race with limiters that prevent them going above 60mph or something...

Hrrrmmm, it is very problematic for me to describe what I meaning...it is kind of an abstract thing I guess...

Essentially: it is very clear that having high safety standards in the context of the arena in question (in this case motorsport) should be considered important. Now, F1, as one branch of motorpsort, has unbelievable safety standards (IMHO). It could basically end up in law of diminshing returns style scenario, whereby tracks/vehciles/venues etc. become rendered kind of meaningless in the search for ever smaller returns....and you end up with something that just isn't desirable on, really, any level.

It is difficult.

Testing, for sure, increase the standards there. There is no reason at all not to improve them.

[Knowlesy]

I understand what you are saying Dutton and I largely agree.

The problem is, you can't go backwards with safety, you can't reverse engineer it. Both for reputational and common sense reasons.

But I do think we go overboard with safety quite often. And it does dilute the spectacle a little, you lose that indescribable factor.

But it's a no win situation I guess. The FIA will get lambasted if they make the cars safer and if they do nothing.

To be honest, I think the FIA are a bunch of numbskulls half the time. But what they have done for safety is very commendable I have to admit, even though it does have the aforementioned negative factors.

[Kev_205]

I think DC is playing clever mind games. He's threatening Mosley that if he backs out of another meeting with the drivers it would be a costly mistake.......

and Jenson. How about this for a senario. Jenson wants a bigger pay packet, DC is his friend, by fueling the rumours about Ferrari, Jenson gets a little more negociating power over Williams and BAR contracts.
Even better...do JB and DC have the same manager..... Mr Brundle????

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

DC is the chairman of the GPDA - he's just reminding Max of the stakes.

Isnt MS the Chairman, and others such as DC, Webber and Trulli Directors?

[Kicking-back]

I was reading an article in Autosport by Mark Webber and he said DC is the chairman.

[FPV GTHO]

Thats weird, theres been a fair bit of attention pyed to MS lately over his laid back attitude towards Coulthard's safety crusade and not getting involved as President of the GPDA, whilst MS clams its a technical issue, not a safety issue.

[Kicking-back]

Just checked - DC is chairman. The other directors are MW, JT and MS.

[Jaxs]

The thing is, Max and Bernie organised an alternative GP series in oppostion to the FISA as it was called before becoming the FIA>>> The FISA- FOCA war was scuppered by.. Ferrari, Alfa Romeo and Renault ,, surprise surprise, it's almost a replica situation arising but the poachers are now the game keepers.. and a lot more money involved.

History repeats itself.