Motorsport Off Topic Thread

Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2006
Posts
4,023
Location
Lincolnshire
No it’s a sport being run by a cartel.
So we're in agreement then, it is a sport. The FOM are only a group of companies responsible for the promotion of the FIA Formula 1 World Championship, and the exercising of the sport's commercial rights.
Whether anyone thinks they've overstretched themselves by rejecting Andretti's application is another debate.

Personally I doubt if the Republicans have chance in hell in turning around the decision, despite Andretti attempts. But, the Republican's will always think their nasty and vindictive politics are gospel. Puppies, guns and republican's, look it up.
By allowing a group of politicians to interfer with any sport potentially opens the floodgates to any country challenging decisions and even results...
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
17 Jul 2010
Posts
25,832
So we're in agreement then, it is a sport. The FOM are only a group of companies responsible for the promotion of the FIA Formula 1 World Championship, and the exercising of the sport's commercial rights.
Whether anyone thinks they've overstretched themselves by rejecting Andretti's application is another debate.

Personally I doubt if the Republicans have chance in hell in turning around the decision, despite Andretti attempts. But, the Republican's will always think their nasty and vindictive politics are gospel. Puppies, guns and republican's, look it up.
By allowing a group of politicians to interfer with any sport opens the floodgates to any country challenging decisions and even results...
The request from Congress is a cross party group made up of both parties, it's not just one. I've said this already.
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,634
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
By allowing a group of politicians to interfer with any sport potentially opens the floodgates to any country challenging decisions and even results...

This is hyperbole. Countries all over the world enforce business regulations on sport. The idea that there is some line crossing here that will lead to politicians interfering with results is ungrounded.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Jan 2006
Posts
11,024
Location
All along the watchtower
So we're in agreement then, it is a sport. The FOM are only a group of companies responsible for the promotion of the FIA Formula 1 World Championship, and the exercising of the sport's commercial rights.
Whether anyone thinks they've overstretched themselves by rejecting Andretti's application is another debate.

Personally I doubt if the Republicans have chance in hell in turning around the decision, despite Andretti attempts. But, the Republican's will always think their nasty and vindictive politics are gospel. Puppies, guns and republican's, look it up.
By allowing a group of politicians to interfer with any sport potentially opens the floodgates to any country challenging decisions and even results...
If you want to make money in their market you have to play by their rules. Doesn’t matter whether you agree with them or not.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Aug 2010
Posts
5,636
Location
Birmingham
So we're in agreement then, it is a sport. The FOM are only a group of companies responsible for the promotion of the FIA Formula 1 World Championship, and the exercising of the sport's commercial rights.
Whether anyone thinks they've overstretched themselves by rejecting Andretti's application is another debate.

Personally I doubt if the Republicans have chance in hell in turning around the decision, despite Andretti attempts. But, the Republican's will always think their nasty and vindictive politics are gospel. Puppies, guns and republican's, look it up.
By allowing a group of politicians to interfer with any sport potentially opens the floodgates to any country challenging decisions and even results...

I see you gave it a few days but are back posting this nonesense again.

So you’re happy to accept the separation between the sport and the business and then jump straight in to it’s political interference in sport. No it isn’t! There is no political interference in to the sport. The political interference, and I’m loathed to call it interference, is in to the potential illegal business practices of the company running the sport, not the sport itself.

Unless you’re once again suggesting that a business registered and operated in the USA should be exempt from some/all legislation of the USA as well as protected from potential prosecution* simply because that business manages a sport.

If so, I’ll ask for a third time (and expect to get ignored for a third time) who therefore gets to decide which laws should, or shouldn’t, be followed?

*In my very limited knowledge of US law I assume it would be a civil case, not a criminal case, so ‘prosecution’ isn’t the correct term. But I’m failing to think of a civil equivalent word.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2006
Posts
4,023
Location
Lincolnshire
I see you gave it a few days but are back posting this nonesense again.
I've never gone away :)

Whilst this might be nonsense to you it isn't to everyone this does have the protentional to have an impact in any sport and it is a desperate attempt by Andretti to force a decision his way

Yet whether this is actually a 'law' in the US, and the republican's have dragged one up from the 1800's, similar to what they did with their anti-abortion 'crusade' against women, has yet to be determined and hopefully someone will see some sense that the decision not to allow Andretti into F1, although disputable, should not be be challenged by one country as it isn't, in this case, being something that violates their antitrust laws or that their people have suffered from this decision.

Should any country should be able to challenge decisions made by any sporting body, such as the FOM or the FIA, simply because they don't agree with them?
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Oct 2002
Posts
17,977
Location
London
Changing the subject slightly because I can't be bothered getting involved in the Andretti discussion.. how come teams from F3, F2 etc. don't get promoted up to F1? Wouldn't that be more fair, and actually doable now that there is a cost-cap?

Or are all the F2 teams essentially owned by F1 teams as used as feeders anyway? Are there any independents?
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,634
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
Not sure becoming F2 champion counts as stalled!

Yeah, but it was his third season and even then he didn't do it in particularly impressive style - winning just one race all season. Before that he'd racked up a tonne of Karting championships, come 3rd in French F4 (winning the Junior/Rookie championship in the process) in his first single seater season, won ADAC Formula 4 the next season, and come 2nd to Piastri in F3 the season after. Compared to that, yeah, winning in his third season was stalling.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
9 May 2022
Posts
1,414
Location
London
Changing the subject slightly because I can't be bothered getting involved in the Andretti discussion.. how come teams from F3, F2 etc. don't get promoted up to F1? Wouldn't that be more fair, and actually doable now that there is a cost-cap?

Or are all the F2 teams essentially owned by F1 teams as used as feeders anyway? Are there any independents?

Because nearly alll the teams in F3 and F2 couldn't even begin to afford to compete in F1, most of them can barely get by in F2 and F3. Also there is a huge difference between a spec series and F1, on top of this they have no real profile outside of the niche world of feeder motorsport series. Audi or some bumblesquat F2 team ? Easy choice for F1.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,634
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
Changing the subject slightly because I can't be bothered getting involved in the Andretti discussion.. how come teams from F3, F2 etc. don't get promoted up to F1? Wouldn't that be more fair, and actually doable now that there is a cost-cap?

I guess because there's such a huge gulf. F2 teams run cars provided for them, they don't develop or build them, so they don't need factories or design centres or anything. Besides, are you going to demote an F1 team to make space for them?

Or are all the F2 teams essentially owned by F1 teams as used as feeders anyway? Are there any independents?

The F2 teams get a lot of their funding from F1 teams' academies but they're not owned by them.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
1 Jun 2015
Posts
308
what i don't really understand is in F2 once you've won the championship you can't race in F2 again so it is technically better to come in 2nd and race again in F2 if you don't have even a small chance at an F1 seat, but in F1 you can come and go all the time a seat is offered to you.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Jul 2010
Posts
25,832
A driver in F2 for a top team is expected to bring sponsorship or support in some other way of €1m to €3m a season depending on manufacturer or academy support. An F2 drive is not cheap, but it used to be more than this up until a few years ago.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Jan 2006
Posts
11,024
Location
All along the watchtower
The some f2 champions just have to try too hard to win it, f1 teams are looking for a certain spark way earlier in your career these days.
F2 is at best acclimatisation for faster cars, but Max and Kimi what’s his name seem to have managed okay.
Quite a few of the current grid have come out of f2 mind.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Aug 2010
Posts
5,636
Location
Birmingham
Yet whether this is actually a 'law' in the US, and the republican's have dragged one up from the 1800's

What's the age of the law got to do with it? It's been illegal to murder people for even longer but you still see people getting convicted of it today. If the law hasn't been repealed then it's still the law.

should not be be challenged by one country as it isn't, in this case, being something that violates their antitrust laws

On what legal foundation do you say it doesn't violate their anti-trust laws? Isn't that the whole point of this process to determine if it does, or doesn't, violate the laws.

Should any country should be able to challenge decisions made by any sporting body, such as the FOM or the FIA, simply because they don't agree with them?

No, a country shouldn't be able to challenge a sporting decision just because they disagree with it. A country absolutely should be able to challenge a business decision if it's potentially an illegal decision.

I'll put it another way, do you think Liberty and FOM should follow US labour laws? IRS tax laws? Or OSHA Health and safety regulations? I'm going to assume the answer is yes. So then, why? why should they follow these laws but not have to follow other ones?

There is no line in the sand when it comes to law, you can't just pick and choose which you follow based on whether you agree with it or not. To bastardise a quote from Bosch, all laws matter or no laws matter.
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 May 2004
Posts
31,634
Location
Nordfriesland, Germany
what i don't really understand is in F2 once you've won the championship you can't race in F2 again so it is technically better to come in 2nd and race again in F2 if you don't have even a small chance at an F1 seat, but in F1 you can come and go all the time a seat is offered to you.

F2 isn't a place to stay; it's a feeder series, there is give drivers the reputation and experience they need to get a chance at an F1 seat - or, more often, a chance to go into another less prestigious series. F2 drivers are not paid (or paid survival sums) but rather, as @MissChief says, either pay for their seats or have enough backing to have their seats paid for - often at the price of substantial commitments to pay back a proportion of future earnings.

Unless you're massively rich, and can afford to pay to race in F2 for fun, F2 just isn't somewhere you can stay. It's not a career, even without the ban on repeat champions, it's a step on the career ladder.
 
Back
Top Bottom