turbof1 wrote:I hope things finally get moving now. We got close to 2 drivers being hit by a full band of rubber. To be frank, this isn't solely the fault of Pirelli. Some teams also blocked the change from the steel belt to the kevlar one.
That's the important thing, Pirelli wanted to change the tyres and the internal politics of F1 prevented them from doing so. I'd be surprised if Pirelli will now continue to be blocked on changing the construction of the rear tyres. Oddly changing the rear construction only may well even the field a little more in making more circuits front limited in terms of wear. There's not a huge amount to choose between all the cars when it comes to front limited circuits, with a definitive pecking order but no one team standing out massively from the others in terms of tyre degradation.
I still find the FIAs position in this terribly conflicted, and they seem as legally confused as ever with the convoluted structures they operate. That Pitpass article is a good summary of Pirelli's legal position and its relative strength, in my opinion.
What I find equally weird is that the FIA were so critical of Mercedes before the tribunal but let Ferrari off scott free, where its now been claimed that whilst the chassis that they've tested with for Pirelli was from 2011 they have been using 2013 aerodynamic parts and potentially suspension components. Red Bull are seeking clarification with the FIA on this as Ferrari are due yet another test with this setup after Germany, and thus far the FIA has remained silent. I'll be interested to hear their take on this as surely a 2011 tub with the 2013 mechanicals and aero package is a car that conforms significantly with the current rules even if there are a couple of technical clauses where it would be less than 100% conformant. That shouldn't be allowed.
The FIA really are making an utter mess of this. I shouldn't be surprised but had hoped that Todt had improved things. I guess that faith was misplaced.