Jean Todt?s Approval Rating IX

Posted on | Author Keith Collantine

Are you happy with how F1 is being run by the FIA president?

Once every month at F1 Fanatic we look at how the president of the sport?s governing body, Jean Todt, is managing the championship.

Join in by casting your vote below.

FIA developments since the last approval rating

Ferrari team orders

Following the World Motor Sport Council’s verdict Todt, who did not take part in the deliberations, said there had not been enough evidence to punish Ferrari:

Before you say [they] are guilty you have to be able to prove that [they] are guilty.
Jean Todt

But the text of the WMSC decision contradicted that view, concluding Ferrari had used team orders:

It is self evident to the Judging Body of the WMSC that this was an implied team order using a message, and as such was contrary to article 39.1 [of the] Sporting Regulations.

The WMSC gave a different explanation for why Ferrari were not punished beyond the token fine already imposed by the race stewards, blaming “inconsistency in [the] application” of the rules on team orders. It asked for article 39.1 of the Sporting Regulations, which prohibits team orders, to be reviewed.

Since the verdict team principals of rival outfits have complained that the WMSC’s refusal to punish Ferrari for breaking the team orders rule leaves confusion over whether team orders can be used in future races.

13th F1 team

The WMSC decided none of the applicants for the vacant 13th team position in 2011 were suitable:

It was considered that none of the candidates met the requirements to be granted an entry into the Championship.

Consequently, the allocation of the 13th team will not be granted.

Read more: No 13th F1 team in 2011

2011 F1 calendar

The FIA has approved 20 races for inclusion in next year’s F1 calendar.

Read more: 2011 F1 calendar officially revealed with 20 races and season finale in Brazil

Staff licenses

The FIA is planning to set up a licensing scheme for top F1 staff.

This follows the FIA’s difficulty in preventing Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds from participating in the sport following their involvement in the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix scandal.

Read more: Top F1 staff to have licenses

Road safety

F1 drivers could have their racing licenses endorsed for breaking the rules while driving on public roads under a new FIA plan:

The Code will be amended to clarify that if an International Super Licence holder is involved in a serious road traffic offence recognised by a national police authority, the FIA, depending on the severity of the case, may issue a warning or refer the matter to the International Disciplinary Tribunal, which may temporarily or indefinitely withdraw the competitor?s International Super Licence.

Read more: F1 drivers? road manners under scrutiny

Jean Todt’s Approval Rating

As an F1 fan, do you approve or disapprove of the way Jean Todt is handling his job as FIA President?

  • Approve (45%)
  • Disapprove (43%)
  • No opinion (12%)

Total Voters: 1,150

Loading ... Loading ...

Tell us how you voted and explain why in the comments.

Jean Todt?s Approval Ratings

Date Approve Disapprove No opinion
August 2010 60% 17% 23%
July 2010 54% 24% 22%
June 2010 53% 23% 24%
May 2010 78% 8% 14%
April 2010 63% 14% 23%
March 2010 53% 24% 23%
February 2010 57% 14% 29%
January 2010 55% 16% 29%
Jean Todt's approval rating, January-August 2010
Jean Todt's approval rating, January-August 2010

Image ?? FIA

110 comments on “Jean Todt?s Approval Rating IX”

Jump to comment page: 1 2
  1. we cant say what we would like to say for fear of a libel suit, but my view hasnt changed, for his views on team orders watch the video of his instructions to Rubens in Austria, he was a disgrace then and to put him in charge of the FIA continues that corrupt practice, as for evidence Jean, you are insulting our intelligence, we all saw and heard it, maybe Max wasnt so bad after all !!!,

    1. “Every team in the pit lane gives team orders.” – David Coulthard

      Punish all of the teams?

      1. I liked the way Coulthard gave lots of examples to back that claim up.

        Oh wait, no he didn’t.

        1. I don’t believe he was asked to.

          But he did follow that statment with “Anyone who says they don’t is lying.”

          But what would he know.

          1. Maybe he meant team orders in a very broad sense – for example, giving the only example of a new part to a certain driver.

            But I doubt he could give us an example of every other team this year getting on the radio and telling one of their drivers to pull over and let the other one pass.

            Can anyone think of any?

        2. Quite a bitter remark you made a comment down about RBR @ Silverstone. Some would deem that a Freudian slip.

          On top of that what benefit does he get out of lying? He’s knows how F1 works inside and used to race for Ferrari’s nr.1 opponent. Seriously, what did DC win by making that comment? Did he imply that he was only talking about this year? Not really. He made a general statement about the sport.

  2. Dissaprove for the first time.
    The rationale is that while in the early stages it was acceptable to ‘be the man in the shadows’ steering but not interfering with day to day issues, at some point a leader has to step up and be counted.
    The Ferrari debacle was just such as moment, where a firm hand of authority was required to either strongly uphold the rules (however interpreted and poorly upheld in the past), and punish appropriately or modify them without delay to ensure there’s no ambiguity going forward.
    The darkest days of 2009 had too many race outcomes decided after the event, by poorly qualified individuals acting on highly variable interpretation of the rules, which at times appeared to be modified to suit the occasion.
    That being the case then the route to clean understandable sport is to have a clearly articulated, stable and firmly upheld rule book.
    The current status is far from that
    1. The Team Orders position is not in any way clear – Can teams openly abuse the rule without penalty, or is the fee for doing so just 100k?
    2. Wings are loaded (and I defer to higher technical authority than me here) to 500kg+ downforce and yet the measure taken to clean up the wing flex issue is to place a much less than adequate load on the wing.

    I would suggest the FIA under appropriately strong leadership either step up and fix the loophole, or hold firm with the current rule, such that in the case of flexy wings clever designs may be employed, interpreting the rules exactly as stated and originally applied – and in the process gaining a recognised and allowable advantage. To do neither once again brings the authority of the FIA into question.

  3. Jean Tod? FIA?

    This is the first year he have not had to hear each month declarations/fights from the President of the FIA about how to manage something related to anyone of the F1 stakeholders.


  4. The stance Todt took over Hockenheim was soft and convenient, and the comments he made contradictory and ill thought out. I was impressed by his premiership up to this point, but it was only a matter of time before he would have to deal with a Ferrari scandal, and he handled it poorly.

    The failure to fill next year’s grid is also disgraceful and illuminates deep failings in the FIA’s selection process – it appears the FIA have learned nothing from the previous year.

  5. I voted disapprove this time for the first time. While I don’t like Ferrari it is not their letting off that I disagree with, it’s the fact that it completely undermines the rules when they are not upheld.

    I also disapprove of the FIA handling of the 13th team. A decision was originally meant to be made in June, but they delayed it until September and then wondered why there weren’t any viable entries. If they weren’t that bothered about getting a 13th team, why open it up for tender at all?

    The racing licence rule is a farce. Does this mean that a driver could be banned from racing for driving too fast on public roads? Irony aside, this would be a terrible shame. Can you imagine what would have happened if Hamilton had been banned from F1 for the incident in Australia? The FIA should stop the silly PR campaign and put more effort into actually doing something about it if they care that much.

    While I appreciate the job he’s done over the past few months I disagree with most of the FIA’s recent decisions. To those saying people have short memories, perhaps you should do a moving average of the results if you wanted to eliminate this factor.

  6. Disapprove for the first time, and I am a Ferrari fan. Privately, I am indeed very happy that my team wasn’t punished more, but for Formula 1, it was bad.

    While Todt’s decision to not actively involve himself in that matter was a correct one, it does not absolve him of any blame. He is the president of the FIA, FIA’s fault is his fault, and vice-versa.

    I hope the Team orders rule is tightened, only then will I vote approve for Todt. They could perhaps ban the passage of information from pit-to-car about the team-mate and his car. While teams will definitely find a way around this, atleast it won’t be done as shamelessly as at Hockenheim.

  7. You can’t base this on the ‘team orders gate’ decision as a whole, mostly becuase Jean Todt didn’t have a say in it. Todt hasn’t really made his mark on F1 yet, partly due to Driver stewards taking over foundation decisions in races, judge him over three years is the best option.

    1. But that was by his choice. He chose to step aside from the decision, and then made contradictory comments after the panel had made it.

  8. Disapprove. Really, no 13th team?

  9. He made right decision to not take part in the hearing which had Ferrari in it. Otherwise the decisions which WMSC had were not that bad so I voted approve.

  10. no opinion from me.

    i haven’t seen anything that fixes the bizarre rules and inconsistent, belated application of rules and penalties.

  11. Definitly Aprove !

    People here are voting disaprove because of the hearing. But its not Todts desicion, it was a big group, you can’t pin this on him.

    Ferrari were innocent anyway !

    1. Innocent if you don’t have eyes…

  12. I voted disapprove mainly for the Ferrari team orders case. There should have been some kind of penalty on drivers or team points.

    Also, the fact that the FIA did not rejected any suggestion for the amendment of the team orders rule would be very negative for the sport.

    Team orders mean that only half of the drivers fight for the best possible outcome.

    1. The nature of which F1 is set up, a team is inclined to support a #1 driver. To be fair to both drivers, there should be 2 pit boxes, 2 separate pit crews as opposed to sharing crews on stops… in short, a clear separation between the 2 cars and drivers would go a long way to doing away with team orders. But then that is not Formula 1.

  13. I still think he’s quite an improvement compared to Mosley but on the whole, quite a few FIA decisions concerning F1 this year have lacked the necessary determination.

    The decision about the 13th F1 team franchise for 2011? Too late for any sane businessman to get involved.

    The decision about the tyre manufacturer? Rather late given F1’s development lead times – ergo no 18-inch rims next year.

    The decision about Ferrari’s just-too-obvious team “strategies”? Weak (You can say all you like, but the bottom line is: Ferrari did exactly what the rule was introduced to prevent, and yet they still got away with it).

    Reviewing Ecclestone’s outrageous 100-year CRH deal? Nothing in sight.

    That’s why this time, for the first time, I’ve chosen “Disapprove”.

  14. … knew where you were with Max, todt operates in the shadows, and his former alliance with ferrari can never be discounted, it was under his tenure at ferrari, that the ‘team orders’ rule was written into the regs, I feel that todt cannot be trusted to be impartial, and should step down, with immediate effect, this would go some way to remove a large amount of distrust, that many fans have in the FIA..

  15. Why should Todt be clouted for not announcing a 13th has failed to materialize before the previously announced deadline?

    It’s not his direct fault that there are no qualified new teams, and they should have allowed potential candidates the full alloted time to attempt to pull their entries together.

    And in an open discourse, why should Todt not be allowed to disagree with his own WMC decisions?

    @achilles: Me thinks you have it bass-ackwards; it was Max who was the ultimate bsack room dealer. I too was opposed to Todt’s election based on his former Ferrari ties, but so far I think he’s working hard to be impartial.

    All in all you can’t fault his leadership to this point.

  16. Licenses for all participants is so elemental I am surprised it has not been in place forever. I believe all sanctioning bodies in the US require licenses for all participants. Good for the FIA, even though I wonder what has taken so long.

    As for team orders, I have always believed F1 is a team sport. I know of no one who objects to team orders in the last race, or the last 2 races, or at some other time of the individual’s choosing. I just want transparency. I am good with a review of the rule if it results in something better in the future–it is remarkably easy for one driver to allow another driver past, I don’t think it is always so provable, lets insist on transparency. For me, I might choose to pull for Ferrari over Red Bull, even if Ferrari allows team orders from race 1 and Red Bull doesn’t until the 2nd driver is mathematically eliminated.

    If Todt finally gets licenses and clearer team orders, good for all of us.

Jump to comment page: 1 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.