Ferrari join Lotus in criticising tyre revisions

2013 Spanish Grand Prix

Felipe Massa, Ferrari, Circuit de Catalunya, Barcelona, 2013Ferrari have added their voice to the criticism of the forthcoming change in tyre compounds at the Canadian Grand Prix.

Pirelli are making alterations to this year’s tyres following the high number of pit stops seen during last weekend’s Spanish Grand Prix.

Ferrari used its anonymous “Horse Whisperer” column on its official website to put forward its objections to the planned change:

“These are difficult times for people with poor memories. Maybe it?s because of the huge amount of information available today that people are too quick to talk, forgetting things that happened pretty much in the recent past. Or maybe the brain cells that control memory only operate selectively, depending on the results achieved on track by their owners.

“A classic example of this is the current saga regarding the number of pit stops. Voices have been raised to underline the fact that various teams, some of whom got to the podium and others who were quite a way off, made four pit stops in the recent Spanish Grand Prix, making the race hard to follow.

“It?s a shame that these worthy souls kept quiet two years ago when, at the very same Catalunya Circuit and on the Istanbul track, five of the six drivers who got to those two podiums made exactly the same number of pit stops as did Alonso and Massa last Sunday in the Spanish Grand Prix.

“In fact, there?s nothing new about winning a race making so many pit stops, even discounting those where it was down to changeable weather. One only has to look back to 2004, when Michael Schumacher won the French Grand Prix thanks to what was a three stop strategy, later changed to a four stopper. That was the key which allowed the multiple champion?s F2004 to get ahead of the then Renault driver, Fernando Alonso, who made three stops. And on that day and we remember it well, our strategy and the tyre supplier were showered with praise for allowing us to get the most out of the car.

“Today however, it seems one must almost feel ashamed for choosing a strategy that, as always for that matter, is aimed at getting the most out of the package one has available. On top of that, if this choice emerges right from the Friday, because all the simulations are unanimous in selecting it, then why on earth should one feel embarrassed when compared to those who have gone for a different choice, only to regret it during the race itself.”

Lotus team principal Eric Boullier also criticised the tyre compounds change yesterday.

2013 Spanish Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Spanish Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Ferrari/Ercole Colombo

Promoted content from around the web | Become an F1 Fanatic Supporter to hide this ad and others

Advert | Go Ad-free

181 comments on Ferrari join Lotus in criticising tyre revisions

  1. geekracer2000 (@geekracer2000) said on 17th May 2013, 12:03

    Whatever Pirelli tried to accomplish with this years tyres have not gone their way.
    And change has been in the air for some time, why they choose to involve RBR into is unclear to me. Hembery doesn’t strike me as “admitting own failure type”, (Hamilton, di Resta and Massa have tire filures during one weekend and all of them are caused by debris?) might be why he’s been advertising RBR involvement just before announcing news about tire changes at the Canadian gp. No one is wondering why such change or why would Lotus and Ferrari agree to those changes instead everyone is focusing on how this is favoring RBR (which we do not know will.)
    There was too many tyre failures lately, and next one could be fatal and I think that is the reason why we are facing changes now, despite Pirelli not wiling to acknowledge that probably as it would be recognized as failure and they do have market to worry about. This has been going on while you were asleep ;-)
    They change compound just after two races:

    Even though they said they wouldn’t.

    They consider changing tyres yet again

    And bring extra tyres for practice? Why!?

  2. karter22 (@karter22) said on 17th May 2013, 12:08

    Sooner or later, directly or indirectly, Ferrari was going to say something about the issue. And I love the fact it wasn´t Luca directly. Maybe this will teach the drink company a thing or two.

    It’s a shame that these worthy souls kept quiet two years ago when, at the very same Catalunya Circuit and on the Istanbul track, five of the six drivers who got to those two podiums made exactly the same number of pit stops as did Alonso and Massa last Sunday in the Spanish Grand Prix

    It makes no difference if it was on soft/hard, medium/hard , supersoft/hard; the truth of the matter is that

    Today however, it seems one must almost feel ashamed for choosing a strategy that, as always for that matter, is aimed at getting the most out of the package one has available

    MAN UP!!! Quit the B***ing and work with what you´ve got!

    • Robbie (@robbie) said on 17th May 2013, 16:39

      As has been pointed out though, the tires are different than two years ago. It’s not about the number of pit stops. It’s about not having a choice but to do 4 stops and still not to have been able to push the car.

      If Ferrari wants to use the word ‘ashamed’ thats on them. I don’t see them volunteering answers as to what makes this year different from two years ago. They want to make it sound like everything is perfectly fine and it’s only about choosing number of pits stops as being the only issue, when they themselves know it must be about more than that or there wouldn’t be this ‘shame’ as they choose to word it.

    • John H (@john-h) said on 17th May 2013, 21:52

      MAN UP and nurse your hard compound to the end of the race?

      I have sympathy for Ferrari and Lotus, but the examples the HW gives don’t add to their argument at all. And what’s all this being ashamed about strategy? I don’t understand the last paragraph at all in relation to the changes being made. Can anyone enlighten me?

  3. StefMeister (@stefmeister) said on 17th May 2013, 12:18

    As I said in the Lotus article yesterday, The problem wasn’t so much the fact we saw 4-stop’s, It was the fact we saw 4-stops on the 2 hardest compounds & were still having to drive to conserve them as much as they were.

    The difference between 4-stops in 2013 & the 4-stop’s we saw in 2011/2012 is that in 2011/2012 there was nowhere near the same level of tyre management & you still saw drivers able to push hard & race the cars around them.

    I’ve been following F1 long enough to know that there’s always been some element for drivers to manage, However its never been this bad, its never been this obvious & its never hindered the racing like it has so far in 2013.

  4. kimiforWCD2014 (@kimiforwc2013) said on 17th May 2013, 12:46

    Or check Gary Anderssons opinion http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22543884 .

    • AdrianMorse (@adrianmorse) said on 17th May 2013, 13:05

      Gary makes some interesting points, but I don’t agree with

      But if you look at the data, things are not so different this year than they have been at any time since Pirelli became the sport’s sole supplier in 2011, or even in the last year of Bridgestone tyres in 2010.

      I think things were quite different in the Bridgestone era (does that point really need to be argued at all?), and singling out one characteristic of the data – the difference between qualifying time and fastest race lap time of the winner – is not a sound way to support that proposition.

      First of all, the 2010 race was a one-stopper, so the tyres on which the fastest race lap was set had been bolted on around lap 10-15, probably, and second, if you would really “look at the data” (which I haven’t, I admit), I am sure you would see that the lap times are much more consistent.

      Finally, what is not easily seen from the data, and which only the drivers and the engineers can accurately judge, is how hard a driver is pushing for all of the other 65 laps. A major gripe these is that drivers are having to drive very, very carefully even on a four-stopper.

      As for Pirelli, I think we should give them some credit. Any claims they are making these changes in order to make Red Bull champions reek too much of a conspiracy to me. Instead, I would say they are making these changes for the best of their brand, and for the best of Formula 1.

      Lotus and Ferrari have reason to feel aggrieved, but it would have been nice if they could have conceded that a slightly more robust tyre is better for the sport, instead of pushing their personal agenda.

  5. “It makes no difference if it was on soft/hard, medium/hard , supersoft/hard; the truth of the matter is that”

    Of course it matters, because if they used anything other than the 2 hardest compounds (which they had to STILL manage by driving way off their potential pace) – they would have had to have made more than 5 stops, which they physically cant anyway because there isnt enough tyres supplied to do so. and from a spectato point of view, its far too confusing to see more than 4 stops. Did the Horse Manure Whisper mention that their own driver Alonso mentioned that for fans 4 stops is too confusing??

    Its really not right when, with the 2 hard compounds available, you STILL have to drive around way off the pace to manage the deg. Its ridiculous and its not what most people tube in to watch. The only people who are aguring to keep the tyres the same are Raikkonen/Alonso fans, no-one else could possibly ENJOY watching what we saw in Barca because from a racing perspective, it was an embarassement. Seeing drivers wave their competitors past is a shambles.

    This nonsense about Alonso going flat out all race on a 4 stopper is a load of ****, Alonso was being told to manage his front left tyre most of the race and there was points Massa was seconds faster than him when he was told to push.

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 17th May 2013, 13:17

      I agree. Barcelona was incomprehensible to the general public and demeaning to the sport.
      I also have to say that I would have a lot more respect for the Horse Whisperer if he or she used a real name and took responsibility for the sometimes silly utterances.

    • Angelia (@angelia) said on 17th May 2013, 13:56

      And Barcelona has the most abrasive surface of the year, so one could also a call this a knee jerk reaction. This is Barcelona we are talking about I would love to hear about these great racing battles at Barcelona that everyone keeps on mentioning. In one of the recent Bridgestone years I think it was in 2007, there wasn’t even one pass at Barcelona during the whole race.

      People keep on mentioning these great racing battles that has never occurred, so Pirelli are being held accountable for not supplying tyres to a golden era that was never there to begin with.

      • PeterG said on 17th May 2013, 14:24

        In one of the recent Bridgestone years I think it was in 2007, there wasn’t even one pass at Barcelona during the whole race.

        Not true, There has never been any race where no passing has occurred.

        Looking back over recent stats, The lowest number of overtakes at Barcelona was 2 in 2008/2009. In 2010 there was 11.
        2011 was 90, 2012 was 51 & 2013 was 71.

        The issue however is that the 11 overtakes in 2010 & the 2 in 2008/2009 were actually exciting, hard fought overtakes which were great to watch. However the Pirell/DRS passes in 2011-2013 were all totally boring to watch & there was a lot this year where drivers simply allowed the car behind to drive by without even trying to defend which made them even more boring!

        I’d rather see those 2 exciting overtakes in 2009 than the 71 totally boring & easy passes of 2013!

        the racing is so much less exciting now, just a series of easy, unexciting & totally uninteresting highway passes. no proper, exciting racing or overtaking anymore :(

        its why i don’t watch all the races now, no actual racing. it has become like nascar, quantity over quality!

  6. Tango (@tango) said on 17th May 2013, 13:43

    “Ferrari join Lotus in criticising tyre revisions”

    I’d like to have a brilliant comment on that one, but all I can think of really is : “Duh”.
    Power struggle in F1, as usual.

  7. Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 17th May 2013, 13:48

    I fully accept that tyre management has always been an important part of the sport – and rightly so. And yes, I’m glad the past few years haven’t been a procession. But like most things, it has to be balanced.

    Currently it feels like tyre management is the overriding skill used during a race. Previously a driver that couldn’t look after his tyres well could make up for it in other area, whether outright pace or well times stops or whatever. It made the overall package of the driver the key thing, not a single skill.

    Right now, it seems that the only skill that really matters is looking after tyres. Required skills are so skewed in the direction of tyre management that little else gets a look in.

    It just makes the drivers frustrated, and the same for some fans.

    I certainly don’t want tyres that are indestructible. They need to be soft enough to encourage a range of strategies. But from what I can see, it’s the not the degredadtion that’s the main issue, but the narrow operating windows, and the consequences for going outside those windows.

    I just want a bit of balance.

  8. Garns (@) said on 17th May 2013, 13:54

    A few points:
    * I cant see how “The Horse Whisperers” comments are refreshing and while Horner having his opinion is having a whinge- just like Lotus its the big boys pushing their point to help the team.

    *Lotus and Ferrari seem to suit the tyres more, Red Bull not so much and the Mercs pretty bad- the McLarens….well we dont know!!. I agree that if RBR have the car with the best downforce and the fragile tyres hurt that, then that is an bone of contention for sure BUT I can also see where the former can argue a mid season change, if one has done the correct design with 2013 tyre specs in mind, they can well be unhappy. HOWEVER

    * Please lets not prentend for one minute the RBR owner can talk to Bernie and things change BUT The Prancing Horse sits quiet in the background!! Ferrari are still certainly the most influential team on how F1 is run, they are just more professional in how their PR is run. Of course they dont rock the boat when the situation suits but are very fast to respond when things dont (Or may not with the change).

    * Bottom line is the tyres need to change so they can race each ALOT harder than they are now. This will change the pecking order slightly but it needs to be done. We dont want to see 2011 again but if the teams can RACE and have a 2 or maybe 3 stop (a late 3rd stop for rubber can be exciting) I dont think it will.

  9. Psi (@psi) said on 17th May 2013, 13:55

    Spain 2011 – Spain 2012 – Spain 2013
    Every race, was completed in 1 hour,39 minutes and 3 to 16 seconds. Why is everyone saying that the drivers were not pushing as much as they were preserving their tyres?
    Also,on the subject that the drivers were instructed not to defend and let other pass, only RBR drivers were told to. I’m sure there is a reason for that.

    • HCA said on 17th May 2013, 14:15

      only RBR drivers were told to.

      not the case, raikkonen said post race that he was told not to bother trying to defend the lead against alonso because he had to watch his tyres.

      Spain 2011 – Spain 2012 – Spain 2013
      Every race, was completed in 1 hour,39 minutes and 3 to 16 seconds.

      so you think that the 2013 cars have gained zero performance over 2011/2012 cars?

      the fact the race distance hasn’t changed much shows just how far off the pace there having to lap as both the teams & pirelli say the 2013 cars are 2-3 seconds a lap faster than the 2012 cars were at this point last season. in fact pirelli say the extra car performance over 2012 is part of the problem.

      if drivers were able to push hard & not run about to a lap time looking after the tyres, the race distance would be faster than 2011/2012.
      in fact you see that 2010 was a lot faster because the bridgestones did not need to be managed.

      you only have to watch the onboard shots during a race & compare to past years to see just how far off the pace drivers are having to run & this is why the drivers are speaking out now & were not in the past.

      also just look at the times compared to gp2/gp3, f1 lap times should not be slower than gp2 for most the race & should be more than 5 seconds faster than gp3.

      all the data shows is what a pathetic state f1 is in this year!

    • Yoshisune (@yobo01) said on 17th May 2013, 14:57

      Because the 2013 cars are much faster than last year and slightly faster than 2011. Pole time in 2011 was 1.20.981, this year it was 1.20.718. Also, we should take into account that drivers were able to use DRS whenever they liked in quali, so I think it’s resonable to say that this year’s cars are 4 or 5 tenths faster than two years ago.
      Still, it took 13 seconds more than 2011 to complete the race with the same strategy.

  10. Dizzy said on 17th May 2013, 14:08

    lot of people saying that lotus/ferrari were not looking after there tyres & were able to push harder than the rest. however looking at the lap analysis that isn’t correct.

    alonso’s fastest lap was a 1:26.681 on lap 53, however that was 1 of only 2 laps in the 1:26’s, for most of the race he was lapping in the 1:28/1:29 range.
    kimi’s fastest lap was 1:26.757 on lap 47, his only lap in the 1:26’s, for much of the race he was lapping in the 1:29’s/1:30’s.
    http://www.fia.com/championship/fia-formula-1-world-championship/2013/2013-spanish-grand-prix-event-information

    what you see from that is that everybody is running well below the pace & as has been pointed out by button there below gp2 times (GP2 Pole = 1:28.706) for most of the race only pulling out 1-2 hot laps.

  11. Jack Lenox (@jacklenox) said on 17th May 2013, 14:25

    I sympathise with Ferrari and Lotus. I don’t remember Mateschitz complaining in 2011 when almost every race ended with Sebastien Vettel winning about a minute ahead of everyone else, scooping up enough points to tie up the championship by Japan. That wasn’t racing.

  12. Patrick Boyle (@patrickboyle) said on 17th May 2013, 14:30

    Everyone seems to be ignoring the issue of delaminations. They are downright dangerous and clearly happening far too much. It’s quite possible that Pirelli intend to strengthen the bond between the tread and carcass, having little or no effect on the degradation and perormance. I think they’re just reluctant to come out and say that their tires are dangerous. Look at the shots of the Pirelli engineer covering up the tire on the Torro Rosso as it’s being rolled into the pits, they’re obviously quite sensitive about the issue.

    • DaveW (@dmw) said on 17th May 2013, 15:36

      Don’t forget that this dramatic delamination also broke a driveline and gearbox on the Mercedes. Pirelli tried to buffalo people about that at the time saying it was just due to debris or whatever, and thow they are trying to say that this is really an advantage because instead you would have an immediate deflation…because somehow long shreds of tire matrial spinning on a wheel while the car rides on the steel belt is better? They are generally not being honest about the delamination issue. They made a basic, eggregious design error here. The whole compounds controvesy ironically is obscuring this more serious issue.

  13. William (@william) said on 17th May 2013, 14:58

    I don’t have a problem with the tyres as it makes it more interesting. Those stupid Red Bulls what they want they get. Come on Paul Hembrey switch it back to 2013 tyres not 2012 tyres. I just hate it when drivers don’t go out on track immediately. Why don’t the broadcasters have a commercial break, if they keep doing this?

  14. DaveW (@dmw) said on 17th May 2013, 15:31

    As I said before, the comparison to Magny Cours is irrelevant, immaterial and pointless for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is refueling. The Horse Whisperer, as usual, is talking nonsense in the interest of stirring the pot.

    Everyone claiming that Lotus and Ferrari will lose their relative form because the tires become more durable is jumping to conclusions. It’s not the total tire life that affects relative competitiveness of the cars, it is the rate of degradation and the change in the rate of degradation—the shape of the curve, not how far it goes. It’s not clear that the change in compound will affect the degradation curve. After all, the ostensible brief for Pirelli is not to reduce stops. That does not mean that the tires will degrade more gradually, just that they will last longer. Nonetheless, a longer-lasting tire, given the limitation on available tires, should tend to let the drivers drive more an drive harder on Saturday and Sunday.

    However, the more important issue is shape and construction of the tire–which implicates suspension design, set up, even aero. No one knows how the move to the new shape and the change back to kevlar bands will affect any car and somehow no one is focused on this at all.

    • Nomore (@nomore) said on 17th May 2013, 15:54

      @dmw

      The Horse Whisperer, as usual, is talking nonsense in the interest of stirring the pot

      Or maybe are you ?

      Everyone claiming that Lotus and Ferrari will lose their relative form because the tires become more durable is jumping to conclusions

      They know their cars more than you know (or everyone of us)…if they contest this change, they have a reason…don’t they ?

      However, the more important issue is shape and construction of the tire–which implicates suspension design, set up, even aero.

      Yes and Ferrari and Lotus have designed their cars based on this tires, which were given in Brazil 2012.

      how the move to the new shape and the change back to kevlar bands will affect any car and somehow no one is focused on this at all.

      If RB pushed for this change, logic says that they will benefit, it was no need to change the construction of a tyre. The delaminations problem could be achieved without changing the construction nor the degradation.

      • DaveW (@dmw) said on 17th May 2013, 16:11

        The only clear point of substance here to respond to, i.e, the one that goes beyond school-yard bluster, is incorrect: the delamination problem cannot be solved without changing the construction. The reason for the delaminations is the change of the belt design. Your possibly substantive addtional point that the teams designed their current cars based on data for tires that would not be used this year is just inexplicable.

        • Nomore (@nomore) said on 17th May 2013, 16:59

          @dmw

          The reason for the delaminations is the change of the belt design

          Can i have the link from pirelli expert where this is mentioned that : “to correct the delaminations we shall change the construction” ? … I will be waiting for that

          Your possibly substantive addtional point that the teams designed their current cars based on data for tires that would not be used this year is just inexplicable

          http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/Teams-to-try-2013-tyres-in-Brazil,51412.html

          As normally when no argument is in play, people ends with : “is just inexplicable.”

          It si explicable and it doesn’t need too much too understand why changing the tires now will affect the outcome of the championship. i.e the championship will be manipulated.
          It si wrong to change the tires (now, at the end of the season i agree…), and basically it wrong to change the rules of a game once the game has started.
          But as ferrari said today different brain operate in different mode.

          Here is a good article why Pirelli is going to change tires :http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/todd-mccandless/formula-one-pirelli_b_3264419.html

  15. Michael Brown (@) said on 17th May 2013, 15:44

    Since the tires have been moved 1 step softer each season, compared to 2011 the current tires are:
    2013 – 2011
    Hard – Soft
    Medium – Super Soft
    Soft – Super Super Soft
    Super Soft – Super Super Super Soft

    That’s just rediculous

    • Paul2013 said on 17th May 2013, 17:03

      That is exactly the same for every one and those were the tyres from the begining, but RDB did not prepare the cars properly so…. we change the rules (that is rediculous).

      • Danilo Schoeneberg said on 17th May 2013, 17:51

        It’s not the same for everyone. All teams were given the data about the Pirelli tires for 2013 in late 2012. Pirelli’s test car is a 2010 Renault, so only Lotus have the data to cross-match the Pirelli tire data with the data of the car they were developed with. So as the only team Lotus had a cross-matched base from which to extrapolate the design parameters for their 2013 cars. That’s why Lotus could run 2 stops at Melbourne when everyone else needed 3 and they could run a 3 stopper at Barcelona when the opponents needed four. And that’s why Lotus is crying the loudest now. They’ll lose their unfair advantage.

    • Max Jacobson (@vettel1) said on 18th May 2013, 12:46

      That’s actually an interesting way to think of it: effectively then we just did a race on the soft and super soft at one of the most punishing tracks on tyres! That’s why they need changed IMO.

  16. obviously said on 17th May 2013, 16:48

    There’s a beautiful technical article on Pitpass about tire-car interaction. I hope Keith doesn’t mind me posting a link here, because it can help people appreciate the challenge 2013 tires have bring, instead of just seeing the “not pushing 100% all the time” or “too many pitstops” side of the debate.
    I certainly hope this change Pirelli brings will be minimal and won’t remove this exciting challenge that teams were faced with in the first 5 races.
    http://www.pitpass.com/49073-Is-Pirelli-really-to-blame

    • tvm (@) said on 17th May 2013, 17:39

      Yeah I’m sure that “Matt Sommerfield” has a much better grip on tires than 4 former f1 champions who has actually tried these tires and think they are crap…

      Why not artificially degrading Gearboxes, Suspension, Engines, Fuel if I may ask?

      These Pirelli tires are useless, the signs are everywhere for only the ignorant to ignore.

      If people could just admit that they want pro wrestling F1 it would be so much easier to understand.

      • kubica2 said on 17th May 2013, 18:42

        4 former champs who want to be champs again will complain when they are not getting their way – they should work harder.

      • obviously said on 17th May 2013, 22:31

        Your reply is a perfect illustration of how the side you are defending behaved during this few months of intense lobbying and slanting. Just be loud and try to undermine opposition’s arguments by insulting them.

        Did you even read the text? It’s interesting and informative, no matter what your view is.

  17. Paul2013 said on 17th May 2013, 17:00

    They are completely right, RDB is having problems, SO PIRELLI CHANGE THE RULES!
    —–
    Vettel should drive as Alonso did and stop moaning. But obviously if RDB does not have adventage they could not win a fly driving a bike.

  18. sato113 (@sato113) said on 17th May 2013, 17:19

    they’re only complaining because they stand to loose out from it. yet they dont mention that at all…

  19. Danilo Schoeneberg said on 17th May 2013, 17:33

    Whoever does the Iraqi Information Minister routine for Ferrari there must be thinking, F1 viewers are window-licking idiots. Who do they think they can fool with that ‘others have won on four stoppers, too’ shtick? When Vettel won two years ago and Schumacher in 2004, the CHOSE to make 4 stops. It was a tactical option and in between stops they pushed the raw stuffing out of their cars.
    At barcelona teams were FORCED to adopt a four stopper as the tires could be run more than 15 laps without dropping 5 seconds a lap. And even with four stops drivers were endlessly told on team radio to go slow and preserve tires.
    The tire change doesn’t come because of RB’s or Mercedes’ complaint. It comes because Pirelli was shown in a devastating fashion, that its tires are simply not fit for use an a race car.

  20. GT_Racer said on 17th May 2013, 18:15

    I think a lot of those complaining about the change & blaming it on Red Bull are ignoring the facts.

    Yes Red Bull was critical of the 2013 tyres, However they were not alone & as I’ve detailed before this year 90% of the grid (Teams & Drivers) had voiced complaints about the tyres.
    Red Bull were more vocal in public but in private practically the entire grid had voices issues to Pirelli.

    People say that Red Bull had no concerns when they won in Sepang & Bahrain, However they were just as vocal even while they were winning:
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/22/motor-racing-prix-red-bull-idUKL3N0CEMQ420130322

    Also look at the bigger picture, People in the media who have been supportive of Pirelli over 2011/2012 have begun to criticize the 2013 tyres. Martin Brundle has been one of the biggest supporters of both Pirelli & DRS yet he has been quite critical of both a few times through 2013.
    David Coulthard is similar, He was quite vocal in his dislike of the tyres post Spanish Gp on the BBC Forum.

    You also see the fan response, In 2011/2012 Pirelli seemed to have a big majority of the fans support, So far in 2013 there has been a lot more criticism from the fans, You see it on this website but you also see it via twitter, facebook & other things as was documented on sky when they spoke to some media people who monitor fan reaction on social media.

    The people who seem to think changes were made just because of Red Bull are just flat out wrong on this, Its perhaps true the changes MAY benefit Red Bull (And Mercedes lets not forget), However its clear that the majority of people both inside & outside of F1 disliked the way the tyres were & also don’t ignore that Pirelli themselfs have said there data shows they went too far & its because of this that changes have been made & not because of 1 team.

    Also speaking to someone on Wednesday, There are a lot of people within F1 unhappy about the way Pirelli have played the situation to the media. There are several top people in FOTA uncomfortable with Paul Hembrey’s comments indicating Pirelli have the power to decide who’s competitive & who isn’t. There’s no suggestion that Pirelli have, will or have thought about manipulating the tyres to hinder or benefit any team, There just nervous about the impression it gives out & would rather he stop singling out any team when making those sort of comments.

    • kbdavies (@kbdavies) said on 17th May 2013, 21:02

      @GT_Racer

      This is EXACTLY what i have been saying all along. Hembery thinks he is media savvy, but all he is doing is making his company look like a fool. Hemebry is the one who brought up the Red Bull favouritsm issue and the one who is making Red Bull the scape goat of the debacle – despite virtually every team and driver voicing concerns over the tyres. They have made this issue far worse than it could have been – If only they had quietly gone about rectifyng a mess that is of their own making.

      As i said, it seems Hembery relishes the fact that Pirelli is essentially a “kingmaker” and just cannot help but gloat about it. It is about making the teams sit up and take notice that Pirelli have the power to influenence the outcome of the championship – even though that is not their aim.
      Bad move IMO

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar