Beyond Thunderdome at his age? He'd deserve a slap on the back for that but I think he's tied up with his privacy appeal for the moment. Toadt looks less and less like he's up to job, though.
Old Maxie is up to something, he would not go quite so public and agreeable with the majority if there wasn't an underlying motive. Toad is not really doing the job is he, thinking back he tends to leave the decision making to others and does not get involved himself. I'm not sure what's going on, very interesting.
This is a rather telling passage, quoted directly from Autosport. It's rather ironic that it is Mosley pointing out errors in FIA procedure; he was quite happy to steam-roller his way through ethical concerns when it suited his own agenda (for instance crucifying Ron Dennis and McLaren): " … There are also now believed to be issues relating to the manner in which the FIA changed the calendar without the unanimous support of the competitors. Former FIA president Max Mosley suggested to BBC Radio that the governing body was in breach of its own International Sporting Code in the way it shifted the date of the Indian GP at its World Motor Sport Council meeting last week. Article 66 of the ISC states: "No amendments shall be made to the Supplementary Regulations after the beginning of the period for receiving entries, unless unanimous agreement is given by all competitors already entered, or by decision of the stewards of the meeting for reasons of force majeure or safety (see Article 141)." Does Toadt have a clue how to handle all this?
Just heard it's off, it needed to be. In my opinion. The drivers and the teams in general were at risk, and the innocent people would be shot to pieces whilst a shiny fast car makes it's way around a track.
Reading cosi's post, I'm worried if they don't even know their own rules, what hope do the rest of us have!
Where are you getting that from, Manny? I think Toadt needs to consider resigning after this. There are all kinds of cock-ups coming out of his FIA and he's really not up to the job.
Well, I pointed out Mosley's observation earlier and I'm not convinced they don't know their own rules. I think Toadt is trying to play both sides off against each other and failing. William Hague has criticised the decision in Parliament. Menzies Campbell called it, "simply shameful." I just don't think Toadt has the political nous that's required for that role. EDIT: JA reports that the teams have not left the door open to return to Bahrain later in the year and simply don't want to go at all in 2011.
The FIA proved they have no moral compass when they mercilessly made hundreds of millions of people sit through the previous seven Bahrain grands prix. They should have just called an end to it full stop in March. They should remove it from next year's calendar as well since the concorde agreement only allows for a 20 race season.
Of course Max is no fool, he obtained a degree at Oxford in physics and later studied law and became a barrister, so he is no stranger to fine detail and minutea, he knows how to manipulate situations to suit his own agenda. My problem with him is, his motives are more likely to be self orientated and less likely to be for the benefit of mankind.
Good old reviews that come out in the open... The FIA report of Bahrain: http://avaazpress.s3.amazonaws.com/FIA Bahrain report FULL.pdf
The FIA reply to FOTA indicates that it's been batted back to El Hypocrite to come up with an alternative.
Surely the FIA stance is irrelevant, because the original decision taken by the FIA to reinstate the Bahrain GP was illegal because FOTA had to agree with any modifications to the calender and as far as we know this permission was not actually granted, but merely assumed by Toad.
Yes, that is also my understanding Ernie. At this stage it is difficult to see how Toadt is not going to avoid looking a complete fool. As the President of the FIA, it is incumbent upon him to lead its decision making process and of course to be familiar with its procedural obligations, never mind what should have been beyond question: familiarity with the rules of the thing he presides over! On top of that, he appears to have no sense of F1 being used as a political tool - as I suggested when the decision to reinstate was first made; and completely contradicts himself at the end of the interview, which I believed was conducted by the far more astute Ted Kravitz. …Ted, what can you tell us?
As for Ecclestone, he is simply a businessman. He has been embarrassed by Toadt's incompetence, having trusted things to him; since it is Ecclestone rather than the leap-away-and-hide toad, who has found himself in the firing line for Bahraini criticism.
As I read through the FIA response I thought they were going to tell FOTA, "tough - the decision's been taken now just fall into line," especially when Toadt referred to the teams' representative in point no. 4 (Domenicali), who voted to reinstate Bahrain. At the end, of course, there's a complete climb down. What's relevant is the position Toadt is left standing in. I don't think this is any longer a story about whether the Bahrain GP takes place in 2011 or not, it's about the extent to which the FIA (and particularly Mr. Toadt) has been undermined by the teams and the commercial rights holder. The scale and the manner (having the report of his special envoy to Bahrain utterly dismissed) of this humiliation surely means he is now a lame duck president and he needs to resign if the FIA is to recover any semblance of respect or authority.
You should know toads have a warty skin. Very offensive when tasted/bitten. Expect some reaction from Monsieur slimy.
