So who posted what on the BBC?
Alright, begging isn't very dignified...![]()
BLS has a comment on the race report from his Benson-ness linking to the awards thread, I haven't found the one linking here.
When Pirelli was given the nod to enter F1 for the 2011 season, another major contender for the contract was Hankook.
At the time, the Korean company's chief Hyan Bum Cho said he had negotiated personally with Bernie Ecclestone.
"We had a very good talk and maybe we'll have a shot for next term, or another term," he said in late 2010.
The source Italiaracing is now reporting rumours that Hankook is once again a possible alternative to Pirelli for formula one in 2014 and beyond.
http://www.auto123.com/en/racing-ne...ve-to-pirelli-as-a-tire-supplier?artid=154753
910 guests!

So who posted what on the BBC?
From what the FIA have said, it sounds like Pirelli are the ones at fault for being negligent. I can't see them back in F1 next year.
Hankook anyone?
F1 doesn't need to make Pirelli the bad guy though... we could soon run out of willing suppliers if we continue like this.
It's a funny one, as presumably Pirelli approached Mercedes about the test, and told them how it was to function. Mercedes probably don't have access to the complete contract Pirelli have with the FIA, otherwise this 1000km test clause wouldn't have seemed like such a shock to other teams. I suspect Pirelli have then told Mercedes how the tests works, and herein lies the problem. Whether Pirelli misunderstood/misrepresented their own contract, I don't know, but I think the problem boils down to the facts that it was a 2013 car, and that Mercedes, not Pirelli personnel, ran a lot of the test. But, Mercedes will say they were only acting within what they were told was legal, and you can't really punish them for that, to my mind anyway. And how do you publish your tyre manufacturer???So anyway since that's all technical gibberish to be me what does it mean in terms of the likelyhood of Mercedes and/or Pirelli being punished in some way? It was being played down this morning, but that note from the FIA indicates that they may have broken the regulations after all?
From what the FIA have said, it sounds like Pirelli are the ones at fault for being negligent. I can't see them back in F1 next year. Hankook anyone?
Nowhere near what General Chat had for the Tulisa sex tape, but a definite record for F1.![]()

I'm Batman:4797234 said:F1 doesn't need to make Pirelli the bad guy though... we could soon run out of willing suppliers if we continue like this.
Too much money involved for that to happen. As long as there is F1, then there will be people willing to supply tyres.
Not if it's such awful publicity like it has been.
BLS has a comment on the race report from his Benson-ness linking to the awards thread, I haven't found the one linking here.
Not if it's such awful publicity like it has been.
I don't think we'll be seeing deliberately **** tyres again after this. It's a shame because they got the balance right in 2011 and salvaged what would otherwise have been an incredibly boring season.
How bad is it though? They've embedded the brand in people's minds, short term they'll be associated with tyres which delaminate dramatically, but long term the brand will be more recognisable. In years to come people will look back on photos and footage of the last three years and see the Pirelli brand, their logo is really prominent on the hats the drivers wear on the podium, this era will be looked back on as having some of the best drivers and they'll be wearing Pirelli merch when they celebrate wins. It will be good publicity for them in the long run I think. Whether it's worth it depends on how much money they've blown.