Mark Hughes

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Current page

151

Current page

152

Current page

153

Current page

154

Current page

155

Current page

156

Current page

157

Current page

158

Current page

159

Current page

160

Current page

161

Current page

162

Current page

163

Current page

164

Current page

165

Current page

166

Current page

167

Current page

168

Current page

169

Current page

170

Current page

171

Current page

172

On and off the circuit, F1 continues to confound. Bernie Ecclestone’s Munich court case for alleged bribery of the German banker Gerhard Gribkowsky has been concluded by a payment from Ecclestone of $100 million to the German authorities.

This type of settlement, a peculiarity of the German legal system, implies neither guilt nor innocence and has been applied reportedly because the prosecution was becoming ever less confident it could prove its case – i e that Ecclestone did indeed pay a bribe and not, as he claims, a blackmail fee. There’s a man currently serving a jail term for accepting a bribe, but he’s maybe serving it for a crime different to the one he actually committed. Something happened but no one is sure quite what – which is a pretty good summation of Ecclestone’s entire era in charge of F1.

When the court case was announced, Ecclestone was asked to stand down from the board of private equity company CVC’s Formula 1 arm, which controls the sport. In reality, though, its day-to-day running remained in Bernie’s hands. At the time of writing it was unknown whether he would be reinstated to the board, but perhaps of more significance is whether the conclusion of the case will now allow the sport to be packaged up ready for sale. In that case, it would once again be subject to the whims and business pressures of the latest bunch of chancers while serious questions remain about its underlying health. Perhaps F1 has already made its really big money and all that might be left will be the relative scraps of a business in decline.

Meanwhile, the media is being criticised by various team bosses for painting the sport in a negative light – as though there were nothing really wrong with it. Their ideal seems to be that everyone runs at undiminished speed towards the precipice of the cliff, cheerfully singing. The fault line – the mismatch of cost and income – that the sport is desperately trying to straddle will not be fixed by pretending it isn’t there.

Meanwhile, it’s true that we are enjoying a fascinating season on the track – despite the big superiority of one car. Before the summer recess, only Daniel Ricciardo’s Red Bull had broken the Mercedes stranglehold and the young Australian’s sensational form – together with the fascinating ongoing struggle between Merc’s Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton – has been one of the most enjoyable facets of the year to date. Red Bull’s Renault power unit cannot hold a candle to that of the Mercedes, but the RB11 is nonetheless beating all but the factory W05s – with an aerodynamic advantage probably as great as during the team’s title-winning run. This is despite the banishing of the exhaust-blowing technology, widely ascribed as the main reason for Red Bull’s previous superiority. The reason for Red Bull’s drop in form is the new engine formula and the respective responses to it from Renault and Mercedes. Aerodynamically, its advantage remains. So if exhaust blowing can no longer be the reason, where is it coming from? Just as with the bribery case, something is happening but no one (outside the team) is quite sure what.

Attention has refocused on how Red Bull can run its car with a degree of downforce-inducing rake that seems impossible. If the car’s tea-tray (the leading edge of the floor, beneath the nose) remains as rigid at speed as when it’s measured stationary by the FIA, then its leading edge would need to be beneath the surface of the track to allow the car to run with as big a difference between front and rear ride height as it does. So clearly the tea tray is moving upwards beyond a certain speed as the increasing downforce forces the car down. But how? One suggestion was that it was heat-related, that the scraping of the tray along the track surface at lower speeds heated it up sufficiently to trigger some sort of structural change in the material that allowed it to bend as it was pressed upwards. A rearwards-facing infra-red camera on last year’s Red Bull showed the tea tray to be running exceptionally hot. The FIA duly applied extreme heat to it before subjecting it to the load test – and it passed comfortably. A new theory, suggested by reader Obi Offiah, is that the change in the material’s properties could be triggered by the vibration frequency. Think of a bucket full of tightly-packed sand and how rigid that is when you press down upon it but how, if the bucket were vibrated at a high frequency, you could sink your hand into the contents.

It’s as good a theory as any for a mysterious phenomenon that has been apparent for several years, but it still doesn’t explain what happened between Bernie and the banker.

You may also like

Related products