{"id":52161,"date":"2016-02-03T16:54:55","date_gmt":"2016-02-03T16:54:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/issue_content\/reflections-with-nigel-roebuck-9\/"},"modified":"2019-07-19T15:53:15","modified_gmt":"2019-07-19T14:53:15","slug":"reflections-nigel-roebuck","status":"publish","type":"issue_content","link":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/archive\/article\/september-2015\/19\/reflections-nigel-roebuck\/","title":{"rendered":"Reflections with Nigel Roebuck"},"content":{"rendered":"

Balancing risk: the thoughts of Lauda, Stewart, R\u00e4ikk\u00f6nen and Ken Tyrell<\/strong> <\/p>\n

Among the photographic folders on my iPad is one entitled \u2018Offbeat\u2019, wherein reside a couple of hundred racing images meeting that criterion. Here you will find such as Gilles Villeneuve airborne \u2013 naturally \u2013 on a snowmobile, John Surtees, wearing goggles but no helmet, driving his Lotus 18 through Riverside traffic at the 1960 US Grand Prix, Lorenzo Bandini chatting up Fran\u00e7oise Hardy at the launch party for Grand Prix, the retrieval of Alberto Ascari\u2019s Lancia following its plunge into the Monaco harbour in 1955\u2026<\/p>\n

One of my favourites is of Spa Francorchamps in 1968: a farmer is milking his cows in the rain while Graham Hill\u2019s Lotus 49 flashes by in the background. Separating them is a fence of barbed wire, erected to keep the animals in the field, and there was \u2013 is \u2013 much of it around the old circuit. If you doubt me, park by the friterie at the exit of the Masta Kink, walk back a few yards and take a look.<\/p>\n

For countless years it has been my ritual, on the Thursday before the Belgian Grand Prix, to drive around the old circuit, frequently pausing to take photographs, most of which get deleted because they merely duplicate those from previous visits. Even as I take them, I am aware of this, but still I can\u2019t help myself because this place has a mystic hold on me. No matter how many times I set off around the \u2018old\u2019 Spa, still the same thought occurs: no, no, they can\u2019t possibly have raced Formula 1 cars here\u2026<\/p>\n

They did, though, and it is to my eternal regret that, although I saw the Ferrari 312Ps of Redman\/Merzario and Ickx\/Regazzoni finish 1-2 in the Spa 1000Kms in 1972, I was never there for a Grand Prix. In 1970, the year before starting work as a racing journalist, I went to Monaco, Zandvoort and Monza, so why not Spa? Had I known this would be the circuit\u2019s F1 swansong, assuredly I would have made the trip, but I didn\u2019t \u2013 which shows how little nous I had in those days, for it was known that there was pressure to have it removed from the world championship schedule. Ah me\u2026<\/p>\n

According to those who raced there back in the day, the most testing part of the circuit was the Masta Kink, a left-right flick \u2013 bordered by houses \u2013 with a downhill approach, and taken flat only by the very skilled, the very brave. Jackie Stewart remembers \u2018the Kink\u2019 as the most challenging corner in all of motor racing: it was here in 1966 that he aquaplaned off the road in what was the worst accident of his career.<\/p>\n

According to the lamented Innes Ireland, \u201cThe excitement of Spa stemmed from driving on an everyday road. The first time I drove there, I was sort of putting my front wheel across somebody\u2019s doorstep and I found that idea very appealing\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

One of Spa\u2019s great glories, which happily survives in the current circuit, is of course Eau Rouge, as dramatic a series of swerves as ever you will find. Thanks to \u2018aero\u2019, in the modern era it has become comfortably flat for one and all, and I find that regrettable, for time was when it separated the great from the good, when a Prost or Senna would reckon to keep from lifting maybe once or twice in a weekend, and that was it.<\/p>\n

Twenty-five or so years ago there were rumblings about the need for change at Eau Rouge: it\u2019s a fact that run-off was minimal, and the death of Stefan Bellof in the 1985 Spa 1000Kms was a shocking reminder of its perils. Given the local topography, not much could be done about the actual sequence of corners, so there arose the question of a chicane before them. Senna the purist was outraged, I remember: \u201cIf you take away Eau Rouge,\u201d he said, \u201cyou take away the reason I do this\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

Ultimately, though, there was a chicane before Eau Rouge, and the irony was that it came about as a consequence of Ayrton\u2019s fatal accident in 1994.<\/p>\n

For anyone too young to remember, it is probably nigh impossible to appreciate how Grand Prix racing was at that time. When Gilles Villeneuve and Riccardo Paletti were killed, in 1982, the public reaction was much as it had always been: yes, it was desperately sad, but once in a while inevitable in a sport that could never be safe.<\/p>\n

Twelve years on, though, when Senna and Roland Ratzenberger died at Imola, the world had clearly changed, and the \u2018risk-averse\u2019 mentality we take for granted these days manifested itself vividly in press coverage across the world. \u201cIn the name of sport,\u201d screamed the Daily Star, sandwiching the headline between photographs of Senna and Ratzenberger slumped in their cockpits. And at the bottom of the page: \u201cThese young men were killed giving us thrills.\u201d<\/p>\n

Had any driver other than Senna been lost, society\u2019s response would have been way less acute, but as one of the most celebrated people on earth his death transcended sport, and as shocked as anyone by the worldwide response was Max Mosley, then president of the FIA. \u201cI\u2019ll confess I was stunned,\u201d Mosley said, \u201cbecause, to me, being an F1 driver was like being a fighter pilot \u2013 there was a small but finite risk that you would come unstuck. That didn\u2019t alter the fact that it was very sad, particularly if you knew the person, but it could happen. However, the public doesn\u2019t seem to react like that these days…\u201d<\/p>\n

Pressure on the FIA was therefore intense to make changes to this \u2018killer sport\u2019, and although Mosley wisely resisted any knee-jerk reaction, that pressure only increased at Monaco a fortnight later, when Karl Wendlinger crashed his Sauber at the chicane. Initially it didn\u2019t look very serious, but Wendlinger suffered life-threatening head injuries and suddenly it felt as if it were impossible to escape unhurt from a Formula 1 accident.<\/p>\n

Not surprisingly the ambience in the paddock was jumpy in the extreme, and at a press conference hastily convened the following morning Mosley announced a plethora of changes, some to be introduced immediately. By the terms of the Concorde Agreement that would ordinarily have been impossible, but these were not normal circumstances. \u201cBecause of the gravity of the situation, and the force of public opinion,\u201d Mosley said, \u201cthe time has come to push aside such considerations, and simply do what is right, in the general interests of the sport. There will be loud criticism from certain quarters, but it will have to be ignored.\u201d<\/p>\n

The rule changes related primarily to a reduction of downforce and horsepower, as well as safety modifications to the cars. All of these duly came into effect \u2013 but so also did manifold alterations to circuits. And while many of these were justified, some were not. At Barcelona, a month after Imola, practice was delayed so that a temporary, wholly unsatisfactory, tyre barrier chicane could be inserted before a corner through which the drivers had for years raced without qualm.<\/p>\n

Mosley announced a plan to eliminate what he called \u201clife-threatening corners\u201d from Formula 1, and 16 were identified. As time went by, though, several drivers began to reflect on the circuit changes, and to allow that there had been a degree of overreaction.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt seemed,\u201d said Gerhard Berger, \u201cthat the world had gone crazy, that, for some reason, F1 had suddenly become much more dangerous. We looked for some common link in the accidents at Imola and Monaco, but really there wasn\u2019t one \u2013 it was all horrible coincidence\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

After an exhaustive investigation, the FIA reached the same conclusion, but still the conviction remained that certain corners were unacceptably perilous, and one of those \u2013 perhaps inevitably \u2013 was Eau Rouge. When we got to Spa in late August, it was with dismay that we looked on a chicane at the bottom of the hill \u2013 a slow left-right leading into the fabled switchback.<\/p>\n

As Berger remarked, this if anything was more dangerous than the corners it sought to protect: \u201cYou\u2019re still coming down the hill flat out, but now if anything goes wrong you\u2019re going to run head on into a guardrail\u2026\u201d Many of us that weekend remembered what Senna had said about Eau Rouge, about his raison d\u2019\u00eatre as a racing driver. <\/p>\n

That said, it was undeniable that some changes had to be made, not least to Tamburello, where Ayrton had died; with a river immediately beyond the corner there was no way to increase run-off, and when we went back to Imola in 1995 a chicane had taken the place of the flat-out left-hander. \u201cIronic, isn\u2019t it?\u201d murmured Professor Sid Watkins that weekend. \u201cIt\u2019s been changed because of Senna\u2019s accident \u2013 and the way it is now, he would have hated it\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

A chicane before Eau Rouge, though, was a different matter, for it changed the whole ethos of the Spa we knew, and although the word was that it was only temporary, pending a significant increase in run-off area, not many of us believed it. That being so, in 1995 it was a delight to be proved wrong: the work had indeed been carried out and the chicane was nowhere to be seen.<\/p>\n

\u2756<\/p>\n

Earlier that year, at Magny-Cours, I interviewed Bernie Ecclestone. At one point we got on to the subject of TV audiences, which \u2013 unpalatably, if perhaps not surprisingly \u2013 had surged upwards in the aftermath of the Imola disasters.<\/p>\n

\u201cAfter Senna got killed,\u201d said Ecclestone, \u201ceveryone said, \u2018That\u2019s it, Formula 1\u2019s finished, forget it\u2019. Remember that? \u2018Brazil,\u2019 they said, \u2018don\u2019t even have a race in Brazil\u2026\u2019 This year we had the biggest crowd ever in Brazil. The TV ratings have been bigger than ever, and at every circuit the crowd has been up. Now, don\u2019t ask me why…\u201d<\/p>\n

All I could suggest in possible explanation was that the death of Senna had inevitably exposed Formula 1 to a wider world, and also that \u2013 in the starkest terms \u2013 it had served to remind a new generation that this was indeed a serious business, where tragedy meant what it said.<\/p>\n

Twenty years on, though, F1 has changed out of recognition, with ever more emphasis on The Show, and \u2013 coincidence? \u2013 ever smaller audiences, be it at the circuits or in front of the TV. The cars are way slower \u2013 and quieter \u2013 than they used to be, and fans are befuddled by a multiplicity of rules, penalties and the like, which never used to exist.<\/p>\n

As well as that, the classic circuits are gradually disappearing from the schedule, replaced by new ones in countries where there is no cultural link with Formula 1, where very often a Grand Prix is sought by a despotic regime keen to buff up its unsavoury image with a big cheque. CVC stakeholders, studying their portfolios, really like this; the rest of us do not.<\/p>\n

As Martin Whitmarsh said a couple of years ago, \u201cModern-day circuits are not only boring \u2013 they\u2019ve also been designed terribly for overtaking. The place that leaves me speechless is Abu Dhabi: one of the longest straights in F1 \u2013 and you put a single-file chicane at the end of it! <\/p>\n

\u201cHere\u2019s a flat piece of sand, together with apparently unlimited money, so you could do anything, couldn\u2019t you? You could say, \u2018Why does Interlagos generally have a good race \u2013 or Spa?\u2019 Overtaking is an outcome, isn\u2019t it? It\u2019s not just a matter of \u2018a corner\u2019 \u2013 it\u2019s a combination of the preceding straight, and the corner before that straight, but apparently that\u2019s not given any thought\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

Throw in the fact that since 1994 attention to safety has been so obsessive as to eliminate as much as possible anything even vaguely risky, and the cumulative effect has been to dilute the excitement of F1 \u2013 which in turn has diluted its audience. There might have been massive crowds at such as Silverstone and Montr\u00e9al, but in 2015 these are against the trend.<\/p>\n

The downturn in interest has of course had a dire effect on the finances of most \u2013 not all \u2013 of those involved in F1, which is why in the recent past such efforts have been made, by the so-called F1 Strategy Group and others, to come up with ideas to halt the slide. Nearly all have smacked of panic, of blundering round in the dark, a readiness to try any gimmick going. <\/p>\n

A return to refuelling? Well, why not? Might work better than last time. How about a reverse grid? Now there\u2019s an idea\u2026<\/p>\n

Others, though, have considered rather more fundamental aspects of the sport. What was it that people used to love about F1 that isn\u2019t there any more? And perhaps it is no more than inevitable that some have lately dared to suggest that maybe one element lacking today is danger.<\/p>\n

\u2756<\/p>\n

These words I wrote yesterday, and in light of this morning\u2019s news \u2013 not unexpected, but no less raw for that \u2013 they of course seem crass: Jules Bianchi, a shy and charming character, and potentially a great racing driver, succumbed to the grievous head injuries he suffered at Suzuka last autumn. <\/p>\n

\u2018Safety\u2019 in motor racing must remain a relative term, for tragedy will always find a way to intrude, as on this occasion. Cars and circuits may be immeasurably safer than they used to be, but Bianchi collided not with a rival or barrier, but with a heavy-duty recovery vehicle, and I could understand in the immediate aftermath what his father was getting at when he said he felt as if, rather than racing, his son had been involved in a road accident. Remembering the Mosley list of \u2018life-threatening corners\u2019, one should surely include any with a JCB operating on the track side of the guardrail. As Alain Prost commented, had Bianchi run into Adrian Sutil\u2019s abandoned Sauber, he might well have been hurt, but the consequences would have been far less severe than hitting a tractor.<\/p>\n

This morning, too, I have been remembering something Kevin Magnussen said to me in Montr\u00e9al. As a friend of Bianchi, he was naturally much distressed by what had befallen him, but at the same time he considered \u2013 rightly, in my opinion \u2013 that the circumstances of the accident were exceptional, and not a reflection of contemporary F1 as whole. \u201cI know Jules well,\u201d he said, \u201cand it\u2019s terrible when there\u2019s an accident like his \u2013 but it doesn\u2019t mean that the sport is fundamentally unsafe. No matter what you do in the world someone will get hurt\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

That same weekend in Canada, speaking of the need to galvanise Grand Prix racing, R\u00e4ikk\u00f6nen raised more than an eyebrow or two during a TV interview with Jean Alesi.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen I first arrived in F1,\u201d said Kimi, \u201cit was more exciting for everyone \u2013 it really was the top. You would have thought the cars would have become faster, but with rule changes they have tried to make them slower. We must do something to make watching F1 more exciting, and \u2013 although we don\u2019t want to see anyone hurt \u2013 make it a little more dangerous. It\u2019s part of the game\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

You may say, if you wish, that R\u00e4ikk\u00f6nen has never been mainstream, and if anyone in the paddock were going to come out with a phrase like \u2018make it a little more dangerous\u2019, it was surely he; his words, though, resonated with not a few, including Niki Lauda, who, God knows, has a greater understanding of racing safety \u2013 or, 40 years ago, the lack of it \u2013 than most. <\/p>\n

Niki stopped a little short of Kimi: \u201cDangerous, no \u2013 but riskier. I\u2019m not saying we should neglect safety, but if the cars were faster the thrill for both the drivers and the spectators would automatically increase. In that way, we have to go back\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

As calls ring out for the magic solution of \u2018a thousand horsepower\u2019, it seems odd now to remember that, according to Mosley, it was for reasons of safety that the 3-litre V10s \u2013 the best of which were approaching 1000bhp \u2013 were replaced by the 2.4-litre V8s, which made a lot of racket but not much else. Now, as Lauda suggested, the mood is to go back, to return to the days when Grand Prix cars were difficult to drive, when many more people wanted to watch them. In other words, to bring back some \u2018edge\u2019.<\/p>\n

Whatever else, Niki said in closing, there must be no \u2018manipulation\u2019 in Formula 1. \u201cIt\u2019s the worst thing you can do in a sport \u2013 and I mean artificial elements like a reverse grid, or adding weight to cars, as Bernie has proposed. This must not happen.\u201d Amen to that. <\/p>\n

\u2756<\/p>\n

I may have begun this column by mentioning barbed wire at Spa half a century ago, but, pondering the ruminations of R\u00e4ikk\u00f6nen and Lauda, I\u2019m hardly advocating a return to those days. <\/p>\n

Having said that, it does seem to me that one or two of the ingredients of contemporary Formula 1 might be open to revaluation, and I talked them through with Jackie Stewart, the man who \u2013 more than any other single figure in motor racing \u2013 forced the powers-that-be to confront the question of safety: as Chris Amon has said, every driver in the last 50 years is in his debt.<\/p>\n

\u201cStirling Moss,\u201d Stewart began, \u201cis a great friend of mine, and someone I\u2019ve always profoundly admired, as a driver and as a man, but we\u2019ve always had different views on safety. Stirling has always said that it was not a good thing for motor racing because it reduced the challenge, and so on. I think that if we were to have multiple fatalities in this day and age, the whole future of the sport would be put into question, not least from an insurance point of view.<\/p>\n

\u201cAt the same time \u2013 and no one loves Formula 1 more than I do \u2013 the fact is that on many occasions over the years it\u2019s been criticised for… dullness. During the Schumacher-Ferrari years, for example, the cars clearly had a considerable advantage over the competition \u2013 and team orders were strongly in force \u2013 so it wasn\u2019t surprising that spectators became frustrated.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhenever you get domination by a particular team \u2013 like four consecutive world championships for Red Bull and Vettel \u2013 it seems that no one else can win a race, and it\u2019s the same now with Mercedes-Benz: you can hardly blame them for doing a better job than anyone else, and it\u2019s to their credit that Hamilton and Rosberg are allowed to race, but even so periods of one team dominating are never good…\u201d<\/p>\n

So how, in terms of fan appeal, can Formula 1 be reinvigorated? For a start, we agreed, there needs to be a drastic reduction in the almost ceaseless radio conversation between driver and engineer. When Richie Ginther was chasing Moss in the closing laps at Monaco in 1961, he was shown a pit board by Ferrari saying, \u2018Ginther Give All\u2019, which rather got on his nerves: \u201cWhat the hell did they think I was giving?\u201d These days, by contrast, a Grand Prix often comes across like a seminar.<\/p>\n

Nico Rosberg recently commented that he was happy to see changes made to reduce pit wall influence, with regard to starting clutch procedures. \u201cIt gives me the opportunity to try and beat Lewis in that area,\u201d he said. \u201cUntil now it was difficult, because it wasn\u2019t really in the driver\u2019s hands\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m glad to see attention being paid to this,\u201d said Stewart, \u201cbut it needs to go a lot further \u2013 the public doesn\u2019t like the idea of a driver being instructed all the way through a race. And another strong negative that I get from the sport currently is that it\u2019s completely wrong that people can go off the race track, and regain it with no penalty, in terms of time or position.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018Give them an inch, and they\u2019ll take a mile\u2019 might have been coined for racing drivers, and it was no more than inevitable that \u2018run-off\u2019 \u2013 particularly after it metamorphosed from gravel to asphalt \u2013 should have fundamentally changed their approach to the job.<\/p>\n

\u201cBack in the day,\u201d Phil Hill once said to me, \u201cthere was something you had to have going for you, which was your brain sorting out where it was safe to mess around, and where it wasn\u2019t \u2013 like Spa or the N\u00fcrburgring. But take a corner like Thillois at Reims \u2013 I was the master of spinning at Thillois! Why? Because there was an escape road there. If there had been a wall, it never would have been that kind of corner\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cExactly,\u201d said Stewart. \u201cTake a track like Abu Dhabi, where the run-off areas are huge \u2013 and with a surface compatible with the circuit. I\u2019ve never forgotten the 2010 race, when four drivers were in contention for the championship, including Alonso and Webber. The two of them made early first stops, which was a mistake, and then found themselves stuck behind Petrov\u2019s Renault \u2013 this was the last race before DRS was introduced.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn his efforts to get by Petrov, Fernando \u2013 whose driving I admire enormously, as you know \u2013 went off the road four times, but Mark was unable to benefit because there was so much grip in the run-off area that running wide didn\u2019t penalise the driver \u2013 or provide an opportunity to overtake for the one who\u2019d stayed on the track. For me that ruined the race.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe new culture of building circuits with such enormous run-off areas \u2013 not gravel now, but hard surfaces that in some cases give even more grip than the track itself \u2013 has allowed drivers an unrealistic amount of privilege in terms of using more than the race track without losing out. I know Charlie Whiting introduced a system whereby they can be penalised for it \u2013 but then it takes time for that to be judged, by Charlie or the stewards, and that doesn\u2019t help the spectators or the TV audience.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think more penalties should be introduced for using more than the actual surface of the race track, so that drivers will be categorically penalised, either through losing time or else through the judgement of the stewards.<\/p>\n

\u201cOf course nobody wants to see drivers seriously injured or killed: we can\u2019t have that \u2013 but neither can we have them routinely using a metre or two off the race track, and not losing by it. I don\u2019t see anything wrong with putting something over a certain width at the edge of the track before they get on to a surface that will allow the cars to be slowed down before hitting the deformable barriers: on the outside of the kerb, for two or three metres there should be a slick surface before you get grip again\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

And what about tyre-warmers? For many years they have been the norm, and whenever a ban is proposed \u2013 as, most recently, a year or so ago \u2013 the drivers immediately shriek about safety. In the dread \u2018traction control\u2019 era \u2013 by which I mean the years during which it was officially permitted, rather than a means of cheating \u2013 moves by the FIA to outlaw it again were welcomed by most drivers, but not all. \u201cWell, it is safer, you know\u2026 \u201d one said to me. Ye Gods.<\/p>\n

It is only in Formula 1, of course, that tyre-warmers are used. Everywhere else, including in IndyCar, they are banned, and somehow the drivers manage to cope \u2013 just as they did in Grands Prix before somebody thought of them. Prior to his debut with Williams, Juan Pablo Montoya spent two electrifying seasons with the Ganassi team, and I have a particular memory of a race at Elkhart Lake, when all the front-runners pitted at the same time, and JPM \u2013 putting his flair and car control to work \u2013 pulled out three or four seconds on the rest on that first \u2018cold tyres\u2019 lap.<\/p>\n

In F1, though, the drivers apparently want no part of that, and Pirelli, too, has shown little enthusiasm for it.<\/p>\n

Personally I think Max Mosley\u2019s observations were on the money in 2008, when a tyre-warmer ban was again under discussion: \u201cSome of the things that have been said are just ridiculous, as with the ban on traction control. There are no safety issues whatsoever \u2013 particularly with a single tyre supplier.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s all such rubbish, this. In F1 the reaction to any proposed change is always to say it\u2019s either unsafe or unworkable \u2013 they said that about the parc ferm\u00e9 rules, remember? Now they\u2019re glad to have them \u2013 the mechanics get a night\u2019s sleep, and still the cars are ready for the race. People adapt, don\u2019t they? A ban on tyre-warmers will reduce costs, that\u2019s all\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

In terms of bringing back some \u2018edge\u2019 to Formula 1, how did Stewart view it? \u201cWell, it would certainly be a start. There\u2019s no down side to banning tyre-warmers, as far as I can see. For one thing, they cost a lot of money, and I think that\u2019s an unnecessary expense, particularly for the small teams.<\/p>\n

\u201cMore importantly, it would provide a greater challenge to the driver \u2013 and that would apply in qualifying, too. One thing about motor racing that never changes, you know, is that you have to drive according to the conditions, whether it\u2019s a wet track or cold tyres or whatever.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the old days Ken Tyrrell used to say to me, \u2018Forget pole position, Jackie \u2013 it doesn\u2019t matter. You make good starts because your head\u2019s together at the beginning of a race\u2026\u2019 I\u2019m not claiming any credit for that, but if I won most of my races in the first five laps, mainly it was because most of the other guys did not have their heads together. It wasn\u2019t to do with tyre-warmers or anything else \u2013 because we didn\u2019t have them. You had to drive in a way that allowed you to take the advantage\u2026<\/p>\n

\u201cDoing away with tyre-warmers would unquestionably put more emphasis on the driver: you\u2019ve got to drive within the limits of the track and the car, and that\u2019s the end of it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Something else that has undeniably served to reduce the drama of a GP is the pitlane speed limit, introduced by the FIA immediately after the catastrophic Imola weekend in 1994: once the race had been restarted, following Senna\u2019s accident, Michele Alboreto\u2019s Minardi shed a wheel as it accelerated away and four mechanics were injured.<\/p>\n

Watch a pre-1994 race now and it\u2019s startling to be reminded of how pitstops used to be. By contrast, there remains something almost comic about the way they are now, with a car trundling down the pitlane, getting its tyres changed in a blur, and then trundling out again. While few would advocate a return to how it used to be, could not the speed limit be raised a little?<\/p>\n

\u201cUndoubtedly,\u201d said Stewart, \u201cpitstops used to be much more spectacular without the speed limit, and certainly on television these days they look too slow \u2013 the contrast between the car crawling in, the mechanics going mad for two and a half seconds, then the car crawling out again\u2026 it\u2019s not much of a spectacle, I agree.<\/p>\n

\u201cMy problem with getting rid of the speed limit, though, is that there\u2019s so much tyre-changing these days \u2013 it\u2019s an intrinsic part of Formula 1 now, and so the pits are much more crowded. Maybe a bit more speed wouldn\u2019t do any harm, but I don\u2019t think you could open it up again.\u201d <\/p>\n

Finally we got on to the question of the safety car, introduced to Formula 1 back in 1993. At the time the idea did not meet with universal approval, some deprecating the very idea of the field being closed up, of a leader\u2019s advantage being lost. Leaning out a long way, you could see their point of view, but the system had been in use for ever in the USA and, as Mario Andretti said, \u201cSometimes you gain, sometimes you don\u2019t, but over a season it balances out\u2026\u201d <\/p>\n

Whatever else, it was difficult to take issue with the proposition that, in some instances, the use of a safety car was a necessity, nothing less. Everyone\u2019s judgement is different, and of course the race director has in front of him information we do not, but there have been occasions when its deployment seemed unnecessary to me, others when I was surprised that it wasn\u2019t sent out.<\/p>\n

Something I really dislike, though, is the \u2018safety car start\u2019 \u2013 in effect, a rolling start, employed nowadays whenever race day is wet, and sometimes when the track is merely damp.<\/p>\n

Time was when really terrible weather would occasion a delayed start, but TV schedules wait for no man, so that sometimes the pack has tooled round behind the safety car for several laps until conditions were considered acceptable for racing to begin.<\/p>\n

In today\u2019s world there is probably no alternative, but to have a \u2018safety car start\u2019 simply because the track is wet seems a step too far to me: these are, after all, supposed to be the best drivers on earth. <\/p>\n

Stewart concurs. \u201cI don\u2019t think that\u2019s right, I must say. By all means, give the drivers more than one lap to see the track properly \u2013 with some of them, you know, after one lap their head\u2019s not together, so if it\u2019s raining, give them two warm-up laps to acclimatise, to see where the water is, but\u2026 if you\u2019ve got to start, you\u2019ve got to start.\u201d <\/p>\n

Whenever the subject of safety comes up, a jumble of remarks made to me over the years comes to mind, but none more so than one from Ken Tyrrell: \u201cIt\u2019s a matter of finding a balance, isn\u2019t it? Keeping it safe \u2013 but not finishing up with something no one wants to watch any more\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

Amen to that, too.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":753,"featured_media":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","categories":[],"tags":[167,195],"issue_decade":[121600],"issue_year":[121672],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/52161"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/issue_content"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/753"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52161"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/52161\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":225660,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_content\/52161\/revisions\/225660"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52161"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52161"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52161"},{"taxonomy":"issue_decade","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_decade?post=52161"},{"taxonomy":"issue_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.motorsportmagazine.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue_year?post=52161"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}