Jean Todt: A "Poor Man's Max"; A "Joke"?
- Thread starter RayInTorontoCanada
- Start date
I agree that Todt is doing a good job. To me, the fact that Bernie is bad-mouthing him is proof enough that he (Todt) has the guts to stand up to BE, and Bernie doesn't like that at all! I started out as being skeptical about Todt, due to his long association with the Red Menace team, but have been very pleasantly surprised.
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
Running a private racing team's sole interests is completely different to administrating a wider cause with varying interests.
So you think it was correct for Todt to try and force the Bahrain GP through - in spite of enormous oppostion - so that his son's bank account would benifit? Nicholas Todt has business interests in Bahrain and having a Grand Prix there would have not done him any harm.
There's a conflict of interest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mo...ahrain-Grand-Prix-will-be-made-by-midday.html...
"...The silence from the FIA, F1’s governing body, meanwhile, has been deafening.
The Bahrain royal family has close ties to FIA president Jean Todt.
Sheikh Abdullah bin Isa Al-Khalifa, the president of the Bahrain Motor Federation, is a FIA world council member and played a key role in Todt’s election in 2008. Bahrain’s crown prince is also a shareholder in Nicolas Todt’s – Jean Todt’s son’s – ART Grand Prix team."
He also tried to force through costly engine reg changes for 2013...against what the manufactures wanted. Good thing he backed down/failed.
And what do you make of the FIA trying to force the EBD issue through mid season. It only benifted Ferrari. Renault Sport and Mercedes Benz HPE lost out. That was Ferrari favouritism. It's clear as day. Renault and Mercedes protested and we had an unprecidented flipping and flopping of the situation a week ago, INTRA-MEETING (!) were they had to have TWO TWG meetings in two days.
That was a joke, frankly.
Max Mosely was a pervert. Thank goodness he's gone. But Todt's been incompetent...either that or he's been bent. I've listed why. Bernie's bang on.
So you think it was correct for Todt to try and force the Bahrain GP through - in spite of enormous oppostion - so that his son's bank account would benifit? Nicholas Todt has business interests in Bahrain and having a Grand Prix there would have not done him any harm.
There's a conflict of interest:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mo...ahrain-Grand-Prix-will-be-made-by-midday.html...
"...The silence from the FIA, F1’s governing body, meanwhile, has been deafening.
The Bahrain royal family has close ties to FIA president Jean Todt.
Sheikh Abdullah bin Isa Al-Khalifa, the president of the Bahrain Motor Federation, is a FIA world council member and played a key role in Todt’s election in 2008. Bahrain’s crown prince is also a shareholder in Nicolas Todt’s – Jean Todt’s son’s – ART Grand Prix team."
He also tried to force through costly engine reg changes for 2013...against what the manufactures wanted. Good thing he backed down/failed.
And what do you make of the FIA trying to force the EBD issue through mid season. It only benifted Ferrari. Renault Sport and Mercedes Benz HPE lost out. That was Ferrari favouritism. It's clear as day. Renault and Mercedes protested and we had an unprecidented flipping and flopping of the situation a week ago, INTRA-MEETING (!) were they had to have TWO TWG meetings in two days.
That was a joke, frankly.
Max Mosely was a pervert. Thank goodness he's gone. But Todt's been incompetent...either that or he's been bent. I've listed why. Bernie's bang on.
Mercedes lost out.Thats news to me.Mercedes were given dispensation to run their hot blown exhaust system.
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
Any pundit will tell you that McLaren lost out in relation to Ferrari at Silverstone.
Sportsman, there was an unusually larger than normal gap between Ferrari and McLaren in Qually and the race at Silverstone. Had Mercedes Benz HPE not shouted out to defend themselves, that gap would have been worse. A lot worse.
What Mercedes ran at Silverstone certainly wasn't Valencia Spec.
Regardless, this was a MID SEASON moving of the goal posts. You can't disagree with that. And that moving of the goal posts were to the detriment of Mercedes Benz HPE and Renault Sport. That leaves Ferrari as the main benificiary.
Further, the to-ing and fro-ing mid meeting was a fiasco. How can anyone see it any other way?
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
What are the facts, again, good Sir?
One fact is that Mercedes engines weren't run at Silverstone in 'Valencia Spec'. Now they're going back to Valencia Spec in Germany and though to the end of '11.
The second fact was where Alonso and Massa (and Perez's Ferrari engined car) qualified in relation to Hamilton, Button, Rosberg and Schumacher. The qually gaps weren't small even adjusted for the conditions.
We'll see where Alonso, Massa, Perez, Kobayashi qualify in relation to Hamilton, Button, Rosberg and Schumacher at the Nurburgring.
Back on topic.
I think Jean Todt is doing a good job for motorsport all round, he has got the WRC out of the hole it was in and has managed to get it out of it's dark periods which when it only had 2 manufacturers.
He isn't as intellignet as Max Mosley? Maybe not, but if he wasn't intelligent enough he wouldn't be doing half a good a job as he is currently doing. He has done many good things such as the driver stewards etc. There was talks of even altering the boring tracks to promote overtaking, (that seems history now as the track owners are hoping the new rules can make their race eventful.)
When Max was in charge F1 was a bit dark, especially politic wise, so far bar the EBD which Jean Todt wasn't involved in, F1 has been fine.
I don't understand why people think of him helping Ferrari, he knows his job he's doing it well. The main reason why Ferrari succeded was because he went around his own way rather than listening to what Luca had to say, look where it got them.The main reason why he left Ferrari was because di Montzemelo wanted him out, so I very much doubt he would favour Ferrari after that.
Now I believe he is doing the same with Bernie it seems.
I think Jean Todt is doing a good job for motorsport all round, he has got the WRC out of the hole it was in and has managed to get it out of it's dark periods which when it only had 2 manufacturers.
He isn't as intellignet as Max Mosley? Maybe not, but if he wasn't intelligent enough he wouldn't be doing half a good a job as he is currently doing. He has done many good things such as the driver stewards etc. There was talks of even altering the boring tracks to promote overtaking, (that seems history now as the track owners are hoping the new rules can make their race eventful.)
When Max was in charge F1 was a bit dark, especially politic wise, so far bar the EBD which Jean Todt wasn't involved in, F1 has been fine.
I don't understand why people think of him helping Ferrari, he knows his job he's doing it well. The main reason why Ferrari succeded was because he went around his own way rather than listening to what Luca had to say, look where it got them.The main reason why he left Ferrari was because di Montzemelo wanted him out, so I very much doubt he would favour Ferrari after that.
Now I believe he is doing the same with Bernie it seems.
Recent events in F1 has shown the FIA in a less than favourable light, ie, Bahrain and this on/off blown diffuser issues. Whilst some may blame Todt for whatever goes on in F1, his job as head of the FIA is not just F1 related and the FIA are the gate keepers of the rules in F1, the FIA are not the originators of the rules, the teams all have a vote and when they and all interested parties are agreed on a set of rules, they are then passed to the FIA to be upheld.
Politics is a staple of F1 and as some comments have already mentioned, it's possible that Todt is more independant of B. Ecclestone than Bernie expected, thus, we end up with the scenario of Bahrain where the FOM (Bernie) lobbied for the re-enstatatement of the race, Max Mosley comes up against it with a legal point of view on the rules, then Bernie does a flip flop and blame Todt for something he himself advocated in the first place.
Max Mosley appears to be an efficient administrator of the sport, however, let's face it, this man is a dictator and that was the discription of Ferrari boss (Monti) about him, This man wanted to force all F1 teams into a budget cap of £40 Million without taking into consideration the carnage it would cause with established teams, the homologation of engines is one of his pet issues, we are now aware that these engines are not the same and thus can't be managed with a uniform (non EBD) rule.
Max Mosley was selective and arbitary in his judgements, for instance, McLaran were fined $100 million dollars (£50 million at that time) for being in posession of Ferrari's data but Renault were in posession of McLaren's data at the very same time, Renault, however faced no penalties.
On one hand there was a proposal for teams to be in a budget cap of £40 millions and on the other a vindictive penalty of £50 million for infringement of a rule when others are proven to have infringed the same rule.
The head of the FIA has to be seen to be even handed, not selective in judgements and vindictively malacious at the same time.
I had reservation about Todt taking over the FIA because of his Ferrari links, but let's face it, Ferrari will always be the centre piece of F1 as we know it, even with the latest Fiasco's I think Todt is more even handed a sports person that max would ever be in two life times..
Politics is a staple of F1 and as some comments have already mentioned, it's possible that Todt is more independant of B. Ecclestone than Bernie expected, thus, we end up with the scenario of Bahrain where the FOM (Bernie) lobbied for the re-enstatatement of the race, Max Mosley comes up against it with a legal point of view on the rules, then Bernie does a flip flop and blame Todt for something he himself advocated in the first place.
Max Mosley appears to be an efficient administrator of the sport, however, let's face it, this man is a dictator and that was the discription of Ferrari boss (Monti) about him, This man wanted to force all F1 teams into a budget cap of £40 Million without taking into consideration the carnage it would cause with established teams, the homologation of engines is one of his pet issues, we are now aware that these engines are not the same and thus can't be managed with a uniform (non EBD) rule.
Max Mosley was selective and arbitary in his judgements, for instance, McLaran were fined $100 million dollars (£50 million at that time) for being in posession of Ferrari's data but Renault were in posession of McLaren's data at the very same time, Renault, however faced no penalties.
On one hand there was a proposal for teams to be in a budget cap of £40 millions and on the other a vindictive penalty of £50 million for infringement of a rule when others are proven to have infringed the same rule.
The head of the FIA has to be seen to be even handed, not selective in judgements and vindictively malacious at the same time.
I had reservation about Todt taking over the FIA because of his Ferrari links, but let's face it, Ferrari will always be the centre piece of F1 as we know it, even with the latest Fiasco's I think Todt is more even handed a sports person that max would ever be in two life times..
Well at least the teams did not threaten to form a breakaway series. You can't accuse Todt of pursuing a Ferrari agenda and trying to force through new engine regs when Ferrari was one of the biggest opposers to the latter. The FIA cannot be seen to be rolling over and giving the teams carte blanche to do what they want, for obvious reasons. It has to set the agenda but at the same time give them a better say in any subsequent negotiations. This is one area Max failed badly to the detriment of the sport. I'm not sure it is worth trying to convince you that Todt has done this rather well but I wish your argument was based on an honest assessment rather than what clearly appears to be personal dislike.
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
Mosley didn't threaten a breakaway series either, though. But what does a break away series have anything to do with the 2011 handling of Bahrain, the 2011 handling of EDB mid season changing of goal posts and Bernie's criticism of Todt on the dictatorial way he tried to push thru 2013 engine reg changes?
Absolutely nothing.
These things have nothing to do with Mosely. We should be comparing Todt to Todt. Vatanen would have been more level-headed, less dictatorial and have no links to Ferrari or have any nepotistic monetary dealings with the Bahraini royal family.
And I never said that the 2013 engine regs were a Ferrari adgenda...I said the changing of the OTEBD goal posts mid way were.
Absolutely nothing.
These things have nothing to do with Mosely. We should be comparing Todt to Todt. Vatanen would have been more level-headed, less dictatorial and have no links to Ferrari or have any nepotistic monetary dealings with the Bahraini royal family.
And I never said that the 2013 engine regs were a Ferrari adgenda...I said the changing of the OTEBD goal posts mid way were.
I'm telling you the peace deal regarding the new engine regs was reached without teams threatening to form their own series like what happened during the budget cap negotiations under Mosley. Anyway, you're making a lot of libelous statements and I would suggest we keep these away from the topic.
A short note in my role as moderator - should you choose to post a thread which is potentially contentious and then someone disagrees with you, arguing or brow beating them isn't going to change their opinion. One persons "fact" is another persons "opinion". Please don't post threads asking for the opinion of others if you are not prepared to listen or consider someone else's point of view.
Thank you
Thank you
Anyway, was the whole off-throttle EBD thing directly attributable to Todt? I thought the ban was sought by Charlie Whiting more than anyone.
Other than wishing that the FIA had been much more decisive much earlier in ruling out a return to Bahrain, I think Todt has done a good job as president. The 2013 engine rules were originally set up as they were to try and entice Audi back into the sport, with them having intimated that they would only be interested on the basis of an in-line 4cyl motor. Once it was clear they weren't interested anyway, the switch to V6's was agreed reasonably quickly and smoothly compared to the way things might have gone under Mosley.
Other than wishing that the FIA had been much more decisive much earlier in ruling out a return to Bahrain, I think Todt has done a good job as president. The 2013 engine rules were originally set up as they were to try and entice Audi back into the sport, with them having intimated that they would only be interested on the basis of an in-line 4cyl motor. Once it was clear they weren't interested anyway, the switch to V6's was agreed reasonably quickly and smoothly compared to the way things might have gone under Mosley.
Whoa, hold on. I did NOT say that Todt is not intelligent. Mosley is probably one of the most intelligent people in the country. However imo he does not always use it wisely and in some cases seems to throw it out of the window. One of his problems is that he just cannot see any other person's point of view. See my signature, that's Mosley.
Todt is intelligent and imo he uses his intelligence wisely. I also think that in the main he is doing a much better job than Mosley and is more amenable to discussion. One of the things he did say was that he was going to take the overall view of the FIAs responsibilities and not get involved in the day to day running and rule formation of F1. Unfortunately there are those on here who seem not to realise that and tbh are making themselves look silly.
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
Here's a "fact" from Jonathan Neale of McLaren: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93192
McLaren lost "0.7 seconds" at Silverstone according to Neale because of the mid-season OTEBD ban which, he says, is a "fact" and not an "opinion".
What do you make of it, Sportsman?
So, when Mr Neale says that the loss of 0.7 seconds is a fact, not an opinion, is it then a fact or merely an opinion?
It's his opinion that it's a fact.
RayInTorontoCanada
Banned
If you can't go by an engineer's numbers and his data, then I have no idea what you can go by. Last time I checked, Neale is an engineer. He's not a 'pundit', a journalist or a politician-like team manager.
So, are we going to believe "Scarbs" or are we to believe Jonathan Neale?
Let's not sit on the fence, here.
So, are we going to believe "Scarbs" or are we to believe Jonathan Neale?
Let's not sit on the fence, here.
