USF1 / StefanGP or both ? [Archive]

foxystoat

20th February 2010, 22:45

Should the powers that be allow USF1 to miss four races so we start with 24 cars instead of 26 ? Or should they kick them out & allow Stefan to take there place ? Alternatively could they allow StefanGP to take there place until they are ready ? although that seems harsh if they are then kicked out after making the first four races.Or should they bite the bullet & give them both entries meaning 26 cars to start with 28 later on if USF1 get there act together.
Is there even grid spaces for 28 cars at all the tracks ?
Personally I would let Stefan run if they are ready give USF1 4 races to be ready if not they lose the place if they make it allow 28 cars if possible & make the show bigger & better.

steveaki13

20th February 2010, 23:29

I would have thought they should let in Stefan GP as they represent a more likely team to make the season start and survive the whole season.
Personally I would like to see Stefan given the 13 slot and then if USf1 do turn up then they can make the 14th team.
If the latter was to happen it maybe more likley that 28 cars would enter Qualifying and the top 26 race as in the past.

Any thoughts?

foxystoat

20th February 2010, 23:35

Dr. Krogshöj

20th February 2010, 23:50

I wonder if the 11 established teams have any say in this. I bet they wouldn't want Stefan GP to compete.
Truth to be told, I'm still wondering what the source is of Stefanovic's money.

rayburn

21st February 2010, 00:00

It's an interesting conundrum, but what I would like to see is Stefan given the first four races, and then if USF1 fail to turn up, they could have the rest of the season.

Of course this fails to take into account any sponsorship arrangements that Stefan may have, i.e. it may be difficult to persuade sponsors to part with their money if a whole season can't be guaranteed.

The crux of the matter is though, is that Stefan actually have a car, and USF1 don't (as far as we know).

Riley

21st February 2010, 01:40

If Mclaren, Ferrari, Williams, Mercedes, Red Bull, Renault, Sauber, Lotus, Virgin, Force India, and Torro Rosso can all get cars to the first race, then why should US F1 be allowed to skip the first few?

Saint Devote

21st February 2010, 01:49

No.

Why should USF1 be treated special? It would be grossly unfair towards the teams that worked hard and arrived for the first grand prix.

If USF1 are not ready then replace them with another team that is.

CNR

21st February 2010, 02:08

Top 26 from 28 could be interesting as occasionally a big name will not make the race if they have big problems in quali. Has there ever been more than 26 cars in F1 races ? it is the most I can remember but not sure about in the early years.

not sure if teams came and went in the year but 1980 has 15 teams

1 Williams-Ford
2 Brabham-Ford
3 Ligier-Ford
4 Lotus-Ford
5 Arrows-Ford
6 Fittipaldi-Ford
7 McLaren-Ford
8 Tyrrell-Ford
9 Ensign-Ford
10 Osella-Ford
11 Shadow-Ford
12 ATS-Ford
13 Renault
14 Ferrari
15 Alfa Romeo

http://www.formula1.com/results/driver/1980/

CNR

21st February 2010, 02:18

1981

1 Brabham-Ford
2 Williams-Ford
3 Ligier-Matra
4 Renault
5 McLaren-Ford
6 Ferrari
7 Lotus-Ford
8 Arrows-Ford
9 Tyrrell-Ford
10 Alfa Romeo
11 Theodore-Ford
12 ATS-Ford
13 Ensign-Ford
14 Osella-Ford
15 March-Ford
16 Fittipaldi-Ford
17 Toleman-Hart

Hawkmoon

21st February 2010, 03:33

If Lotus can turn out a car in less than 12 months then I don't think it's unfair to expect USF1 to do the same when they've had twice the time that Lotus have had.

If I were the FIA then my response to USF1 asking for races off is to show them the door. Stefan can have the spot if they can show they're capable. Otherwise stick to 12 teams and open the bidding for the 13th spot for 2011.

foxystoat

21st February 2010, 09:08

Fair comments really USF1 were the first to bid to be in if I recall correctly yet the least organised, maybe it is time for Bernie/the FIA to make a decision one way or the other to make sure we see 26 cars in Bahrain & hopefully for the whole season.

steveaki13

21st February 2010, 09:57

1991 also had 34 cars looking for the 26 spots at times.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 11:20

21st February 2010, 11:35

BDunnell

21st February 2010, 12:06

In 1986, AGS entered the Italian GP as their debut, in 1985 Minardi entered at San Marino, Zakspeed at Portugal (IIRC) and Beatrice-Haas at the European GP.

Not to mention Renault at Silverstone 77 & Alfa Romeo at Dijon in 79.

Whilst USF1 are looking highly dubious and don't warrant any help or favours, I'm not sure exactly why there is the big deal about starting your debut season at the first race.

After all, some teams don't get this years car to the first race all the time (Ferrari in 05 & 03, Mclaren in 03 and Benetton in 92 are three who spring to mind).

I would tend to agree with all of that. I was then going to write 'But on the other hand, everybody knows the current rules', until I realised that Bernie's recent comments that were immediately countered by the FIA render any such statement nonsense.

21st February 2010, 12:10

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2010/02/21/us-f1-a-future-in-belgrade/

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 12:16

After all, some teams don't get this years car to the first race all the time (Ferrari in 05 & 03, Mclaren in 03 and Benetton in 92 are three who spring to mind).

Well, just allow USF1 to field last years car until this years is ready just as Ferrari in 05 & 03, Mclaren in 03 and Benetton in 92 did.

Simples.

21st February 2010, 12:25

Well, just allow USF1 to field last years car until this years is ready just as Ferrari in 05 & 03, Mclaren in 03 and Benetton in 92 did.

Simples.

Not surprisingly, you miss the point.

Since even the grandees sometimes don't get their new car ready for the start of the season, why is it such a big deal for a debutee to have to be at the season opener?

Not defending USF1 here, as it is apparent that they are a shambles.

It's not the end of the world for a team to miss races in their debut season.

BDunnell

21st February 2010, 13:50

Bagwan

21st February 2010, 13:53

Not surprisingly, you miss the point.

Since even the grandees sometimes don't get their new car ready for the start of the season, why is it such a big deal for a debutee to have to be at the season opener?

Not defending USF1 here, as it is apparent that they are a shambles.

It's not the end of the world for a team to miss races in their debut season.

Is there a point that you're missing , too ?

Those "grandees" felt it was important enough that they race in that first meeting that they were willing to run the previous year's car if the new one wasn't ready .
More than embarassment is at stake .

The fact that they didn't run a car last year precludes using that option , but that is moot , really , as there isn't much to show on the grid in Bahrain but the shell they mocked up in that early video .
At this point , they would be laughed out of any prospective sponsor's boardroom , except Bernie's .

If they cannot work this merger thing work in some way , I think SGP will start the season at the second race , with the FIA having given USF1 every chance they were guaranteed .
If a merger does work , with Campos and USF1 together , the last thing they should do is be picky about the name , because having the entry gained from USF1's demise , it would only remind the public of the debacle over and over during telecasts , with announcers feeling obligated to explain what happened to the masses .

F1boat

21st February 2010, 14:08

Stefan GP.

N. Jones

21st February 2010, 14:47

Doesn't the Concorde, or some other agreement between the FIA and the teams limit the grid to 13 teams/26 cars?

My choice would be - both.

mac853

21st February 2010, 15:22

Sportmotores.com of Portugal had said already of USF1 is practically out of function.
Stefan GP is already confirm of their 1st shake down in Algarve in 25th.

I hope for their last Toyota chassis could bring it good results and fight for the best rookie team.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 16:45

Not surprisingly, you miss the point.

Since even the grandees sometimes don't get their new car ready for the start of the season, why is it such a big deal for a debutee to have to be at the season opener?

No missed points methinks.

The grandees could well afford to use previous seasons' car, start-ups cannot, and should not be allowed to miss any races. Rules is rules.

Lotus and Virgin managed just fine thanks very much, so must USF1.

One thing about USF1, how are they allowed to use F1 in their name? I thought Bernie had trademarked F1 to buggery and beyond....

Sonic

21st February 2010, 17:14

As a fan I would like a 28 car grid with both US and Stefan GP on the grid, but as a realist, US F1 is dead in the water and as such should be put out of its misery by the FIA and refused a late entry.

21st February 2010, 17:18

The grandees could well afford to use previous seasons' car, start-ups cannot, and should not be allowed to miss any races. Rules is rules.

Lotus and Virgin managed just fine thanks very much, so must USF1.

My point, since once again you have missed it, is that it is a fecking stupid to

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 17:24

My point, since once again you have missed it, is that it is a fecking stupid to

I'll assume you started but didn't finish. The point you made in print was that even the established teams have been unable to produce a car in time for season start.

One has to consider that the grandee teams will have been pitting all resources to running a championship campaign, and do not have the luxury of working solely on the new car.

As the grandees still had a car to race, albeit last seasons, it was not an issue, and no races needed to be missed.

If your point was different - apologies for missing it, but it was not clear enough old chum.

edv

21st February 2010, 17:24

Umm...last year's cars would be running out of fuel around the halfway point of this year's races.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 17:29

Umm...last year's cars would be running out of fuel around the halfway point of this year's races.

Generally, last years car would be adapted - at minimal cost/effort - to run within the current regs/requirements.

A bit like Tambs Benetton having active ride bolted on to a passive car. Simple analogy, but you get the gist?

edv

21st February 2010, 17:33

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 17:42

So what would you be moving out of last year's tub to make room for twice the fuel? The cooling system? The Electronics? Hire midget-sized drivers?
I do not see exactly how this can be done "at minimal cost/effort". And a new tub would need FIA approval, methinks.

I appreciate what you are saying, but try to be a bit logical.. Cars have been adapted and the previous seasons campaigner has been used in the following years championship at the start as a stopgap until the new 'definitive' challenger is fully ready to race.

I doubt you could adapt an '09 car for '10 regs due to requirement for race fuel - and if you did I suspect it would go worse than the '91 Ferrari 'Alain Prost' truck. But previous years have seen old cars used as a stopgap.

When all is said and done, USF1 should not be given leeway. Their car is highly likely to be a brick if it ever materialises at all. It will devalue the championship and has the pootential to bring much embarrassment upon the FIA.

edv

21st February 2010, 17:46

I am torn on the USF1/Stefan issue.
I would really like to see an effort from North America in F1, even if it's slow.
But if Stefan hires JV, I would really like to see that as well. (even if he's slow, LOL)
Hmmmm.

21st February 2010, 17:48

21st February 2010, 17:51

Sorry about the half post previously, I had to get the crew to moor the yacht properly.

21st February 2010, 17:53

Generally, last years car would be adapted - at minimal cost/effort - to run within the current regs/requirements.

A bit like Tambs Benetton having active ride bolted on to a passive car. Simple analogy, but you get the gist?

A wrong analogy though, as last years tubs would not be capable of having a fuel tank big enough for this year.

It requires a complete new design.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 17:55

I didn't realise you wholeheartedly supported the FIA.

Believe me, I don't! But if you were Virgin or Lotus, how would you feel.

The FIA have 'brung this sorry state of affairs' on their own shoulders.

But, Anderson and Windsor have messed this up all by themselves also.

21st February 2010, 17:57

When all is said and done, USF1 should not be given leeway. Their car is highly likely to be a brick if it ever materialises at all. It will devalue the championship and has the pootential to bring much embarrassment upon the FIA.

I agree with the first point, that USF1 should have no leeway as the rules stand at present, but did Forti devalue Damon Hill's championship?

Did Life, Coloni and Eurobrun devalue Senna's 90 and 91 titles?

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 17:57

Sorry about the half post previously, I had to get the crew to moor the yacht properly.

Can't get the staff eh? I have the same issue docking at the ISS sometimes.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 18:00

I agree with the first point, that USF1 should have no leeway as the rules stand at present, but did Forti devalue Damon Hill's championship?

Did Life, Coloni and Eurobrun devalue Senna's 90 and 91 titles?

Thats me not making my point clear.

The embarrassment is on the FIA selection process, not on the overall championship.

SGWilko

21st February 2010, 18:08

Thats me not making my point clear.

The embarrassment is on the FIA selection process, not on the overall championship.

...and you can see that StefanGP are rubbing the FIA's noses in it, by showing they have both the finance and car to be in the championship.

What doe USF1 have, unpaid, demoralised and disgruntled staff, and an investor who wants his money back - alledgedly.

foxystoat

21st February 2010, 18:22

I can't believe how right most people have been about USF1 from the outset. A lot of people were saying they will never get a car built they are all hot air etc etc. I saw there news buletins showing the drawings/designs etc & gave them the benefit of the doubt but guess there's a lot of people who can say I told you so in this instance.

Saint Devote

21st February 2010, 19:28

I agree with the first point, that USF1 should have no leeway as the rules stand at present, but did Forti devalue Damon Hill's championship?

Did Life, Coloni and Eurobrun devalue Senna's 90 and 91 titles?

Its not about that.

It is about a professional sport that today requires professional behavior and this means keeping to an agreement or contract.

USF1, Campos and because of the mess - Stefan GP ought to be excluded if they cannot make the test at Catalunya.

And in future any team not making the two final tests should be out as well.

Robinho

21st February 2010, 19:39

does the current teams contracts state they have to make the final test at Barcelone or be excluded?

why should Stefan go to the test when they have no entry and therefpre no right to be there? (which is of course why they plan to run in portugal, those guys can test all they want, that is assuming they actually have paidf for the cars now)

when the contract says they have to make a certain number of tests then hold them to it, but at the moment it looks like they don't even have to make all the races and can still avoid being in breach.

Bagwan

21st February 2010, 19:39

[quote="tamburello"]...stupid to have such a limitation on the first season of a team.[quote]

Why is that , though ?

As the business world turns , which is the how and why of F1's existence as we know it , a "no-show" is replaced , and quickly if a good replacement is available .

It is business , and it has been for a very long time now , out of necessity .

Walkinshaw ran the Arrows for the formation lap only , if I recall , to avoid the "no-show" fine .
That was an embarassment to all , and does , like this situation , point to there need to be a change , but I believe that limitation should still exist .

I'm not sure the $48million bond is still in place , but this is what they came up with to protect the franchise value .
It has it's faults , but the basic idea was reasonable .

Where it fell down , though , if I understand correctly , was that there was also requirement to keep the livery relatively unchanged (without special permission for "one-offs) throughout the season , presumably , to make it more understandable for the viewers .
BAR ran into trouble trying to run 555 and Lucky Strike cars and ended up with a zipper .
This precludes local sponsorship for single races , and in today's economics where even the big guys are hurting , it makes it near impossible to pull together the cash needed .

If it's possible to allow the caped crusader Coulthard to grace the platform in the principality , then why not a different livery , or at least extra adornment at every race ?

Alfa Fan

21st February 2010, 23:51

I think the livery rule is that both cars have to carry the same livery, not that it has to be constant throughout the season.

SGWilko

22nd February 2010, 09:20

I think the livery rule is that both cars have to carry the same livery, not that it has to be constant throughout the season.

Yes, it is. But it is an outdated rule.

Say you managed to land Cadbury - the renowned processed cheese company ( ;) ) - as your title sponsor, and they wanted one car painted like a Dairy Milk, and one like a Dairy Lee.

Nowt wrong with that, but it is not allowed.

Why?????

SGWilko

22nd February 2010, 09:25

why should Stefan go to the test when they have no entry and therefpre no right to be there? .

Because it shows up the FIA's flawed 'new team selection system'.

We have a team ready to go, but who was deemed not suitable for F1, and a team that was deemed fit, that is currently the talk of F1 for all the wrong reasons because, despite all their promises, they have next to nothing to show for all their hot air.

If any situation makes you realise the FIA is unneccessarily political, this is it.

Max has dropped his buddy Jean in the 5h!t, to the point that Todt has already had to correct the fact that he thought teams were allowed to miss races.

Does anyone at the FIA know what's going on????????

Sonic

22nd February 2010, 09:30

Stefan GP need to stop the "softly softly" approach with the FIA, the whole "we want to be the 14th team" stuff has failed. If they want in they need to go to the FIA and say - he guys, we've got a car. How's about we race as the 13th team until USF1 get their %hit together and then we'l bow out graciously when they arrive.

99.9% USF1 won't show up so Stefan then just continues for the duration of the year.

BDunnell

22nd February 2010, 10:17

Max has dropped his buddy Jean in the 5h!t, to the point that Todt has already had to correct the fact that he thought teams were allowed to miss races.

I thought only Ecclestone raised that confusion, not Todt.

Mia 01

22nd February 2010, 11:43

We need stefan GP, they got a car and some funding it seems.

What do we know, the rebadged Toyota could be one of the fastest car on the grid.

And on top of that, JV.

SGWilko

22nd February 2010, 12:55

I thought only Ecclestone raised that confusion, not Todt.

Quite. What I meant to say is that, to save face and without being au-fait with his own rule book, he (JT) has waded in making claims that are just not possible.

Such is the legacy left by Max....

22nd February 2010, 12:59

What do we know, the rebadged Toyota could be one of the fastest car on the grid.

Which is exactly why the FIA will be under discreet pressure by other teams not to accept them as an entrant.

Besides which, there is a whiff of "Pheonix GP" about the Stefan GP set up...not to mention Coughlan's involvement.

22nd February 2010, 13:00

Such is the legacy left by Max....

Yep, three new teams and a squabble over a fourth.

Terrible, that.

SGWilko

22nd February 2010, 13:06

Yep, three new teams and a squabble over a fourth.

Terrible, that.

Only two 'currently viable' teams, less than a month till curtain up.

It is terrible indeed.

UltimateDanGTR

22nd February 2010, 16:34

Which is exactly why the FIA will be under discreet pressure by other teams not to accept them as an entrant.

Besides which, there is a whiff of "Pheonix GP" about the Stefan GP set up...not to mention Coughlan's involvement.

very true that. I dont think it would be fair for stefan gp to be really good just because of a car toyota built (and for the record, that may sound like honda-brawn scenario, but that is toally different because they were the same team)

but on the other hand, if USF1 dont turn up, then why not have a 13th team?

I can see why its a difficult situation for the FIA, even I'm sturggling to find what's best.

SGWilko

22nd February 2010, 16:40

Why are some amongst us labelling the car Toyota pulled out of F1 before they raced is a grid beater.

In 12+ years of participation, when was the Toyota ever a car to fear...???

K-Pu

22nd February 2010, 16:42

Why are some amongst us labelling the car Toyota pulled out of F1 before they raced is a grid beater.

In 12+ years of participation, when was the Toyota ever a car to fear...???

Never. And IMO this one is no exception... How many times Toyota have said to come across with a groundbreaking new desing and all they had was the most conservative car on the grid?

Mia 01

22nd February 2010, 17:16

stephenw_us

22nd February 2010, 17:46

Why are some amongst us labelling the car Toyota pulled out of F1 before they raced is a grid beater.

In 12+ years of participation, when was the Toyota ever a car to fear...???

Last year at the beginning of the season when they were one of only three cars with the double diffuser...they were on the podium in Oz.

Sonic

22nd February 2010, 17:46

Never. And IMO this one is no exception... How many times Toyota have said to come across with a groundbreaking new desing and all they had was the most conservative car on the grid?

It may never have been ground or record breaking, however they have scored multiple podiums and poles so even in the hands of an independant team should be able to hustle up a few points over the season, which is more than the new teams can manage on pace atm.

foxystoat

22nd February 2010, 19:20

Looks like StefanGP aren't quite as organised as we are led to believe !

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/9370.html

I wonder if this is the only reason they have cancelled the test or wether the car is not totally ready to go either, I would have thought Toyota had some spare rubber from last season laying around they could have used for a shakedown.

Helicon_One

22nd February 2010, 19:25

Why are some amongst us labelling the car Toyota pulled out of F1 before they raced is a grid beater.

In 12+ years of participation, when was the Toyota ever a car to fear...???

Wind the clock back 12 months and replace 'Toyota' with 'Honda'!

Obviously, the chances of Stefan pulling off a story like last year's Brawn is pretty slim, its more the case that a rebadged Toyota is likely to be a much more credible entry than whatever USF1 can cobble together at this stage. I think most of us would much refer to see another mid-packer squabbling over the occasional point than a trainwreck in stars and stripes showing up late and propping up the back of the grid (if they can even put out a functional car by Barcelona), humiliating Formula One's American fanbase and taking a place which could have been filled by someone competent.

The bigger issue with Stefan GP isn't the car itself, its that, as lacking as the FIA's financial checks seem to have been, they haven't even gone through that, and even if the FIA were to give them the nod right now they only have 3 weeks to run around getting the paperwork and everything else in order for Bahrain. As funny as it is to have this whole team running round doing testing and telling everyone they'reshipping their cars to the races without an actual entry, Stefan seem to be gambling on Todt and the FIA turning around and saying 'you know kid, to hell with the rules I like your style, you got balls' and letting them in like a cliche from a Hollywood movie. I suspect they're in for a rude awakening.

gloomyDAY

22nd February 2010, 19:27

Lame! The team is not disorganized, rather that Bridgestone won't give them any tires because they're not officially part of the grid. I can't believe the FIA are lagging so much to make a decision on Stefan's entrance.

Helicon_One

22nd February 2010, 19:29

I wonder if this is the only reason they have cancelled the test or wether the car is not totally ready to go either, I would have thought Toyota had some spare rubber from last season laying around they could have used for a shakedown.

Don't all the tyres go back to Bridgestone after every event?

Sonic

22nd February 2010, 19:34

Don't all the tyres go back to Bridgestone after every event?

But a GP2 set of boots can't be too hard to come by. Its just a shakedown after all.

Robinho

22nd February 2010, 21:06

no tyres, no entry, no Villeneuve deal (despite what Stefanovic says), funding from the govt, which i'd imagine is dependent on them getting the place on the grid - have they paid for those toyotas yet? not sure these guys are any better than some of the other chancers

foxystoat

22nd February 2010, 21:07

Looks like we may end up with a 24 grid at best for Bahrain at this rate. Still be better than the 20 car grids of the last few years tho.

SGWilko

23rd February 2010, 06:17

Looks like we may end up with a 24 grid at best for Bahrain at this rate. Still be better than the 20 car grids of the last few years tho.

It's another fine mess the FIA have gotten us into Stanley.

VkmSpouge

23rd February 2010, 08:01

Shame Stefan could not get a supply of tyres from Bridgestone but I guess Bridgestone were contractually bound. Still Stefan should have tried to secure the GP2 tyres earlier but I guess they simply ran out of time.

not sure these guys are any better than some of the other chancers

Why aren't you sure about that? Clearly them getting tyres and Villeneuve are dependant on getting an entry to F1, I don't see why that should lead to more doubts on your part.

truefan72

23rd February 2010, 08:38

Shame Stefan could not get a supply of tyres from Bridgestone but I guess Bridgestone were contractually bound. Still Stefan should have tried to secure the GP2 tyres earlier but I guess they simply ran out of time.

Why aren't you sure about that? Clearly them getting tyres and Villeneuve are dependant on getting an entry to F1, I don't see why that should lead to more doubts on your part.

exactly

SGWilko

23rd February 2010, 09:23

The situation is shameful and rotten to the core.

A team is ready to test, but cannot do so because the official tyre supplier will not supply tyres?

Or, are they not obliged to? If this is the case I hope they bugger off at seasons end.

Or, are they not allowed to? If this is the case, I hope whoever stopped them from supplying buggers off at seasons end.

If USF1 do fail, a willing team is stymied from being prepared to take their place.

It is really quite pathetic, and IMO is a sorry reflection on the sport..

Dave B

23rd February 2010, 10:18

Sonic

23rd February 2010, 13:13

I'm not sure Stefan GP have as much money and clout as they'd like us to think. Word is they'd struggle to afford a set of remoulds, let alone F1 or GP2 tyres. Can't blame a chap for having a dream, but I think our Serbian friend should come clean over his team's finances and bow out gracefully.

Well they are not gonna get their hands on any finance until the FIA open the door and let them in! Come on Jean, you were elected to lead - now lead us out of the cr@p!

mac853

23rd February 2010, 14:26

Why Stefan doesn't buy some tyres from A1GP then try with them, at least the shake down could ensure the car reliability, then could be fixed on time, isn't it?

Sarac330d

24th February 2010, 22:20

becouse this thing with Stefan GP is one big froud done by Mr.Stefanovic,
I am sure that he didn`t even bought team, he is one big manipulator.
You will see after first race.
Mr. Stefanovic doesn`t have normal private car(he drives Yugo, this car is arround 2-3.000 EUR), and this thing about Stefan GP is one big froud.

Robinho

25th February 2010, 20:20

Well they are not gonna get their hands on any finance until the FIA open the door and let them in! Come on Jean, you were elected to lead - now lead us out of the cr@p!

and that finance is just hanging around waiting to be picked up and is easy to come by - just ask Campos and USF1, who have ebtires and facilities and still can't scrape together the cash to get on the grid. i doubt that if Stefan does not have hos own cash to spend that there is a pile of cash waiting for the green light - surely that would have found its way to someone with an entry?

Robinho

25th February 2010, 20:35

my take on everything -

the 4 new teams were only allowed on the strength of the Cosworth Link, Max would not allow any new teams in affiliated with the current manufacturuers by using their engines.

Stefan will never get on eth grid - they will need approval from the other teams - Ferrari will not give that as long as Coughlan is involved, and Williams tend not to approve much these days.

USF1 and Campos never had the plans or structure to make the grid in the current climate, which possibly a better established outfit "might" have managed (Prodrive, Lola amongst others), although by sheer chance we may get one of them now they've picked up extra funding. If the FIA/max had wanted competitive outfits they would have not specified Cosworth only.

i hope the 2 (maybe 3, almost certainly not 4) new guys are able to establish themselves under the new regime as they've been through a lot to get there, but the way Stefan are hanging around with someone elses car and no entry trying to force their way in stinks. if one do not make it then the FIA should reopen the opportunity to all the original tenderers - Lola always said they were continuing with their own plans (why haven't USF1 been in touch with these guys?!)

Dave B

28th February 2010, 09:54

This is like watching two bald men fight over a comb.

Now it appears that USF1's "management" (and I use that word quite incorrectly) have blocked a merger with StefanGP, possibly the only chance they had of making the grid with one-and-a-half resprayed Toyotas.

Adam Cooper's article explains more:
http://adamcooperf1.com/2010/02/27/anderson-windsor-block-stefan-gp-merger/

USF1 won't be at Bahrain: the simply don't have anything to race. Windor's ego has killed the team. Stefan have some cars but no entry, no spares, no manufacturing capability and dubious finances.

This has been an amusing sideshow, but with two weeks until the five lights go out for the first time it's surely time to put these teams out of their misery.