Geoff Arnold

Missiles were thrown onto the circuit during the race, and the cars crossed the finishing line to shouts of derision from spectators.

Missiles?!

mis·sile P Pronunciation Key (msl, -l)
n.
An object or weapon that is fired, thrown, dropped, or otherwise projected at a target; a projectile.
http://dictionary.reference.com/

Can't find the plural.

Lay the blame where it belongs; on Michelin. They screwed up the tire choice. You can't change the rules for a race in the middle of the race. It's 100% unfair to the other (Bridgestone) teams. FIA was just upholding the rules, and they gave the Michelin teams plenty of options.

Michelin was clearly at the root of the problem. However the fact that the teams and the FIA couldn't agree on a compromise that would give the fans a race is inexcusable. A combination of a chicane at turn 13 and a points guarantee for the Bridgestone runners would have achieved that.

And behind all of this are the crazy tyre regulations which have forced both manufacturers into unknown design territory. The intention of the rules (ostensibly to save money; in reality to stop Bridgestone and Ferrari from stitching everything up) was bogus, and the consequences have been horribly dangerous. On several occasions teams have hesitated about bringing a car in for a tyre change because they were worried that the old tyre would be seen as "insufficiently damaged". That's stupid.

One this about this debacle: the momentum for a breakaway series controlled by the car companies just increased significantly....

Contrary to a comment above, it seems to me that Michelin were the only ones who actually handled a difficult situation with any sense. Yes, they made a massive mistake, but they dealt with it as best they could and will pay for it. If there is actually evidence that they were specifically negligent beforehand, then throw the book at them, but given the bad-feeling that this would obviously bring towards them, I would be amazed if there was negligence. It seems that the Michelin teams did make very reasonable offers of concessions and that they were rejected, which just shows the lack of perspective that the decision makers had.

Now, I may be a Ferrarri fan, but if Schuey and Rubens had taken each other off, I would have laughed so hard it would have hurt.

Overall, embarassing, a sham and best summarised by Geoff as "inexcusable".

I disagree on the chicane. That's just a ludicrous suggestion on the part of Michelin. That would have violated so many different rules as to have an even worse impact on the sport in the future. The Indy track has been around for 97 years. The F1 layout has been around for 6. If Michelin can't bring a tire to the track that is safe to drive, then they should be kicked out of F1.

Regarding the new tire rules, I agree they are atrocious, but all the teams agreed to race by them. So tough luck, IMO.

The FIA's troubles stem from creatin rules to stop Ferrari, when F1's popularity worldwide has exploded during Michael's/Ferrari's rise to dominance. People wanna see Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Michael Schumacher, etc...

re: my point about FIA giving Michelin options:

"As explained in our earlier letter, your teams have a choice of running more slowly in Turn 12/13, running a tyre not used in qualifying (which would attract a penalty) or repeatedly changing a tyre (subject to valid safety reasons)."

All of those would have followed the rules.