I’d urge @Jonny_Long and @Ronan_Mc_Laughlin to take a close look at the history of F1 safety and Sir Jackie Stewart - of course the UCI has to make changes BUT the driving force behind those changes could (and perhaps if we want it to actually happen SHOULD) be riders. In the 1960’s F1 was enormously dangerous with multiple driver deaths every year. The FIA didn’t want to change a thing - it was the drivers refusing to race and near constant protests after Niki Lauda’s horrific burns that forced the change. The UCI (and ASO) will do nothing meaningful without the threat of NO RACING and televised protests…that is sadly how change is going to happen.
1 Like
Agreed, although I’d argue the FIA/F1 changes didn’t come for a long time after Lauda’s horrific crash. Unfortunately, it took the loss of Senna and Ratzenberger in that one tragic weekend before the drivers refounded the GPDA and forced through meaningful safety changes, which to their credit, F1 and the FIA have continually evolved and improved ever since. The rider protest at the weekend had me thinking of Monaco 1994 and the refounding of the GPDA. This is where I wanted to go with the conversation on yesterday’s podcast, but that conversation deserves a podcast of its own. It’s a topic I’ve touched on previously, one that I may return to, but I just hope the UCI can recognise and learn from F1’s safety advances before any more riders are lost.
3 Likes
You are absolutely correct - I was thinking about Jackie Stewart complaining about the Nordschleife and completely forgot about Senna and Imola/Monaco '94 - which certainly moved the ball forward another leap.
I 100% agree. Unfortually, I think it’s going to take something career-ending happening to one of the big names of men’s cycling to drive any changes.
2 Likes
Tangentially related: I’d also be interested in knowing whether F1 could be useful for growing pro cycling as a business.