The family of Jules Bianchi has employed a firm of London lawyers to argue that they deserve compensation for his death. The website of the legal firm, Stewarts Law, says that it 'is the UK's only litigation-only law firm and specialises in high value and complex disputes.'
Is there a clue in the words 'high value'?
At every motor sport event I have attended there have been warnings that the sport is dangerous, this has been displayed on tickets, posters and in the programmes from, kart meetings to Grands Prix. The warning has always been clear and has pulled no punches. It was not like the cigarette company which advertised a menthol brand (Consulate) as, 'cool as a mountain stream' when the harmful effects of tobacco were known in the industry.
Jules's family has known the cruelty of the sport, his great uncle, Lucien, winner at Le Mans in 1968, died while testing there the following year.
To recap on his accident in the 2014 Japanese GP. It had been raining and suddenly the downpour intensified. Adrian Sutil was the first to be caught out and he spun. Yellow flags came out and everyone, except Bianchi, drove appropriately. He came off and hit the mobile crane which was removing Sutil's car. He was rendered unconscious and died because of a diffuse axonal injury caused by massive deceleration. This is the same cause of injury and death when babies are severely shaken.
Ironically, it was advances in safety which prolonged the agony. At one time Jules's car would have disintegrated on impact and he would have died immediately. Death was also likely to have been instantaneous before the adoption of the HANS harness. I can think of several exceptional drivers whose careers were affected, or even curtailed, by what in retrospect we can see as diffuse axonal injury.
Incidentally the 'halo' structure which will be worn next year to make F1 cars look ridiculous would not have helped Jules. In the 111-year history of Grand Prix racing it might, I emphasise might, have saved the lives of two drivers, One was Alan Stacey driving for Team Lotus in the 1960 Belgian GP when a pheasant collided with his head. Even then a combination of a modern helmet and the HANS restraint would most likely have saved Alan.
The one occasion when a halo might have been really useful involved Tom Pryce in the 1977 South African GP when a young marshal ran across the track carrying a fire extinguisher. Tom hit the marshal and was struck by the extinguisher. Nobody called for the modification of the cars, it was regarded as a freak accident. The call came nearly forty years later, after Bianchi's accident, when a halo would have been useless.
There have been fatalities in other forms of racing which could have been prevented by a 'halo', but it is being adopted only in Formula One.
We have all heard of everyday drivers being killed when a foreign object went through the windscreen. We do not fit steel grilles to our windscreens.
Jules made a slight error, had he braked a second or so before he did, he might have made the corner. The greatest drivers in history have made bigger mistakes yet walked away from them. On different occasions, Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna both had the Monaco GP in the bag when, with a few laps to go, they lost concentration and swiped the Armco in unforced errors.
In 1955, Alberto Ascari had inherited the lead at Monaco when he misjudged his braking and ended up in the harbour. He made it back to the shore employing 'a stylish crawl', according to one contemporary report.
The story may have been different had Ascari been strapped into his Lancia and had a modern race suit, helmet and HANS restraint., On the other hand there would have been Armco. The game of 'What if...' is for amusement only.
According to press reports the Bianchi family believes that it wrong to hold the Japanese GP in October, or at least their 'high value' legal representatives do. The F1 calendar has to consider logistics so it begins and ends with races away from Europe, where the teams are based. It also takes into account local climate so Spain, Monaco and Italy are at the beginning and end of summer in the Northern Hemisphere while Australia and Brazil are the same in the Southern Hemisphere.
There are sound reasons for the shape of the calendar which has been developed over many years. You can never legislate for the weather. Ayrton Senna established his reputation in only his sixth GP and then with a Toleman. It was the 1984 Monaco GP when the rain was so heavy the race was abandoned. Monte Carlo in early summer, who would have thought it might rain. There are goldfish who can remember the last time it happened.
Because Jules made a mistake, his family (or their 'high value' lawyers) believe that the whole calendar should be revised even though nobody can predict the weather, let alone control it. This is ridiculous. We have a series taking place on five continents, in both hemispheres, and over many years a reasonable compromise has been achieved. One driver makes a small error and everyone else must change. Do me a favour.
Jules hit a mobile crane and it can be argued that it should not have been where it was. Every circuit has its own topography, therefore its own problems and its own solutions. Suzuka had used mobile cranes for years and I would like to see evidence of any serious objection to the practice before Bianchi's accident. The circuit is not only used for racing throughout the season, but for track days and a racing school.
Suzuka is owned by Honda, which appears not to be named in the law suit. I guess suing a small F1 team in the lawyers' home court is easier than suing an industrial giant on its home turf.
The second Marussia, driven by Max Chilton, negotiated the same corner, in the same conditions, under the waved yellow flags, but at an appropriate speed. Max finished the race and the car had passed every crash and safety test. The team in the pits cannot control the decisions of a driver on the track.
Jules Bianchi drove too fast for the conditions. That was clear at the time and telemetry bears it out. I can understand his family's distress, but I have no time at all for the blame and compensation culture, it is a pestilence that damages society and it has been largely the creation of ambulance chasing lawyers.
Some ambulance chasers have been known to have given themselves airs with plush offices in smart locations. But then some sluts call themselves 'high class escorts' when they mean 'expensive sluts'; there being no such thing as a high class slut.
Jules Bianchi was a gifted and popular young man who was helped to his drive with Marussia by Ferrari, as part of its driver development programme. Earlier in 2014 he had rewarded Marussia with its first, its only, World Championship points by finishing ninth at Monaco. At Suzuka he made a small error, he should have braked a second or so earlier, that is how small the mistake was, but he didn't do that and paid with his life.
When, after nine months in a coma, he died, his passing was marked, sincerely, by everyone in F1. Speaking for myself, I would like to remember him as a bright talent. I do not want to remember him as the subject of a law suit which might damage, for cash, the sport he loved and which should remember him with affection and respect.
Motor racing is dangerous. It always has been and always will be. It is what gives the sport its edge. It is live, it is not simulation or Scalextric. I see drivers doing stuff I know I could not and that is why anyone watches any sport. We want to marvel at excellence and we would prefer to remember Jules because of what he achieved and not because of some 'high value' litigator.
Mike Lawrence.
Learn more about Mike and check out his previous features, here
sign in