With the F1 world now returned from Bahrain, the sport is assessing the fallout of one of the most controversial grands prix in history.

The drivers were conspicuously quiet over the saga in the island Kingdom, but – with no contract tying him down – former Force India driver Adrian Sutil admitted he was glad he was not there.

“In a situation like that, it is probably better not to go,” the German said on Sky Deutschland.

“On the one hand, the decision was made (to go to Bahrain), on the other hand, it’s very difficult when there are so many problems in a country.”

Red Bull reserve driver Sebastien Buemi, who has family living in Bahrain, does not agree at all.

“I arrived on Monday and I had no problem — maybe there were a few more police than two years ago, but nothing happened to me,” the Swiss insisted on Austrian Servus TV.

Force India and Sauber, however, witnessed Molotov cocktail attacks on their treks to and from the circuit.

And Caterham team spokesman Tom Webb told the Sun that there was “one minor incident when one of our (hire) vans slowed down in traffic and its occupants saw a local youth on the side of the main road brandishing a bottle with a rag stuffed in its neck”.

World champion and race winner Sebastian Vettel also admitted the feeling was tense in the paddock throughout the weekend.

“It was not easy for anyone,” the Red Bull driver admitted, according to SID news agency, “but I’m glad that nothing happened to any of us (in F1).”

And the Telegraph quotes Vettel adding: “Hopefully, we come back in the future when everything’s a little bit safer.”

Reuters reports that Vodafone, the main sponsor of the half Bahrain-owned McLaren team, sent no staff to the country and expressed concerns to the British outfit.

But Jim Wright, an F1 sponsorship expert, told the Guardian that he thinks while the sport’s image took a beating last weekend, sponsors will be happy.

“Most teams handled a difficult decision very well,” he said. “On that basis I think a lot of people would be pleased with that and happy to get involved with them.”

The television audience was also unaffected – even boosted – with the BBC reporting more viewers for Bahrain than Australia and Malaysia, and Germany revealing similarly strong figures.

Still, there remains criticism.

“Now is an opportunity to reflect,” former F1 driver Alex Zanardi told Tuttosport, “and make sure that major sporting events are assigned only to governments that deserve the honour of hosting them.

“Ecclestone is brilliant and has made formula one what it is, but he can’t administer races at any cost and above all else,” insisted the Italian.

Due to security fears, Force India sat out a practice session on Friday so that staff could return to their hotels in daylight.

F1 chief executive Bernie Ecclestone was reportedly enraged, and according to rumours got his revenge by instructing Formula One Management’s television cameras to ignore the Silverstone based team’s cars in qualifying.

“There was a bit of fuss about what we did,” deputy team principal Bob Fernley is quoted by Spain’s AS newspaper, “and it was not easy, but I think it turned out to be the right response.

“We had a lot of pressure, our attitude was not well received,” he confirmed, “but I think that we had a duty of care to our employees, and to do the right thing by the team.”

The calamitous Bahrain grand prix saga has not jeopardised the island Kingdom’s future on the F1 calendar.

That is the strident claim of Bernie Ecclestone, after the F1 chief executive and FIA president Jean Todt displayed rare unity as they insisted the country’s civil and political problems would not affect the grand prix.

But amid the bubbling Bahrain saga, Ecclestone had suggested that Bahrain might face trouble when it comes to negotiating a new contract, with the existing agreement only set to extend for three more years.

However, when asked by Reuters if F1 is going to keep returning to Bahrain despite this year’s troubles, Ecclestone insisted on Sunday before leaving the Persian Gulf: “Absolutely. Forever. No problem.”

Like Todt, he even played down the damage done to F1′s reputation this weekend.

“I think it’s good because people talk about things, you know. You know what they say — there is no such thing as bad publicity,” said Ecclestone.

In truth, reputation damage has undoubtedly been done. But Roger Benoit, the veteran correspondent for the Swiss newspaper Blick, admitted he is dismayed with how politics interfered with sport so strikingly this weekend.

“On all continents, somewhere, all hell is breaking loose. And as a formula one reporter, you’re flying around this globe two or three times a year,” he wrote.

“We go to countries that are politically explosive. Where human rights are violated, where poverty reigns.

“But we hardly talk about it — not in China, India, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore or Brazil. In 2014, we’re going to Russia.

“Years ago, our circus happily danced around in apartheid South Africa, and the military dictatorship of Argentina.

“Formula one is pure entertainment. Detached from the problems of the world. But here, in Bahrain, every reporter entered the political field, whether he liked to or not,” wrote Benoit.

So that is why Ecclestone is unapologetic, after championing the Bahrain grand prix.

“Because, basically, the problems they have in Bahrain have nothing to do with F1,” the 81-year-old told El Pais newspaper.

“The relevant agencies gave the nod as far as security was concerned, and I think it is clear that they were not wrong.”

He also sees no problem with F1 being used as a political tool.

“Governments want to have an F1 race for the same reason as they want the Olympics. We come to agreements with the promoters and, if that’s good for the country, fine,” said Ecclestone.

Force India deputy boss Bob Fernley has dismissed reports the Silverstone based team could pull out of the controversial Bahrain grand prix.

Two members of the team were allowed to return to Europe this week following a Molotov cocktail attack en route from the Sakhir circuit to the hotel.

There were high-level meetings involving Force India on Thursday, sparking speculation the entire team could follow its frightened members back to the UK.

But Fernley, admitting that security has been ramped up after the incident, is quoted by Express newspaper: “We are definitely taking part, that is decided.”

Bahrain’s information affairs authority also released a statement featuring quotes by Bernie Ecclestone.

“I have no knowledge of any teams planning to withdraw from the race and we are all looking forward to racing in Bahrain,” the F1 chief executive said.

According to Telegraph correspondent Tom Cary, however, another incident like the one involving Force India this week could force F1 to change its decision to go ahead with the race.

“If that happened again and someone was injured then that’s the nightmare scenario for organisers as it might push the teams over the edge,” he said.

Many drivers, like Kimi Raikkonen, have said the situation is normal this weekend in Bahrain, but Cary does not agree.

“Normally there would be PR events in town, you know, ‘meet the fans’ and that sort of thing but certainly as far as I’m aware there aren’t any of those happening,” he said.

World champion Sebastian Vettel said he will be happy when track action begins on Friday.

“I think it’s not a big problem,” the German said when asked about the security situation this weekend, “and I’m happy once we start testing tomorrow because then we worry about the stuff that really matters — tyre temperatures, cars.”

Earlier, Vitaly Petrov’s manager indicated the Russian would only travel to Bahrain if F1 could guarantee his safety.

“If it was dangerous they wouldn’t let us in,” the Caterham driver told The National in Bahrain.

“If they make sure nothing gets thrown onto that track to hurt us, then we’ll be fine. We are here; if it happens, it happens,” added Petrov.

In fact, almost everyone in Bahrain has been reluctant to comment in detail, but there is an obvious feeling of unease.

Peter Sauber told Blick newspaper: “I feel like a guest, and so it is not polite to criticise your host.”

But 1996 world champion Damon Hill allowed himself some criticism of F1, including the sport’s most powerful figures, Bernie Ecclestone and Jean Todt.

He pointed out that FIA president Todt has said “next to nothing” about the Bahrain saga.

“This I find baffling,” Hill wrote in the Guardian. “Surely it is possible to condemn acts of inhumanity without taking a side?”

As for F1 chief executive Ecclestone, who has consistently trivialised the Bahrain issue, Hill noted that “few” in the paddock “dare to publicly disagree” with the imperious 81-year-old.

“Perhaps we should (criticise him), instead of just muttering under our breath, scared of losing our passes,” said Hill.

Hermann Tilke, the German architect who designed the Sakhir circuit, sees the entire saga as a storm in a teacup.

“It is safe in Bahrain,” Tilke, whose company has an office there, told the Kolner Express newspaper. “I’ve never heard about any problems from our people.

“Of course there is some unrest, but it is protests, not civil war. As Bernie Ecclestone has said, we do sports, not politics,” he insisted.

“And if they demonstrate peacefully now, the media will report on it, so both sides benefit.”

High-profile sponsors are nervous, as formula one ploughs ahead with next week’s Bahrain grand prix.

Despite widespread trepidation felt within the paddock this weekend in Shanghai, the FIA has declared that there is no reason the Sakhir event cannot go ahead.

And after meeting with the teams on Friday, Bernie Ecclestone told reporters the race is “200 per cent” on.

But The Times reports that, amid the threat of violence, some sponsors have pulled the plug on providing hospitality for guests next weekend.

“When you have an environment like Bahrain then all the sponsors will be watching developments very, very closely and talking to each other,” a source said.

“It’s a case of ‘watch this space’ basically.”

However, the British newspaper said it is unlikely any major sponsors will pull their logos from the cars.

“(They) will effectively just have to follow the sport,” said Tim Bampton, of the motor sports marketing company Just Marketing.

“They will have to watch and wait to see what happens even though they could be caught in the vortex.”

But, at the same time, it is believed that sponsors’ contracts with the teams – such as Vodafone’s estimated $75m deal with McLaren – contain “brand damage” clauses.

An added complication for McLaren is that it is part owned by Bahrain’s sovereign wealth fund, with Mumtalakat Holdings “on course to own half the business” according to writer Kevin Eason.

Also under heavy scrutiny is the conspicuously silent FIA president Jean Todt, whose son Nicolas shares ownership of his GP2 team with Bahrain’s controversial crown prince.

“We all know why it (the Bahrain saga) might have dragged a bit,” Mark Webber is quoted by the Telegraph.

“F1 is like that. There’s a lot of funding and finances that have come from Abu Dhabi and Bahrain and the Middle East.

“They’re very excited about F1 and they clearly want to give it another go. Let’s see if it works,” added the Red Bull driver.

With F1 currently scheduled to arrive en masse in Bahrain next week, a crisis surrounding the possible cancellation of the island Kingdom’s race is continuing to deepen.

The teams have now denied Bernie Ecclestone’s claim that they can simply choose to skip the event.

“That would not be possible,” said a statement issued by the teams association FOTA. “Teams are unable to cancel (a) grand prix.”

Bahrain, meanwhile, stepped up its campaign, accusing some of deploying “scare-mongering tactics” designed to force the race’s cancellation.

The race organisers released a report conducted by Lotus, following the Enstone based team’s recent reconnaissance mission to Bahrain.

“We came away from Bahrain feeling a lot more confident that everything is in hand,” Lotus is quoted as having reported.

The team, however, reacted angrily, accusing the organisers of having released a “confidential” document.

“Lotus F1 Team is one of 12 contestants of the … world championship and we would never try to substitute ourselves for the FIA”, said the Enstone based team.

Surmised Times correspondent Kevin Eason on Twitter: “(It’s) getting messy…”

At the same time, F1 chief executive Ecclestone became fully immersed in the political situation on Tuesday, reporteding personally phoning Bahrain’s crown prince to express concern about the jailed hunger striker.

An Amnesty International report published this week had called for Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja’s release, amid claims he is now close to death and being force-fed.

But the Bahrain government, through its information affairs authority, insisted that only police and rioters are being injured in “infrequent and remote clashes”.

Also weighing into the argument was Sir Jackie Stewart, the eloquent triple world champion, who said: “I would go.

“The commercial rights holder has sold a package, at a price, and it is part of the constructors’ agreement that they attend the races that have been published,” he told the Guardian.

“As a team owner I would have to honour my agreement both orally and legally.”

Whatever happens, the Bahrain saga – stretching back now over a year – is not good news for the future of the island Kingdom’s calendar spot.

“Maybe we wouldn’t renew it (the contract),” Ecclestone admitted to the BBC. “We’ll have to look and see.”

Group Lotus will no longer sponsor the formula one team that bears its name.

But – as F1′s perpetually bizarre ‘Lotus’ saga takes another twist – the Enstone based team, formerly Renault, will continue to be known as Lotus in the coming years.

Last year, and in 2010, ‘Lotus’ was the name of the team that is now called Caterham, but a bitter dispute soured that relationship as the Proton-owned car company Group Lotus ended the naming license and made its own bid to enter F1.

Group Lotus’ new foray blossomed in 2012 with Renault’s renaming to Lotus, amid speculation team owner Genii was keen to get more involved with the iconic sports car marque.

When asked recently about his team’s relationship with Lotus, Kimi Raikkonen answered clumsily on the Top Gear motoring programme: “Well it’s, er, it (the car) is not a Renault. Lotus is just a sponsor.”

The Autosport website revealed on Good Friday that the sponsorship deal has been “terminated”.

However, “We are happy to carry the Lotus name as we believe it is a good name for F1,” explained team owner Genii’s Gerard Lopez.

“So Lotus are still Lotus despite no longer being sponsored by Lotus?” the Telegraph’s Tom Cary wittily surmised on Twitter.

And in yet another twist, Lopez refused to rule out a scenario in which Genii actually takes over Group Lotus.

“We don’t know yet, because we really do not know what the new owner wants to do with it,” he said.

The FIA appears to have waded back into the ‘F-duct’ debate, indicating that the Mercedes-style solution is fully legal.

We reported on Monday that the saga looked set to continue into China next weekend, with some teams – notably Red Bull and Lotus – questioning the legality of the aerodynamic innovation.

It had emerged that Lotus technical director James Allison has come up with another argument against the technology that will be posed to the FIA’s Charlie Whiting ahead of scrutineering in Shanghai next week.

Christian Horner insists Red Bull and Lotus’ concerns are shared by others.

“Believe me it’s not just Red Bull, I think there’s half the paddock that’s been looking at this,” he told British television Sky Sport’s The F1 Show.

The Red Bull team boss revealed that Whiting left Malaysia wanting “to have a think about it”.

So, the latest development is the re-release via the FIA website of an “edited version” of the technical briefing that Whiting gave to reporters in Australia last month.

It is believed the complaining teams’ main objection to the Mercedes system is that it arguably uses ‘driver movement’ – the pressing of the DRS button – to be activated.

Under the heading “Pressing the DRS button and the issue of ‘driver movement’”, the media briefing quotes Whiting as stating simply: “This is specifically allowed (in the rules).”

Mercedes’ Ross Brawn is quoted by the BBC: “We call it the DRS, because that’s all it is. The purpose of the DRS is to improve overtaking and that’s what we’re trying to do.”

Whiting’s stance in China, however, may not be the end of it.

“Then the teams are faced with alternatives,” Horner explained. “Either accept it and get on it and maybe look at your own solution if that fits your car.

“You’ve got the opportunity to protest if we were to feel – or any other team were to feel – that we didn’t agree with Charlie’s interpretation,” he added.

The 2012 ‘F-duct’ controversy looks set to keep running for now.

“It’s not over yet,” confirmed Red Bull advisor Dr Helmut Marko to Germany’s Auto Bild.

In Australia and Malaysia, the threat of results protests hung over the opening races of 2012, due to some teams – chiefly Red Bull and Lotus – questioning the legality of the aerodynamic innovation on Mercedes’ 2012 car.

Until now, the FIA has declared that the system – working in unison with the driver-operated DRS – is fully legal.

But it has emerged that Lotus technical director James Allison has come up with another argument against the technology that will be posed to the FIA’s Charlie Whiting ahead of scrutineering for next weekend’s Chinese grand prix.

It is believed that while Ferrari is on Red Bull and Lotus’ side at present, Mercedes-powered McLaren is currently staying out of the debate altogether.

Dr Helmut Marko has denied reports Sebastian Vettel was summoned to Red Bull’s headquarters this week to explain his behaviour at the recent Malaysian grand prix.

The Narain Karthikeyan-saga aside, reports suggested the German deliberately ignored his bosses’ instruction that he retire his RB8 – ostensibly due to a brake issue – so that he could fit a new gearbox without penalty in China.

The reports suggested Vettel had confessed immediately after the race that he heard the instruction but chose to ignore it.

“That is all nonsense,” Red Bull’s motor racing consultant Marko told Sport Bild.

“Sebastian did nothing – absolutely nothing – that was against our wishes.”

Marko said Vettel’s visit to Milton Keynes this week was scheduled long ago, adding that he will be working inside the driver simulator amongst other things.

He also hit back at claims the 24-year-old could be penalised by the FIA for breaching the code of conduct when he showed the ‘middle finger’ to Karthikeyan.

“The matter was resolved during the meeting with the stewards (in Malaysia). For me, the case is closed.”

Speaking to Kolner Express newspaper, however, an FIA spokesman confirmed that the code of conduct forbids superlicense holders from insulting their rivals.

But he added: “I imagine the application of this paragraph was considered by the stewards in Malaysia.”

And Sebastian Vettel’s spokeswoman said: “We know of no investigation.”

Years after F1′s ‘spygate’ sagas, the issue could be set to return to the very top of the governing body’s agenda.

Force India claims Caterham and their common former wind tunnel partner Aerolab were this week “found liable” by a British court of using Force India data for the Team Lotus car of early 2010.

Vijay Mallya’s Silverstone based team said the ruling has been “referred for the consideration” of the FIA.

But Aerolab has hit back, insisting the judge “entirely rejected” Force India’s charge of “systematic copying”.

“On the contrary, such misuse as I have found to have occurred mainly consisted of opportunistic copying of CAD files by CAD designers in order to take a short cut,” the wind tunnel company quoted judge Justice Arnold as saying.

Nonetheless, Caterham was ordered to pay EUR 25,000 to Force India, but not the 18 million requested by the team.

“We were deeply disappointed with the damages award,” Force India deputy team principal Robert Fernley told the Guardian.

He said Caterham/Aerolab did not make a simple “short cut” in copying the CAD files, but copied “front and rear break duct systems, the front wing, the rear wing, the barge boards, the vortex generators and the diffuser”.

“The judge might say it’s not systematic but in my view it’s pretty extensive,” added Fernley.

Force India is expected to appeal.

And if the FIA intervenes and charges Caterham with theft, “it would cost Caterham tens of millions for the money they received for finishing tenth in the world championship for the past two years”, wrote Guardian correspondent Paul Weaver.

“And that is before any fine.”

 The latest twist in F1′s endless ‘blown diffuser’ saga was reportedly triggered by Mercedes.
Amid last week’s Barcelona test, it was rumoured that Mercedes and Renault-powered teams would have to make tweaks, after a loophole was discovered in the standard electronics software.

For 2012, the FIA has clamped down on engine exhaust blowing for aerodynamic purposes, but speculation continued to sweep the paddock that some teams had devised ways to minimise the impact of the ban.

Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport reports that it was Mercedes engineers who found the loophole, in terms of how to utilise the standard electronic software to maximise the off-throttle exhaust blowing effect.

“The FIA has responded by rewriting the software,” read the report.

Auto Motor und Sport said Mercedes was right about the loophole, but that it could only have been exploited at the price of dramatic fuel consumption, and potential damage to the engine.

“We have erred on the safe side,” an FIA source is quoted as saying.

Writing in Spain’s Mundo Deportivo, Raymond Blacafort said the 2012 Red Bull’s exhaust was making a strange sound in the chicane in Barcelona last week.

Lewis Hamilton looks set to be recalled as a witness as the Adrian Sutil assault saga rolls on.
German Sutil, and his father Jorge, described former close friend and 2008 world champion Hamilton as a “coward” and “pathetic” after the McLaren driver did not appear at the recent hearings in Munich.

But with the former Force India driver – and Munich prosecutors – now filing appeals against the judge’s verdict, Hamilton’s personal testimony might be regarded as crucial.

Hamilton is clearly visible in the video footage of the incident with Eric Lux in a Shanghai nightclub last April, but Sutil’s manager Manfred Zimmermann claims the judge neglected the gravity of the security camera evidence.

“Not asking one of the witnesses to court and other important circumstances have not been considered as well,” Zimmermann charged.

London newspaper the Daily Telegraph claims Hamilton “is happy to testify provided the date does not clash with prior commitments”.

 Charlie Whiting has given the 2012 cars at the Jerez test this week an early clean bill of health.
It was reported the FIA’s technical delegate decided to attend the opening test of the 2012 pre-season amid speculation the teams may have overstepped the mark with their new exhaust layouts.

Exhaust-blown diffusers have been banned for this season, but the early signs were that teams had been clever in their interpretation of the new rules to maintain an aerodynamic benefit.

“At the moment they’re all legal,” Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport, following Whiting’s inspection of all the team garages on Wednesday, quoted the Briton as saying.

Red Bull’s Adrian Newey also played down all the speculation about 2012 exhaust interpretations, insisting there is unlikely to be a “bright idea” from this year’s restrictive rules similar to the double diffuser or blown exhaust innovations.

“We do not see any big differences between all the possible solutions,” he said. “The rules are very specific and very restrictive.”

That could, of course, be great news for Red Bull’s rivals, particularly with the FIA having also clamped down on flexing front wings — another area perfected recently by Newey.

“That rule change,” said Newey, referring to the halving of the allowable wing flex for 2012, “came very late.

“The result is that the wing has gained a lot of weight, making it harder to achieve the optimum weight distribution.”

Newey said the FIA’s new stance on wings was “probably” powered by the violently fluttering components on Ferrari’s car late last season.

Indeed, between Ferrari and Red Bull, there already appears some tension.

Spain’s Marca newspaper claims Newey suspected Ferrari’s initial exhaust solution on the F2012 was not legal.

Then on Wednesday – the day of Whiting’s pit visits – the Maranello based team hastily cut into its exhausts and fairings, ostensibly to meet the new rule about top visibility.

“Honestly,” Ferrari designer Nikolas Tombazis said, “I haven’t seen anything out of the ordinary. We have analysed what everyone is doing and I do not see a great innovation that we have not studied already.”

The saga will continue to run.

“They will still be able to use the exhausts (aerodynamically) this year,” predicted Remi Taffin, engine supplier Renault’s track boss.

“So we will see changes in this area in the Barcelona testing and probably also in Melbourne,” he is quoted by France’s Auto Plus.

While ‘step’ noses were still occupying some in the F1 paddock, the sport’s purists were staring at the rear of the cars as the field of 2012 tested at Jerez on Tuesday.
With blown exhausts effectively banned this year, the new rules state that the outlets must now be visible from above.

But according to Auto Motor und Sport, the Ferrari and McLaren solutions are not necessarily visible from a bird’s eye view, causing some insiders to predict a new controversy about the legality of cars this season.

So at Jerez, the game began.

“We have had a lot of correspondence with the FIA,” said Ferrari designer Nikolas Tombazis. “We believe that what we are doing is legal.”

McLaren’s solution is also innovative, with the side ‘bump’ seen at the launch of the MP4-27 still on the car at Jerez.

One early analysis is that the team is using a rule loophole to cleverly redirect the exhaust air.

“There’s always a chance that somebody will come up with something that’s right on the border,” said Red Bull designer Adrian Newey.

Added Lotus’ James Allison: “So far we have a conservative solution,” he commented on the day Kimi Raikkonen went quickest in the 2012 car.

“We will watch the competition and also what the FIA says. Depending on how much they will allow, we will act accordingly.”

Some of the smaller teams are already expressing frustration.

“The FIA has said that the exhaust should no longer influence the aerodynamics. We support that and we will stick to that,” said Toro Rosso’s Giorgio Ascanelli.

Added Williams’ Mark Gillan: “The rules are actually pretty clear and we are trying to be on the right side of them.”

Mark Webber has vowed to improve despite now sharing a team garage with F1′s youngest ever double world champion.

Less than a year ago, the Australian arrived at the season finale as a favourite for the championship, amid rumours he might be snapped up by Ferrari.

But ten days into October of 2011, his teammate Sebastian Vettel is the back-to-back title winner.

“We have had some problems but, ultimately, the problem is that I have not been fast enough or consistent enough to fight for wins with Sebastian,” admitted the 35-year-old.

Webber said he has struggled to adapt to the Pirelli tyres and make good race starts but “It’s true that I have struggled with Seb”, he told the Spanish newspaper El Pais.

“He has not had any problems with the tyres, with getting up and running at a good pace without destroying them. I have to improve,” said Webber.

El Pais also reminded Webber that, last year amid the Silverstone front wing saga, he said that if he knew he was subordinate to his teammate, he would not sign a new deal.

“What has changed to make you sign for another season?” asked the newspaper.

Webber answered: “I re-signed because I had no choice.”

But he denied that his single year deal is making him nervous, with drivers like Fernando Alonso and now Jenson Button locked into contracts for the long term.

“They are younger than me, but it doesn’t worry me too much,” insisted Webber. “You can sign for two or three years but I am sure that Jenson and Fernando have clauses to opt out if they don’t have competitive cars.”

And he insists he is not necessarily now Vettel’s ‘number 2′.

“Well, both this year and last year we started on equal terms but it ended well for Sebastian. This time I have just been fighting to win races.

“I have to be prepared because, maybe, he’s not going to like the new car or is not comfortable with it,” said Webber.

But he acknowledged that Vettel is likely to remain up to speed because the RB8 “is going to be very similar to what we have now”.