At Indy 2005, also remember that only ONE team refused to allow the modifications to the track which would have allowed a full race to happen. Yes, it was a disgrace that the weekend went the way it did, but a sensible compromise could have been reached. Let's face it, they did at Imola one year, and also at Estoril as well in the past, when the circuit had "temporary chicanes" added to the track to slow drivers down because of "safety issues" at both tracks. Strangely enough, Michael and his team agreed to these changes for the similar reasons involved in the "Indy Farce", but refused at Indy. What was the difference this time? The idea that "Michelin teams should slow down before the final turn" was the most ludicrous and dangerous suggestion I have heard in my life. A McLaren could have lapped a Minardi, then had to brake hard to keep within the "speed limit". We know where the Minardi would have gone, don't we. "Michelin cars would have to drive through pit lane, at pit lane limited speeds" is utter tosh, as that would also have been "altering the track configuration" which was the reason quoted for not putting in chicanes. If the pit lane was to be used in that manner, then ALL cars should have been forced to drive through it and not just the Michelin teams. How would that have looked "as a spectacle", and how would your beloved Michael have reacted if he would have had a drive-through penalty on every lap whilst his rivals were allowed to stay on track and go at full speed? I think you would be shouting VERY loudly about that. I was stunned and horrified at the time (in a bar in Chicago, you should have been there to hear the yelling and laughing over the farce) because the FIA suggestions in this case were ridiculous by offering 3 teams an instant and unfair advantage and/or extremely dangerous. Of course, they could have let BOTH tyre companies supply new tyres for the event, and allowed the event to go ahead SAFELY. Michelin made a BIG mistake there, they admitted it and paid for it. That is also a fact, so please don't say that people weren't punished over the Indy fiasco just because you don't agree with the decisions.
Also, as said earlier it would have been ILLEGAL under Indiana State Law for the Michelin teams to have even started the race under these conditions. The safety of the drivers, public, etc could NOT be guaranteed because of the tyre issue and no agreement could be reached by the teams because ONE team decided they would vote against any sensible idea which could have allowed the race to run. That meant that it was impossible for the Michelin cars to run in safe conditions, illegal in Indiana, and was why the FIA HAD to clear the teams of the "charges" brought against them by Max. Oh, and why didn't Bernie do a bit more at the time?