Formula 1 jewelery ban is for the right reasons, says GDPA chairman Alex Wurz

“We need to work together”; Grand Prix drivers’ association president Alex Wurz believes the FIA’s jewelery ban is in the drivers’ best interest, but it could have been handled differently; Lewis Hamilton has been in a showdown with the FIA ​​over the ban.

Lewis Hamilton has called the dispute with the FIA ​​’unnecessary’

Formula 1 is right to ban jewelery in the cockpit, but the ruling FIA could have applied the rule in a less confrontational way, according to Grand Prix Drivers’ Association (GPDA) president Alex Wurz.

Seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton and the FIA ​​clashed at this month’s Miami Grand Prix over piercings the Mercedes driver has raced with for years and cannot remove, prompting the FIA ​​to give him a term. grace of two races to remove the piercings. jewelry.

While Hamilton has been told to take them out at the Monaco Grand Prix on May 29, he has said he has no intention of doing so, leaving many to wonder if he will be allowed to compete in the historic event.

However, former Benetton, McLaren and Williams driver Wurz, who is heavily involved in driver safety and education, believes the rule is in the best interest of drivers, but has not been expressed correctly.

Use the Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Lewis Hamilton was told to remove his earrings and was given a two-race waiver for his nose piercing after Formula One continued its crackdown on drivers wearing jewellery.

“It’s a rule for the right reasons,” Wurz said.

“I probably would have liked a slightly different approach to how to get the message across.

“I don’t want to end up in football where there are more hands in the air and verbal abuse… you have to work together. It’s a style I would have preferred in this case.”

The ban on jewellery, as well as the wearing of non-compliant undergarments, has been in the rules for a long time, but was rarely enforced until the FIA ​​clamped down this season.

Saying items under mandatory flame retardant clothing could increase the risk of burn injuries and has highlighted the risk of critical delays or complications if medical imaging is required after an accident, FIA President Mohammed Bin Sulayem added that is cracking down on ensuring F1 drivers are seen as ‘good role models’ for younger drivers working their way up the ranks.

Use the Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Lewis Hamilton says he will work with the FIA ​​to resolve the ongoing dispute over his jewels, admitting there are bigger issues to focus on.

Wurz said he had never forgotten a talk he attended as a youngster, given by former Danish racer Kris Nissen, who was in a car accident on Japan’s Fuji circuit in 1988.

“He showed his body and said ‘look at this,'” the 48-year-old recalled.

“For him, the most painful thing after the fire, and it was not a prolonged fire, was that the rubber (elastic) of his normal pants burned into the skin. He said that (it was) for years of agony and pain. And that made me educated

“At this moment I said that I do not want to live these consequences, just for (not) taking off my pants and putting on some fire-retardant underpants. The same with jewelry.

GDPA in talks with FIA over Miami concrete wall

Another topic of conversation that came out of the Miami GP was the lack of Tecpro energy absorption covering a concrete wall that Carlos Sainz and Esteban Ocon crashed into.

Use the Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Carlos Sainz and Esteban Ocon complain about their crashes against a concrete wall at turn 14 of the Miami GP and believe that it should be Tecpro in that curve for the safety of the drivers.

Wurz confirmed that the GPDA was speaking to the FIA ​​about the body’s refusal in Miami to protect the wall after several drivers accused the FIA ​​of ignoring their concerns, although the body said it had listened to their advice but decided it was not needed. changes.

Wurz said that hitting a concrete wall, even in a second-gear corner, was going to hurt.

“A Tecpro barrier could reduce G-forces by almost half and would mean that a driver would not need medical checks and the chassis and gearbox would remain intact,” he added.

“That would save money, with teams subject to budget limits, and eliminate the need to bring a damaged chassis back to Europe, which would increase the carbon footprint.

Wurz said the GPDA had been told a barrier was available and could have been installed.

“Strictly speaking, we didn’t have an injury, so maybe you can say (the barrier) isn’t necessary, but we want to say that if we did, it would improve the situation.”