Formula 1 halo: Bernie Ecclestone says it will not be introduced in 2017
Last updated on .From the section Formula 1
Formula 1 bosses have voted against introducing the 'halo' head protection system next season.
The strategy group of Bernie Ecclestone, six leading teams and Jean Todt, president of governing body the FIA, decided it needed more work.
But the FIA said some form of increased head protection would be introduced for the 2018 season.
F1 commercial boss Ecclestone said it was agreed to "look into it in more detail".
A statement from the FIA said that Thursday's decision to delay the introduction of head protection was made because of "the relatively short time frame" before the start of the 2017 season.
It added that the strategy group decided "it would be prudent to use the remainder of this year and early next year to further evaluate the full potential of all options before final confirmation".
The statement continued: "While the halo is currently the preferred option, as it provides the broadest solution to date, the consensus among the strategy group was that another year of development could result in an even more complete solution.
"Halo remains a strong option for introduction for 2018."
The decision comes despite the fact that the FIA has been working on the introduction of the system for some months and all teams have designed their 2017 cars with the capability to fit the halo.
Ecclestone, who had made clear his opposition to the halo concept before the meeting, told BBC Sport: "When you look at it, it was yes and no. We haven't really got a lot of positives. But we've learned a lot about what to do. We will look into it further."
The governing body made a presentation to the drivers at last weekend's Hungarian Grand Prix, saying that the halo was ready to be implemented, while demonstrating how it could save a driver's life.
Alexander Wurz, the chairman of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association, told BBC Sport: "Today's strategy group decision, if ratified by the FIA World Council, represents much more than just a vote against halo, or a delay in the introduction of additional head protection.
"This decision brings F1 into uncharted territory in many ways.
"Let's wait for the reasoning behind the decision, but for now it could almost be seen as 'business first and safety second'."
What do the drivers think?
Four-time champion Sebastian Vettel said on Thursday at the German Grand Prix that the drivers were overwhelmingly in favour of the device being introduced in 2017.
Speaking before the outcome of the vote was known, Vettel said: "I think 90-95% [of the drivers] voted for it. We don't like the looks of it but I don't think there's anything that really justifies death.
"We've always learned from what happened, incidents that happened on the track, and we've always tried to improve.
"Now, that would be the first time I think in human history that we've learned a lesson and we don't change. It's up to us to make sure it does happen, otherwise I think we'd be quite stupid."
However, Haas driver Esteban Gutierrez said he was pleased the halo was not being introduced because it needed more work. His team-mate Romain Grosjean also said he was against it.
The strategy group vote is not necessarily the final act in the saga.
The FIA has the right to introduce any change it wants on grounds of safety, without the approval of the teams or Ecclestone.
But the governing body's statement strongly suggests that this action will not be taken, despite the liability risks facing the FIA and F1 following the decision not to introduce a device that has been shown to increase safety.
The risk for the sport is that if the halo is not introduced and a driver is seriously injured or killed in the type of accident where it is designed to reduce risks, they would be open to legal action and have problems defending their decisions.
What else did the strategy group decide?
In addition, the strategy group voted to free up radio communications between teams and drivers after criticism of restrictions imposed this year.
The FIA had brought in a series of limitations on the amount of information drivers could be given by teams over the radio.
But that has led to a series of problems this year, including a penalty that demoted title contender Nico Rosberg from second to third place at the British Grand Prix for being given too much information on how to solve a problem.
The FIA statement said: "With the exception of the period between the start of the formation lap and the start of the race, there will be no limitations on messages teams send to drivers either by radio or pit board.
"This approach is aimed at providing improved content for fans and spectators, as teams will now be required to provide the commercial rights holder with unrestricted access to their radio messages at all times that their cars are out of the garage."
Subscribe to the BBC Sport newsletter to get our pick of news, features and video sent to your inbox.
Comments
Join the conversation
Next I'm not surprised that the halo was rejected. It comes across as a rushed half measure. It may stop a wheel hitting a driver, but other stuff can still hit the driver possibly killing them.
I've said before that the Red Bull Aeroshield seemed a better option. They need to look at it again
If it toppled to one side, as could happen in a race, there would be no chance of the driver getting out. In some, not all, situations, the halo could be more lethal than noting.
But what id really like to do is to point out the sensationalist headline the Beeb have gone with yet again, this time in regards to cricket "root innings caused by ramprakash hurt".
Click bait in its poorest form, which if you read, shows root is positive of ramprakash.
BBC please stop.
Good decision all round, yes I'm all for safety of the drivers but F1 needs to stay open cockpit.
If not you'll see ridiculous things like speed limits enforced, overtaking restrictions... basically the competitive edge will be removed.
Listen: To Halo in use on practice runs
Or
The latest BBC condenscending comment;
The Halo: What you need to know.
Televised sport on the BBC - nothing to see here!
thinking about it the spring that hit his helmet at the height it was would have taken a deflection off the Halo and ether hit him in the chest - killing him instantly or though the visor - again killing him
the RB AiroScreen is the safer of the two - Halo has as many down sides as up sides, AiroScreen is much safer...
As for safety, you could put a speed limit of 30mph on the cars if you want them to be safe. Racing is inherently risky. If you sanitise it, you'll make it boring and the sport will fail to capture young imaginations and die.
F1 is an open cockpit / wheel formula. That's it's very essence. Take that away and it's just a glorified GT car.
If the drivers don't like it, retire.
Radio? Fixing things on the move..... Why should settings etc be different from mechanical problems, tyre problems where they have to go into the pits to resolve? Sorry but turning knobs on the go does NOTHING for the spectator.
I never said anything about teams having specifically a non-LH stance. I mean, quite clearly, every team has an agenda against all of their rivals, no?
You said they didn't complain because they aren't anti-LH, lol what?
I told you this conversation was going to turn into a bag of balls and
here we are.
'Cause I wonder where you are
And I wonder what you do
Are you somewhere feeling lonely
Or is Vettel loving you?
You need to win Bernies' heart
For he hasn't got a clue
Sorry