South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
So teams saying its not them...FIA open Toto and Susie Wolff investigation over alleged conflict of interest: https://racingnews365.com/fia-open-wolff-investigation-over-alleged-conflict-of-interest
"... The FIA Compliance Department has opened an investigation on Toto Wolff and his wife Susie amid an alleged conflict of interest.
Wolff is currently the Team Principal and CEO of the Mercedes squad while Susie is the managing director of the all-female F1 Academy series.
It is believed that the FIA is acting on complaints from other senior personnel in F1 regarding the activities of the duo and the information that both may be able to share due to their relationship.
It is suggested that Toto Wolff is privy to confidential information about Formula One Management (FOM) activities, unavailable to rival team bosses, while Susie Wolff has access to discussions between the team bosses, which could be advantageous to FOM.
A recent report from BusinessF1 magazine claimed that Toto Wolff had made a comment in a meeting with information that could only have come from FOM, which the other bosses were unaware of.
In response, FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has asked the compliance department to launch an investigation. ..."
Some commentators have said that all teams singing from the same hymn sheet and posting identical statements at the same time may be a sign that they are starting a campaign against the FIA (possibly anti 11th team related?). Lots of missing gaps to be filled on this matter though. Uncle Ben looking like his FIA days might be numbered...So teams saying its not them...
![]()
F1 teams deny complaining about Toto & Susie Wolff over conflict of interests allegation
Formula 1 teams issue statements denying they have made any complaints about the behaviour of Toto and Susie Wolff.www.bbc.com
Except they've waited 9 months to say something? It is a conflict of interest, but who's fault is that?
Nah it's not. If it were a conflict then fire half the paddock.Except they've waited 9 months to say something? It is a conflict of interest, but who's fault is that?
I can't see how hiring a competitors spouse to work for the governing body isn't a conflict of interest.Nah it's not. If it were a conflict then fire half the paddock.
That's fine @FlashSA, I don't need to change my stance and nore do you, this is just playing out as predicted.Some commentators have said that all teams singing from the same hymn sheet and posting identical statements at the same time may be a sign that they are starting a campaign against the FIA (possibly anti 11th team related?). Lots of missing gaps to be filled on this matter though. Uncle Ben looking like his FIA days might be numbered...
Oh, and I absolutely cannot resist tagging @caroper here: Please don't get worked up again as you graduate from the school of assumptions...
Formula 1 teams have issued statements denying that they have made complaints about the behaviour of Toto and Susie Wolff.
That is a slippery slope. She's either qualified for the position or she isn't. I'd argue she is and I can't think of anyone more suitable for the position she holds.I can't see how hiring a competitors spouse to work for the governing body isn't a conflict of interest.
We're in agreement. I posted it as a response to some of the comments here wrt her use of the word misogynistic. I'm not bothered by the conflict unless there's actual evidence contrary to her statement.Erm... except Susie Wolff was a racing driver herself, and thus knows all about facing the uphills of women trying to compete in motorsport, so IMHO she is well placed to head up the Academy.
While there is the potential for conflict of interest, that should be separated from her racing credentials/experience.
The FIA and F1 in general leak like a sieve but goes to show it's unlikely to be Suzie.Wasn't there a rumour last year when the cost cap breach was rumoured that someone told Toto and he leaked it, about it before it was later confirmed by F1?
I'm not arguing that, but you're courting with controversy if you accept a position with the FIA while being married to an F1 boss. It's not rocket science.That is a slippery slope. She's either qualified for the position or she isn't. I'd argue she is and I can't think of anyone more suitable for the position she holds.
F1 Academy is FOM not FIA. It's only controversial if she's not recusing herself from situations where she may be biased in favour of her spouse or, as a matter of fact ,has shared confidential information with him. The only person courting controversy seems to be a media reporter and the unnamed source.I'm not arguing that, but you're courting with controversy if you accept a position with the FIA while being married to an F1 boss. It's not rocket science.
www.motorsport.com
"The FIA can confirm that there is no ongoing investigation in terms of ethical or disciplinary inquiries involving any individual.
"As the regulator, the FIA has a duty to maintain the integrity of global motorsport. The FIA reaffirms its commitment to integrity and fairness."