After an uneventful first day on track for Aston Martin, Fernando Alonso made sure to create some sparks in the media pen.
The 43-year-old Formula 1 veteran finished eighth and 13th in practice in Australia, and after stepping out of his 2025 challenger, he laid down the law with the media.
“We haven’t learned anything, and if I learn something, I won’t tell you,” he said.
“We come here because it’s mandatory, but, really, there’s nothing to talk about.
“We’ve just jumped out of the car as usual. There will be 24 Fridays like now, where you can ask what you want and I won’t tell you anything.”
“I need to review everything now with the team and privately discuss what we did today.”
Giving one final sarcastic response, he said: “We did laps… the car goes, the engine is alive, the brakes are OK, the gearbox is changing gears up and down, so all good.”
Formula 1 drivers are not required to speak to the press after Friday practice, although they are now obliged to attend the television broadcaster’s pool.
They have to do that straight after jumping out of the car, though, something which clearly annoys Alonso as drivers will be speaking without any feedback from their engineers.
As does the number of races, with F1 continuing with 24 Grand Prix after reaching that watermark figure last season and repeating it this term.
The requirement is far from the only one that annoys Alonso and his competitors, though, as disagreements rumble on between the drivers and the sport’s governing body, the FIA.
President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has come under increasing pressure for a number of controversial rule changes, including the implementation of a so-called ‘swearing ban’.
The F1 grid unanimously slammed the rule at the F1 75 car launch in London, with a number telling talkSPORT about their grievances.
On top of that, Ben Sulayam is now coming under fire from key leadership figures within the sport after Robert Reid, the FIA’s deputy president for sport, and David Richards, the UK’s representative, were barred from a world motorsport council meeting having refused to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
Just a few days ahead of the season opener in Australia, Richards joined the dissent against Ben Sulayem in a statement where he said: “For some time now l’ve had concerns about the erosion of accountability and good governance within the FIA.
“Many of you were possibly surprised that we didn’t support the British candidate, Graham Stoker, but the Board met with both candidate teams and was convinced by the well thought out plans that Mohammed’s campaign team presented, which very much aligned with our own views of the way the FIA should transform itself.
“The key messages in their presentation were: A hands-off President who would be non-executive and delegate the day-to-day running of the FlA to a professional executive team.
“The appointment of an empowered and capable CEO to run the FIA to professional standards.
GettyAlonso did have some fun in Australia, getting involved in his team’s activities around the track[/caption]
“Full transparency of actions and the highest standards of sporting governance.
“I’m afraid that over the last three years there has been a distinct failure to meet these promises.
“In fact, the situation has progressively worsened with media reports confirming that numerous senior members of the FIA and volunteer officials have either been fired or have resigned under an opaque cloud.”
Going further, the former BAR and Benetton team principal continued: “The final straw for me, three weeks ago, was being asked to sign a new confidentiality agreement that I regarded as a gagging order.
“The construction of this new confidentiality agreement does not comply with the statutes of the FIA and contradicts the promise of transparent governance we had voted for.
“Our Motorsport UK lawyers, along with our French legal counsel, have challenged the FIA on their actions by setting out a clear set of questions that the FIA leadership needs to answer.
“It is very disappointing to report that we have still not received an answer to these or the fundamental question I raised: where in the FIA statutes does it provide for an elected member to be barred from a meeting?”
