[Lowell]

This could have been averted by simply relaxing the start rules. Let the teams start on the new tires that were flown in to replace the questionable tires. Then if these tires show a competitive advantage say 1/10 of a second per lap do the math and figure out who won. They should have told the teams that just because you finished first doesn't mean you won they need to look at the times. Brig stone didn't have a change to change compounds and re manufacture tires to fit the course better so this seemed to me to be the most fair option.
TEAMS MUST START THE RACE WITH TIRES THEY QUALIFIED ON. They refused to change that rule for one race. Race timing and scoring had two days of data to know what the average times were on these tires. If the new tires had shown an advantage they could have made an adjustment.

[Publius Valerius]

Why should you change the rules and penalize the teams that actually brought the right tires?

Teams are allowed to bring backup tires in case the inital set does not function properly. Why didn't Michelin supply the teams with backup tires? Moreover, as Derek Daly said during the race, the IMS has been here since 1909. You'd think Michelin would have had plenty of time to make a tire that could go around the track 73 times.

On top of that, there was nothing preventing the Michelin teams from racing on the new tires flown in from France on Saturday--there just would have been a penalty from FIA for doing so. Why didn't the teams run on the new tires and take the penalty?

It's not FIA's fault. The rules are there for everyone to understand. It's not Bridgestone's problem (or Ferrari's) that Michelin didn't build a tire that could run at Indy.

It sucks for the fans, it sucks for Indy, and it sucks for the IMS, but change the rules? No way. The teams had plenty of options and chose not to take them.