[Rules] Future Rule Changes

[JacobP]

^

In my opinion this new rule and also the proposed rule for the minimum number of tire changes sounds like an act of desperation. The FIA wants to do something to reign in the current incumbent champions and also to make the "show" better, specially towards the end of year. This does sound gimmicky of course. Why should the last race be worth more points? It's just a race. If they make it worth more points, at least it should be special in some way. E.g. make the race last three hours instead of just two.

[csirl]

I can see the F1 final race being developed and marketed as some sort of F1 Finals type event which would justify F1 charging a bigger fee to the hosting circuit. Can see the F1 Finals being offered to the highest bidder in future years. Don't particularly like the idea as I think all rounds should have equal points, but I get the aim.

I like the driver numbers idea. Allows drivers to have easily identifiable brands that they, rather than the team owns, built around their own number, thus allowing them to develop an income stream separate from the team and team sponsors. Will benefit those drivers who dont get a reliable team salary. I always hated the F1 numbering system, particularly the part where they skip #13.

5 second penalties - how's that going to work? Anything that means that the final result is different to the order in which the cars crossed the finish line is a bad idea.

[Tucky]

Originally Posted by JacobP

^

If they make it worth more points, at least it should be special in some way. E.g. make the race last three hours instead of just two.

Considering the FIA think that the races are long enough and put a time limit on them, I doubt they'd ever increase the race distance

[david5]

More points is like printing more money, it just devalues the currency. I've been following F1 for 35 years, I feel like I've been robbed, I was really looking forward to the new engine rules, now I doubt if I'll watch, I can't remember missing a GP for 20 odd years. MW @ Porsche is a much more exciting prospect.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Here's a good synopsis and implications of the rule changes for 2014 from Edd Straw.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111800

[wolfhound]

The F1 teams don't want the 2 pit stop rule. I don't blame them for that.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111806

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Can you tell me why an engine blowup on one day should be potentially more damaging (twice so) than an engine failure a week or two earlier. Especially at the end of the season when equipment is a bit more scarce.

Can you tell me why the last race in particular is double points? Why not the first? Hey, it'd make no difference right? Oh sorry, all the thick people would switch off because the winner would have a massive points advantage after one race.

Can you tell me why a race witnessed by a trackside audience of dozens should award double over a packed Silverstone or Monza?

Can you ask the teams and the FIA those questions?

I certainly wouldn't have come up with that suggestion myself, but the teams and the FIA must have their reasons for it, although they are a bit thick.

[Knowlesy]

Well yes. They are.

[Nicholosophy]

It can only be something given to Abu Dhabi because they were put last on the calendar and didn't want to be.

Outside of that context it makes no sense whatsoever.

And personally I'd have preferred team numbers (Williams 5,6, ferrari 27,28) rather than driver numbers. But it's a nothing issue to me.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

The F1 teams don't want the 2 pit stop rule. I don't blame them for that.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111806

Well, it will please those who don't want a minimum number of pit stops i.e. one pit stop, but will perhaps not please those who think that Pirelli should supply tyres that only degrade after about 35 laps or more.

Personally, I hope that Pirelli go ultra-conservative, so that only one stop, at any race, is necessary and only because it's a current tyre regulation that says you have to.

Maybe they will also reject the double-points suggestion?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by NickoGP

It can only be something given to Abu Dhabi because they were put last on the calendar and didn't want to be.

Outside of that context it makes no sense whatsoever.

Unless Abu Dhabi deliberately wanted the season finale to happen at their venue and therefore have pushed for double points. Personally, I don't think this really helps F1, it smacks of a gimmick.

[wolfhound]

Martin Whitmarsh fears that it may be difficult to impliment a budget cap. Surprise surprise and who will be the first team to be found with a bag of cash for something outside the cap?
I suspect it will be difficult to impliment the cost cap especially with teams who don't want it.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111808

[steve_r]

Vettel says that the double points system for the final race is "Absurd". I agree with him, good choice of wording there.

[bella]

i've always thought a resource restriction would be easier to police than a budget restriction. teams have to register resources with a central body and can only make use of those for certain amounts of time.

perhaps introducing a control piece of software and control computer networks that can be inspected at any time might be worth looking at.

[Moneyseeker]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Martin Whitmarsh fears that it may be difficult to impliment a budget cap. Surprise surprise and who will be the first team to be found with a bag of cash for something outside the cap?
I suspect it will be difficult to impliment the cost cap especially with teams who don't want it.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111808

Yep, this is going to be another one where the regulators think they are going to be smart enough to police this. It is going to be very interesting to see what actually falls within the regulated budget to be submitted..

In the past when cost cutting has been raised, teams have wanted drivers salaries excluded.

I can also see teams arguing that R&D for the following years car should not be counted in the current years team running budget

Couple of things we need to look out for..

A figure of £40M -£50M has been mentioned in the past as a possible budget, I can't see teams agreeing to this now, it would mean the big teams employing 500-600 people would probably have to reduce their staff by 50% to keep overall costs within the cap. So I think £70M to £80M is more likely in year 1.

Loopholes, I am sure that teams will see if there are legitimate accounting ways they can still spend more than the cap, but keep the accounts within budget, so will we see things like divisions of the team (e.g. composites, wind tunnel, design office) hived off into separate companies who bill the main F1 team at less than cost for goods and services?

[Paradise City]

A budget cap will eventually fail. Any budget cap will only be partially effective to do what its supposed to do. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented though. Even if it only works for a time maybe it's worth it.

To maximise effectiveness you would need to attach an independent team of inspectors and auditors to each team to review the books and pursue a paper trail for everything.

Also, with the internet age, speculation about breaches and loopholes, both founded and hysterical, would be relentless and politically exhausting. Particularly for Ferrari, who do far more in-house, than anyone else and who, the other teams view with envy.

In short, the FIA would need to roll up its sleeves and be ready to slog it out for an indefinite battle with a cost cap because policing the pockets is about as controversial thing as you can do with a team.

[Armco Bender]

'You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig.'

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Vettel says that the double points system for the final race is "Absurd". I agree with him, good choice of wording there.

Now that Vettel agrees that it's 'absurd', perhaps more people will like the idea?

But I agree, it is absurd. I will also agree that it was an absurd idea when we get to the Abu Dhabi GP.

I think it was equally absurd that Alain Prost lost the 1988 title, even though he had scored more points than his team mate. Dumb regulations are not a new thing.

[Born Racer]

Double points for Crappy Dhabi?

Why don't they go the whole hog and just introduce success ballast? NO, people in charge, that's a joke.

Originally Posted by Salamus

2013 was a snoozer because of Vettel`s dominance

I respectfully and completely disagree with this. There were some excellent races, including ones Vettel dominated. 1st position might be the most important, but there is racing up and down the field.

Plus, he and Red Bull did a better job than the others. Full stop.

[Marbot]

It doesn't matter how much you liked the actual racing in 2013, Vettel domination just equals borefest to some forum members.

[EERO]

It figures it would be a terrible rule such as this that would bring me back...

The essence of F1 has been eroded by the death by a thousand cuts. DRS, manadtory tire stops, mandatory tire rationing, soulless new tracks and now double points in Abu Dahbi.

Feh.

47 years a fan for this????

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It doesn't matter how much you liked the actual racing in 2013, Vettel domination just equals borefest to some forum members.

Never a borefest....
Racing is racing and F1 has been for 60 years but for a generation who grew up on X-Box and video games, instant gratification, its easy to feel bored if you aren't being stimulated in some way.

Races from the 60's 70's and 80's may not have been titanic battles all the time but I was never bored with it. Today we have all sorts of manipulation to make it 'more interesting' yet it has lost its soul.

Public approval or popularity isn't always the best indicator of sporting value.

[bauble]

Double points? It would have meant that this year Vettel had an even bigger lead over Alonso at the end of the day. Rather defeats the object.

Daft I call it!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Now that Vettel agrees that it's 'absurd', perhaps more people will like the idea?

But I agree, it is absurd. I will also agree that it was an absurd idea when we get to the Abu Dhabi GP.

I think it was equally absurd that Alain Prost lost the 1988 title, even though he had scored more points than his team mate. Dumb regulations are not a new thing.

That was the best 11 result rule. I'm glad they got rid of it but now it looks like dumb rules are coming back in order to spice up the racing.

[Knowlesy]

EERO!