Who's game is it anyway?

[chris bailey]

Reading the recent arguments about the 2010 championship regulations, I am at a loss to understand where FOTA are coming from. FOTA are just the teams. It's not their ballgame. Formula One is run by the FIA. They set the rules. The budget cap has been introduced because of the ludicrous spending of the manufacturer-supported teams in F1. Something had to be done, and Max has done it. Live with it, FOTA, or leave. Formula One does not need Toyota, BMW and Renault. It would get by (reluctantly) without Ferrari. The Sport cannot be held to ransom by a small number of (mostly) jonny-cum-lately bully boys with fat wallets. Let's get back to the free-for-all days of the late 1970's, when anyone could aspire to competing in F1 (Hello, and welcome to Manor Motorsport), even if it was a case of hiring a spare Lotus or Williams for their home Grand Prix. Those really were the days..........

[ECW Dan Selby]

Yeh I quite liked the idea of the customer cars being rebadged. Any means of racing!

Selby

[climb]

Ah but the only problem is, what about TV rights money?
If Ferrari and some of the big leave, will the worldwide TV channels stay eager to pay what they currently do?
Hadn't been for that reason, Ferrari and co would have already been kicked off.

[Lotusonpole]

I was wodering if the manufacturers do leave or are effectively shown the door, who would provide the engines?

And true what would become of TV rights money and the effect of this?
Would TV be less interested and therfore would coverage be less reliable and/or extensive?

[jab]

Originally Posted by Lotusonpole

I was wodering if the manufacturers do leave or are effectively shown the door, who would provide the engines?

Cosworth

And quite a few TV broadcasters have already expressed their interest in broadcasting a breakaway series after a poll was done in the paddock in Turkey (I think)

[ECW Dan Selby]

I have no doubt that a breakaway championship, with all the money put in to the advertising behind it, would do very well.

Selby

[jab]

But it's an incredibly short-sighted idea. You only have to look at what happened Stateside, with CART breaking from USAC and TG breaking from CART, to see what a mess that made. And manufacturers dominating a series always ends in doom - just look at the WRC and its grand total of 2 works teams, and the same for the political mess that is the DTM

[ECW Dan Selby]

Yeh that's not to say it'll "all go well" etc, I just in the short term it will generate alot of publicity.

Selby

[OZ_HCR32]

Yeh , the FIA have made a mess of just about every major championship running under it...so i cant see any real interest next year if FOTA go do their own thing under the guidance of the Moto GP crowd

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by chris bailey

Reading the recent arguments about the 2010 championship regulations, I am at a loss to understand where FOTA are coming from. FOTA are just the teams. It's not their ballgame. Formula One is run by the FIA.

Yes, but if the teams think the series doesn't make sense, they are free to leave. And they are also free to run elsewhere if they desire.

The Sport cannot be held to ransom by a small number of (mostly) jonny-cum-lately bully boys with fat wallets.

If Bernie Ecclestone and Max Mosley are not jonny-cum-lately bully boys with fat wallets, what are they?

[veeten]

The problem is the difference between it and the aforementioned CART.

CART was a get together of racing teams and their managers (Gurney, Penske, et al), going against the then-USAC and IMS. The manufacturers of racing engines (Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, etc,)were on the sidelines, watching the outcome.

With FOTA, it is the manufacturers that are staging this, against the FIA and FOM.

Like CART, FOTA's major (manufacturer) members will have more incentive to micromanage the rules and regulations to their individual interests, especially one in particular. The individual that they choose to be the President of their organisation will look more of a figurehead than anything else, as the real power will reside among the manufacturers.

As this kind of politicing goes on, the very same smaller teams will feel manipulated, either by their votes or their association through their powertrain contracts, and have even less chance of being heard by the 'board of directors', and will leave.

And where will they go?... back to the original racing organisation, in whatever shape they have manifested themselves into.

History has taught us this, in many forms and facets. This will be just another example of pure intentions with hidden agendas, resulting in bad ends.

[Flyin Ryan]

Originally Posted by veeten

The problem is the difference between it and the aforementioned CART.

CART was a get together of racing teams and their managers (Gurney, Penske, et al), going against the then-USAC and IMS. The manufacturers of racing engines (Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, etc,)were on the sidelines, watching the outcome.

With FOTA, it is the manufacturers that are staging this, against the FIA and FOM.

Like CART, FOTA's major (manufacturer) members will have more incentive to micromanage the rules and regulations to their individual interests, especially one in particular. The individual that they choose to be the President of their organisation will look more of a figurehead than anything else, as the real power will reside among the manufacturers.

As this kind of politicing goes on, the very same smaller teams will feel manipulated, either by their votes or their association through their powertrain contracts, and have even less chance of being heard by the 'board of directors', and will leave.

And where will they go?... back to the original racing organisation, in whatever shape they have manifested themselves into.

History has taught us this, in many forms and facets. This will be just another example of pure intentions with hidden agendas, resulting in bad ends.

I'll agree with that, with the caveat that the CART-USAC war the manufacturers were a non-factor. The early '80s was dominated by the Cosworth engine and it wouldn't be until the late '80s when the manufacturers started coming in en masse.

As far as the current thing, if FOTA breaks away, everyone there will be looking out for their own self-interest like they did in CART where all the team owners hated each other just because it's natural due to the system they setup. The one good thing in this case would be that the teams mostly build their own cars, so you won't have chassis controlled by one owner and he picks and chooses his competition. (Screw you Carl Haas!)

The only difference I see here is you have one bad system where there's a dictator telling you what to do and there's little logic to their decisions which cost everyone a lot of money (we're going to force KERS on everyone and then we'll back off a bit and then we'll get rid of it altogether) and they're only imposing cost controls so that the shareholders in the sport can take even more money while giving the teams less and racing in far flung places with no fans like Abu Dhabi financed by corrupt governments, and there's another bad system where the teams are going to bicker with one another. So you're choosing between bad and bad.

If I was a team owner, I'd choose the breakaway with the understanding that it will create its own set of problems, just because there are so many hands in the money pool for F1 that those people that take part in graft and corruption that need to get weeded out of the sport by not receiving enough money that should be going into the sport to improve the spectacle instead of taking it out of the sport to finance corrupt individuals' lifestyles. The manufacturers running their own championship has a lot of flaws, but I would accept those flaws instead of Max and Bernie at this point. Not to mention, all those smaller teams that didn't get their entry accepted, well if there's a new manufacturer series I'm sure they'll allow you to enter.

[nobster]

I don't think that a breakaway series with only manufacturers will survive long, after all they would only have 8 different cars ( 16 entries unless more drivers per team would be allowed ).
The current economic climate does still not bode well for spending hundreds of million dollars/euros every year as all manufacturers have trouble in keeping theire heads above water at the moment. Car selling is still going down every month.

[ECW Dan Selby]

But the manufacturers have not seemed fased by this and would like to continue infinate amounts of spending..

Selby

[csirl]

It's not their ballgame.

Maybe is should be. F1 should not be run for the benefit of a small number of individuals or a management company.

As I said on another thread, I fundamentally disagree that the competitors cannot run their own series. While it may not be the way top level motorsport is run, there is precedent in other sports.

What is the best run sports organisation in the world? Answer: the NFL.

The NFL is run by the competitors. Each team has one representative on the Board. This Board appoints a Commissioner to run the sport on their behalf. All income, minus the sports running costs, is passed onto the competitors in an equal and transparent way. All competitors have an equal say i.e. 1 vote each.

On reason why this model is very successful is that in order for the sport to thrive, it has to be competitive and appeal to the fans. Otherwise, there is no income and everyone goes bust. Utlimately all income is generated by the number of fans who follow the sport - think about it. If the sport is run well, you get more fans = more income. Therefore the competitors have a strong vested interest to make the sport a success and appealing to the fans. One vote per team means that small teams have just as much power as larger rich teams (it started out this way in the NFL, but all the small teams quickly became large rich teams due to the success of the league).

I dont see why F1 cannot be run the same way. Have each of the 13 teams appoint someone to the Board of F1 who in turn hire someone to administer the sport on their behalf. Let all the income trickle down into the teams in an equal and transparent way. I guarantee you that if F1 did this, we would have more strong teams = better racing.

[jab]

There's one tiny flaw - the NFL isn't a motor racing series

Team-run motor racing series ALWAYS fail

[chris bailey]

I like the NFL idea. Salary caps. The draft (Lewis would have gone to Force India). Stopping every 3 minutes for an ad break. Something to celebrate after every play. Everyone on the team has the same colour helmets. The list goes on........... Oh, and all the teams channel vast amounts of money into grass roots motorsport to nurture future talent.

Now, I can't quite put my finger on it, but there's a flaw in there somewhere.....

p.s. Go and watch some late 70's F1 footage, and tell me if I'm just being nostalgic.

[csirl]

Dont scoff the idea. It makes a lot more sense than having a secretive company or an out of touch rich pensioner running the show.

What has F1 management done for the sport lately? Look at their track record:

1. 2010 - most boring season ever in spite of rule changes.
2. Different teams getting different payments.
3. Some teams having vetos.
4. Moving races out of places where there is fan support and putting them in places where nobody cares and with TV coverage at an inconvenient time for most fans.
5. Number of teams/cars is dropping.
6. Sport is getting very insular.
7. Ruining great circuits.
8. Running a closed shop instead of letting anyone enter a car.
9. Medals system
10. Winner of most races wins championship.
11. Stupid ugly looking cars.
12. Drivers who pay to drive rather than being there on talent.

the list goes on. One thing you can say about F1 management is that they dont care about the fans.

[jab]

Originally Posted by csirl

1. 2010 - most boring season ever in spite of rule changes.

Most boring season ever? Nonsense

If you look down the field, if Brawn hadn't made it we'd have perhaps the closest season since 1982 on our hands

2. Different teams getting different payments.
3. Some teams having vetos.

And if they hadn't, they'd have gone and formed a breakaway 4 years ago anyway

4. Moving races out of places where there is fan support and putting them in places where nobody cares and with TV coverage at an inconvenient time for most fans.

These places are paying a lot more money for their races with far better facilities, so the alternative is no races at all

5. Number of teams/cars is dropping.

We have the same number of cars as we did at the end of 1996

6. Sport is getting very insular.

Blame the manufacturers. They've driven the costs up

7. Ruining great circuits.

The alternative is crippled or dead drivers

8. Running a closed shop instead of letting anyone enter a car.

It's not a closed shop. Teams are allowed to enter if they want. They just can't afford it because, again, the manufacturers have driven costs up

9. Medals system
10. Winner of most races wins championship.

That never happened. The championship's still decided by points

11. Stupid ugly looking cars.

Personal opinion. And they were designed that way to make overtaking easier, so the alternative is minimal overtaking with last year's cars, which, in my opinion, were a lot uglier than the ones we have now

12. Drivers who pay to drive rather than being there on talent.

Who? 19 of the 20 drivers on the grid are in there on talent, which is a far higher percentage than 10 years ago

One thing you can say about F1 management is that they dont care about the fans.

Neither do the manufacturers. They just want to make money. We're just pawns to them

[csirl]

Most boring season ever? Nonsense

If you look down the field, if Brawn hadn't made it we'd have perhaps the closest season since 1982 on our hands

Ifs and buts..........the fact is that Brawn are there.

These places are paying a lot more money for their races with far better facilities, so the alternative is no races at all

Are you suggesting that short term profiteering at the expense of the sports fan base is better than looking after the fan base? I think you're proving my point.

We have the same number of cars as we did at the end of 1996

Before Bernie & Max we had nearly 40 cars for many races.

Blame the manufacturers. They've driven the costs up

No so, the manufacturers are being forced out in favour of the old boy network. The core of F1 used to be sports car manufacturers from all over Europe - UK, Italy, Germany, France etc. Ferrari, Lotus, Renault, Mercedes, AUDI (autounion), Alfa Romeo, etc. etc.

The alternative is crippled or dead drivers

Dont agree - alternative is to make the cars safer, not neutering the circuits.

That never happened. The championship's still decided by points

Not in 2010.

Neither do the manufacturers. They just want to make money. We're just pawns to them

Manufacturers cant make money unless F1 is competitive and attractive to the fans.

[nycuk]

Originally Posted by csirl

1. 2010 - most boring season ever in spite of rule changes.

Where did you park your DeLorean?

[steve nielsen]

So F1 would be a low budget series with all teams running the same engine: sounds like A1 GP to me.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Any breakaway series would still be ok for the teams as they could secure say 75% of the TV revenues instead of just the 50% they get now from uncle Bernie. The remaining 25% can go into building up the championship instead of paying off the loans of CVC.

[jab]

Originally Posted by csirl

Ifs and buts..........the fact is that Brawn are there.

And even so, it's not the most boring year ever. Go and read about some other years - 2002, 2004, 1952-53

Are you suggesting that short term profiteering at the expense of the sports fan base is better than looking after the fan base? I think you're proving my point.

No, but the fact is the old track are off the calendar for a reason, and just because the teams might go back to some of them with their new series doesn't mean they will. For all you know, within a couple of years of that series, we'll end up back in Sakhir and Shanghai again

Before Bernie & Max we had nearly 40 cars for many races.

And do you know why we don't have them anymore? Because it wasn't economical to run a team that wasn't racing. It's called survival of the fittest. A team like Life was never going to make it unless they built a car that was capable of racing, because who's going to sponsor a team that isn't racing?

Pre-quali might sound nice now but it makes no commercial sense whatsoever

No so, the manufacturers are being forced out in favour of the old boy network. The core of F1 used to be sports car manufacturers from all over Europe - UK, Italy, Germany, France etc. Ferrari, Lotus, Renault, Mercedes, AUDI (autounion), Alfa Romeo, etc. etc.

What?

Look at budgets from the last 15 years and you will see that since manufacturers have started to come back in with their own teams, budgets have skyrocketed

Dont agree - alternative is to make the cars safer, not neutering the circuits.

You can't do one and not the other. It doesn't work like that. Tarmac run-off is a necessary evil and so are chicanes

Not in 2010.

Wrong. The FIA have removed it. Go look at the rules

Manufacturers cant make money unless F1 is competitive and attractive to the fans.

How much money manufacturers make overall and whether F1 is competitive and attractive are unrelated. Whether or not manufacturers keep pouring money in to their F1 teams usually has a lot to do with how competitive they are, not how attractive the sport is. Or, like Honda, they'll pull out in a PR move to make it look like they're cutting their losses

[littleman]

Anything that reduces the power and influence of Ecclestone is a good thing in my book. I detest the man.

Has he mentioned a cap on what he can charge for a GP? Has he worked tirelessly to ensure we have a British GP (his home event)? No, he's just a greedy little man driven by self interest.