'Benevolent dictatorship' might be best solution for what ails F1
The future of Formula One has come sharply into focus in the past couple of weeks as the major players have discussed the direction the sport should take in the future.
We've seen some pretty good racing this year, notwithstanding Lewis Hamilton's healthy championship lead. Ferrari has won a race and come close in others. And in Spain, Nico Rosberg showed that Hamilton won't necessarily have it all his own way at Mercedes this year.
But clearly there are some big issues to be addressed. TV viewing figures and circuit crowds have suffered of late, and several teams are struggling on track carrying huge debts off the track. The collapse of Caterham at the end of last year was a reminder that eventually those with unpaid bills will take action, and bankruptcy can follow. F1 may live in a bubble, but sometimes real-world issues can hit home.
Last week saw a crucial meeting of the F1 Strategy Group, the organization with a main job of, as the name implies, determining the future of the sport. However, only six of the 10 teams are represented on the body. There are five permanent members in Ferrari, Red Bull, McLaren, Mercedes and Williams, while the next-best-placed team in the championship becomes a member for the following year. Last year, that was role was held by Lotus, this season it is Force India.
Each team has a single vote, while the FIA (via president Jean Todt) has six votes, and Formula One Management (in other words Bernie Ecclestone) has six votes. Decisions require a simple majority.
The other four teams, namely Lotus, Sauber, Toro Rosso and Manor, are in effect disenfranchised. Those teams don't have a formal opportunity to contribute to new ideas, other than by asking someone else to put them on the agenda of the Strategy Group meetings, so one could argue that Toro Rosso's interests are in the hands of sister team Red Bull Racing.
Proposals that emerge from the Strategy Group go to the Formula One Commission, on which all teams are represented. However, the body can only discuss the proposals that are sent to them.
Formula One World Motor Sport Council must approve F1 Strategy Group's proposed changes
Time will tell how much last Thursday's meeting of the Strategy Group will actually change the direction of Formula One.The group -- featuring the top teams, Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA -- met ...
So, while everything that emerged from last week's Strategy Group meeting still has to be discussed and voted through, in theory the F1 Commission can't actually add new items to the agenda. Thus, while the disenfranchised teams do get a vote, their input is limited.
Other key stakeholders are represented on the F1 Commission, namely Ecclestone (as its chairman), Todt as FIA president, eight race promoters, Pirelli as the tire supplier, two sponsors (currently Rolex and Philip Morris), and an engine supplier (Renault, which does not have its own team).
Proposals have to secure 18 out of 25 votes to be passed, or unanimity of the 10 teams is required if changes are for the following year. If approved, they then proceed to the World Motor Sport Council. If they have got that far, then passing them is usually a formality.
The struggling teams were hoping that last week's meeting would properly address the financial crisis that affects them all, and Force India's deputy boss Bob Fernley was there to defend their interests. Perhaps not surprisingly, his suggestion that there be a redistribution of F1's income -- which is heavily weighted toward the five big teams that dominate the group -- didn't get very far. And nor was there any major progress on controlling costs, which is has been a contentious talking point for years.
Instead of finding ways to help teams that are on the verge of financial collapse, the meeting focused on how the grid might be filled if those teams did start disappearing -- and that would be by the big teams fielding third cars or, a little further down the road, by them supplying customer cars for others to run -- in other words there would be a second "B-team" team running a pair of McLarens or a pair of Mercedes, or what have you.
But the heart of the meeting was a discussion of what can be done to improve the show in 2017. Usually the FIA does not issue details of Strategy Group meetings, but the governing body was aware that there was a lot of interest on this particular gathering. So a day later we were told that refueling could be coming back, and that as part of a move towards improving lap times by 5-6 seconds we could have revised aerodynamics and wider tires, in addition there would be an attempt to improve the sound made of the current breed of hybrids, a hugely contentious issue among fans of course. Revisions to the structure of the GP weekend were also discussed.
Formula One F1 boss Ecclestone: We're sitting and waiting for Formula One to disappear
Former FIA president Max Mosley is not the only one fearing for the very survival of Formula One. F1 boss Bernie Ecclestone also fears the series is heading down a slippery slope.Mosley, a famously ...
The most important point was that we will now have long-term stability in the engine regulations. In other words the V6s in which Mercedes, Renault, Ferrari and Honda have invested so much are not suddenly going to be swept away. And the FIA underlined that this was being done not just for the current competitors, but to help encourage others -- in other words VW/Audi -- to finally commit to the sport.
In other words, quite a lot of stuff did get discussed, although the details are a little fuzzy, to say the least.
“It was a very positive meeting and lots of good things talked about for 2017,” said Red Bull's Christian Horner. “There was obviously a large amount of discussion about the future and about current issues. I think there is positive work going on regarding the 2017 chassis. There were debates about refueling, whether that should be reintroduced or not. Differing opinions on that. It was a constructive meeting. I wouldn’t say that we nailed down a whole load of decisions out of it, but certainly a lot of discussion about the relevant topics at this point in time.”
“It was a good meeting in relation to the 2017 regs,” said Mercedes boss Toto Wolff. “We all agree that we want to reintroduce quicker cars, get the lap times down by five to six seconds. Make it more of a driver formula, maybe get rid of the electronic start procedures, go back to more conventional clutches. Refueling was discussed, with many various opinions. But we all agreed that this is what should be happening, so it was good.”
Of course, if you have 10 or 15 people in a room taking for a few hours, they will all come out with a different idea of what was achieved, and that was demonstrated by the reaction of Force India's deputy team principal Bob Fernley, frustrated by the lack of help for the struggling teams.
“I must have been at a different meeting,” he said. “I don’t think it was a good meeting at all. After 18 months, I think we failed totally to agree on any form of cost control. There’s absolutely no way there is going to be any equitable distribution of income. Power units are going to remain the same. And whilst I agree that there were some good discussions on 2017, the fundamentals of F1 weren’t addressed at all.”
Formula One Formula One Strategy Group has work to do to fix series
Roberto Merhi has arguably the least enviable job in all of Formula One -- the slowest driver at the wheel of the slowest car.So slow was the Mehri's Manor in Barcelona that he would also have ...
It's hard not to sympathize with Fernley. In its two-year existence, the Strategy Group doesn't seem to have achieved very much, and it's all too obvious that the big teams are out to look after their own interests.
“I think that the problem I have is that I don’t think the Strategy Group is fit for purpose,” Fernley added. “And we should be looking at something where we have a clear program that delivers results. We’ve have 18 months or two years of Strategy Group work with nothing coming out of it. I think we need to look at the system in a better way.”
He then came up with an unexpected suggestion: “In days gone by, with Max [Mosley] and Bernie in charge, there would be none of that. We would know exactly where we’re going. I don’t think you should have the teams making decisions on where Formula One should go. The teams should be told where Formula One is going.”
Intriguingly, Fernley isn't the only one calling for a “benevolent dictatorship” to keep the teams in line. Horner, who admittedly is very close to Ecclestone, agreed that it might be better not to leave the teams with too much power and little ability to make a decision, and give it instead to Ecclestone and Todt.
“I mean it’s rather predictable,” Horner said of how the Strategy Group works. “Bob’s going to ask for more money, Toto’s going to not want to change anything, and we want to change engines. So every team has got its own agenda, and it’s going to fight its own corner. I think that the sport is governed by the FIA and it’s promoted by FOM (Formula One Management). It’s those guys that need to get together and say ‘What do we want Formula One to be?’ Yes, we want it to go quicker, we want cars to be more aggressive to drive –- but you’re never going to keep everybody happy.
“I think that Bernie and Jean need to get together and say 'This is what we want the product to be, this is how it needs to be governed,' and then give us the entry form and see if we want to enter or not. Because I think putting it in the team’s environment to try and agree a set of regulations, you’re never going to get everybody on the same piece of paper.”
For the time being, the Strategy Group, and the curious form of “semi-democracy” that it represents, is what we've got. Not everyone may agree with the return of refueling and some of the other things that emerged last week, but to be fair the FIA has admitted that more details need to be locked down, and then that's done it might all make a lot more sense. Now it's a question of waiting to see what emerges.
12:06
jcreator
Noah JosephCritics have lamented a drop in performance, competition and spectacle in the modern age of Formula One. So to get the championship back up to the pinnacle of motor racing where it belongs, the parties involved have agreed on a number of measures earmarked revitalize the sport.
