Unusual days in F1
Discussion
It would appear that there is some form or orchestrated campaign going on with the teams and drivers. FOTA and unanimous have been so frequently used together that they have almost become one word. And now we have drivers as a group it would appear, suggesting that they all reject Mosley's proposals.
Mosley has used his old tactic of the short deadline, this time 29 May, and it is very likely that this will be the watershed. Mosley appears to be girding his loins but everyone in the pitlane seems to be building defences. Ecclestone, as normal, is playing both sides against the middle but he needs to take care, I would suggest, because he is the only one in the middle at the moment. Still, he has always managed to keep his money in such situations before and one assumes he'll do so again.
The odd thing is that, according to F1-Live, he's been attacking FOTA for not wanting to accept cost reductions when they would appear to be unified on that account. Is he going to suggest later that they followed his advice?
We have Ferrari and BMW suggesting that they would consider leaving F1, Brawn saying that FOTA are not making plans to leave the FiA at the moment and Mercedes giving out all sort of contradictory statements. Perhaps they are waiting for an opportune time to drop their bombshell? Certainly the drip, drip, drip of anti-Mosley press releases would appear to be part of a plan.
Mosley has his old buddy Berger saying something or other, but my (limited) experience is that he's treated as something of a joke in the pitlane. Not really much of a counter force against the might of Ferrari. The bloke's difficult to treat seriously. He was once supposed to have a chat to the sponsors' representatives and guests (the latter included me) about the McLaren and he acted like a spoiled kid. I was given an autographed photo of Senna and Berger and asked my host if I could have one with just Sennas signature. He replied: 'That's berger's one chance of fame and you'd deny it to him.' Sort of summed him up for me.
Have the teams finally realised that they have power? Much will depend on Brawn's response and, to a lessor extent, Williams/Head's, as these have been the weak point in unity in the past. Mosley's historic tactic is to offer one team 'special considerations' - which are not, of course, anything like a bribe. Oh, no. But with the lead team no longer a buddy of his and Brawn likely to struggle in the short term, that MO does seem to be less likely.
Mosley is in a difficult position. The two-tier system is his baby. I don't know anyone who has come out in favour of it, not even Eccs, and he'll say anything to keep on the good side of both sides. If it is dumped, and if it is it will be a very public occasion, then he loses face at a time when he will be confirming or denying his intention to stand for president yet again (any odds from the bookmakers?).
The clandestine inclusion of the so-called 'winner takes all' championship is rather odd and I can't see why Mosley should want to include something which, again, no one wants. I mean apart from Eccs. Is it in there as a loss-leader, something to discard during negotiations to show willingness to compromise? Not a tactic Mosley has used before.
For the first time in some time I'm a little bit more hopeful for the future of F1. But the 29th is the date. Things will be much clearer then.
Mosley has used his old tactic of the short deadline, this time 29 May, and it is very likely that this will be the watershed. Mosley appears to be girding his loins but everyone in the pitlane seems to be building defences. Ecclestone, as normal, is playing both sides against the middle but he needs to take care, I would suggest, because he is the only one in the middle at the moment. Still, he has always managed to keep his money in such situations before and one assumes he'll do so again.
The odd thing is that, according to F1-Live, he's been attacking FOTA for not wanting to accept cost reductions when they would appear to be unified on that account. Is he going to suggest later that they followed his advice?
We have Ferrari and BMW suggesting that they would consider leaving F1, Brawn saying that FOTA are not making plans to leave the FiA at the moment and Mercedes giving out all sort of contradictory statements. Perhaps they are waiting for an opportune time to drop their bombshell? Certainly the drip, drip, drip of anti-Mosley press releases would appear to be part of a plan.
Mosley has his old buddy Berger saying something or other, but my (limited) experience is that he's treated as something of a joke in the pitlane. Not really much of a counter force against the might of Ferrari. The bloke's difficult to treat seriously. He was once supposed to have a chat to the sponsors' representatives and guests (the latter included me) about the McLaren and he acted like a spoiled kid. I was given an autographed photo of Senna and Berger and asked my host if I could have one with just Sennas signature. He replied: 'That's berger's one chance of fame and you'd deny it to him.' Sort of summed him up for me.
Have the teams finally realised that they have power? Much will depend on Brawn's response and, to a lessor extent, Williams/Head's, as these have been the weak point in unity in the past. Mosley's historic tactic is to offer one team 'special considerations' - which are not, of course, anything like a bribe. Oh, no. But with the lead team no longer a buddy of his and Brawn likely to struggle in the short term, that MO does seem to be less likely.
Mosley is in a difficult position. The two-tier system is his baby. I don't know anyone who has come out in favour of it, not even Eccs, and he'll say anything to keep on the good side of both sides. If it is dumped, and if it is it will be a very public occasion, then he loses face at a time when he will be confirming or denying his intention to stand for president yet again (any odds from the bookmakers?).
The clandestine inclusion of the so-called 'winner takes all' championship is rather odd and I can't see why Mosley should want to include something which, again, no one wants. I mean apart from Eccs. Is it in there as a loss-leader, something to discard during negotiations to show willingness to compromise? Not a tactic Mosley has used before.
For the first time in some time I'm a little bit more hopeful for the future of F1. But the 29th is the date. Things will be much clearer then.
I would agree Derek. There certainly appears to be something afoot. First off we get the teams all saying that they 'agree' with the cap system etc, and then, after a joint meeting, we get calls for urgent talks on it.
I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground. At a time when motor manufacturers are struggling to simply survive, F1 is a very expensive circus for them to be involved in, arguably with increasingly limited rewards and increasing amounts of hassle.
I've heard more mention of FOTA in the last six weeks than ever before. It's the teams who have the power to change the current situation. Clearly, the teams do want costs reduced, they have all agreed to this point. However, It seems very hypocritical for Bernie to be bad mouting the teams, saying they don't want to reduce costs when everyone else is, and they should do, and then holding his hand out for increasing amounts of cash from circuits and blaming the UK Government for the problems with the British Grand Prix.
I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground. At a time when motor manufacturers are struggling to simply survive, F1 is a very expensive circus for them to be involved in, arguably with increasingly limited rewards and increasing amounts of hassle.
I've heard more mention of FOTA in the last six weeks than ever before. It's the teams who have the power to change the current situation. Clearly, the teams do want costs reduced, they have all agreed to this point. However, It seems very hypocritical for Bernie to be bad mouting the teams, saying they don't want to reduce costs when everyone else is, and they should do, and then holding his hand out for increasing amounts of cash from circuits and blaming the UK Government for the problems with the British Grand Prix.
Derek Smith said:
I was given an autographed photo of Senna and Berger and asked my host if I could have one with just Sennas signature. He replied: 'That's berger's one chance of fame and you'd deny it to him.' Sort of summed him up for me.
Wow! That'll learn him!You do realise that your writing does not give insights into anyone in F1, it only gives insights into the poster known as Derek Smith.
Edited by Get Karter on Friday 8th May 08:32
johnnywb said:
I would agree Derek. There certainly appears to be something afoot. First off we get the teams all saying that they 'agree' with the cap system etc, and then, after a joint meeting, we get calls for urgent talks on it.
I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground.
D'you get the impression that things are building up for the big confrontation? I must admit to thinking it would come nearer the election date. This scenario has much in common with the situation at the time of JMB's outsting but I can't believe Mosley will leave himself open in the same way when it was his buddy, Eccs, who was intrumental in the vote last time. Mind you, I've found that the only thing that history teaches us is that we never learn from it.I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground.
The race this weekend will probably show the way things are going for the teams and who is in the ascendant and who likely to fall. I wonder if the week following will show the same with regards to the power struggle.
Derek Smith said:
johnnywb said:
I would agree Derek. There certainly appears to be something afoot. First off we get the teams all saying that they 'agree' with the cap system etc, and then, after a joint meeting, we get calls for urgent talks on it.
I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground.
D'you get the impression that things are building up for the big confrontation? I must admit to thinking it would come nearer the election date. This scenario has much in common with the situation at the time of JMB's outsting but I can't believe Mosley will leave himself open in the same way when it was his buddy, Eccs, who was intrumental in the vote last time. Mind you, I've found that the only thing that history teaches us is that we never learn from it.I do wonder if the exit of Honda and the question marks over the futures of Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault in the sport have given the teams some common ground.
The race this weekend will probably show the way things are going for the teams and who is in the ascendant and who likely to fall. I wonder if the week following will show the same with regards to the power struggle.
I also think that many of the long serving F1 characters feel that the way Ron Dennis was 'disposed' of was unacceptable. With almost every race this season marred by some kind of controversy linked to the FIA, i think the teams have had enough.
Quite what is going to come about i don't know, but it could be a very interesting few months.
I suspect there has been a tendency for manufacturers to justify their involvement in F1 to their boards using the very simple argument of "It's F1 !! We need to be there !!". Nobody really questioned that because, well, it was F1 and you'd be silly *not* to be involved, wouldn't you ??
But now, with budgets being reigned in, and politics tarnishing the image of F1, the value of being involved with F1 is vastly diminished, not least because manufacturers are getting column inches for entirely the wrong reasons. Now the boards seem to be asking "It's F1 !! Can you remind us why we need to be there again ??!".
F1 is a mess. It's badly marketed (it has good TV coverage but lacks the depth of marketing of, say, NASCAR or Superleague), poorly attended because of where some of the races are held and the prices which circuits need to charge, and the governing body and commercial rights holder are seemingly out of touch with the teams and the public.
Frankly, who could blame the people with the most vested interest in F1 from walking away and doing their own thing ? Relatively speaking, there's little for them to lose and much to gain.
It is about time that the circuit owners/operators worked together, unlike at the moment where hey all do theor own deals, and promote F1 internationally. The sponsors would also buy into this idea and there are a number of organisations who will manage hospitality, ticketing, decent merchandising, web, race programmes and additional on track action.
FOA / FIA are way too interested in their own importance to help develop global motorsport and would rather live off of F1 and GT / WRC fame.
The Team owners and manufacturers need to speak as one and just say enough is enough. Without us yu have nothing and the drivers who are paid by the teams / sponsors will just do whatever they are told.
A new era need to begin with better rules and technical freedom, more for the live spectators, better on track facilities and races in parts of the world where people can afford to buy tickets.
FOA / FIA are way too interested in their own importance to help develop global motorsport and would rather live off of F1 and GT / WRC fame.
The Team owners and manufacturers need to speak as one and just say enough is enough. Without us yu have nothing and the drivers who are paid by the teams / sponsors will just do whatever they are told.
A new era need to begin with better rules and technical freedom, more for the live spectators, better on track facilities and races in parts of the world where people can afford to buy tickets.
belleair302 said:
It is about time that the circuit owners/operators worked together, unlike at the moment where hey all do theor own deals, and promote F1 internationally. The sponsors would also buy into this idea and there are a number of organisations who will manage hospitality, ticketing, decent merchandising, web, race programmes and additional on track action.
A few years ago it would have been impossible for circuits to run against the FiA by having non FiA events whoch were not sanctioned by them. The EU has put a stop to such restrictive practices and in the event of a breakaway series, Eccs would be terrible exposed.Given the certain antipathy between little and largely useless I would suggest that if there were to be a breakasway series they'd take Eccs with them. But the profits might be arranged slightly differently. But then if Mossy continues with his super Formula Ford then the two series, F1 and the new, rule changed GP1 could run together without problem especially if GP1 stayed mainly in Europe with forays to Oz, Canada, North America and, possibly, Kyalami. Say eight races in Europe as well.
I can't see it myself. It would be far cheaper to go for sportscars or saloons. There's no reason for open wheelers.
The simplest solution to the current strife is for Mosley to go. This will happen a few seconds after the teams get the nod from Bernie.
Derek Smith said:
Mosley has his old buddy Berger saying something or other, but my (limited) experience is that he's treated as something of a joke in the pitlane. Not really much of a counter force against the might of Ferrari. The bloke's difficult to treat seriously. He was once supposed to have a chat to the sponsors' representatives and guests (the latter included me) about the McLaren and he acted like a spoiled kid. I was given an autographed photo of Senna and Berger and asked my host if I could have one with just Sennas signature. He replied: 'That's berger's one chance of fame and you'd deny it to him.' Sort of summed him up for me.
Derek, this doesn´t ring true. I have met Berger and can´t think of many in (or recently ex-) F1 who are more down-to-earth.Edited by El Guapo on Friday 8th May 20:46
The two-tier idea is laughable; everybody knows that.
Even with that bit of idiocy written into the rules, there is nothing that would prevent all the teams from agreeing amongst themselves to enter in the "Capped" category. That would preclude a two-tier competition. The issue would be the size of the cap.
Even with that bit of idiocy written into the rules, there is nothing that would prevent all the teams from agreeing amongst themselves to enter in the "Capped" category. That would preclude a two-tier competition. The issue would be the size of the cap.
I think that the present world recession brings with it such a fundamental shock to all of us and particularly F1GP, that we are not dealing with it very well.
I'm not sure we're quite ready for quite such socialism in motorsport.
MM's suggestion to use budget capping in F1 to reduce costs fundamentally strikes at the heart of all present values and completely upsets the equilibrium.
For example, so far it's been OK for Toyota to be beaten by Ferrari because everyone that mattered knew Ferrari were using a budget, influence and experience, far exceeding those of Toyota's. Which sort of made it 'alright' to be beaten by them and they 'lost' nothing. If Mac Mercedes were right up there, this was the might of Mercedes you were taking on, so in terms of acceptable pecking order, it was about right, they were second or there abouts (and could 'blame' McLaren if their performance was 'suspect').
But now, Ferrari are looking stupid (no disrespect) and if they can't throw 500 Million at it, well then it's not Ferrari/Italy we're taking about. Mercedes must be having second thoughts and BMW will be accutely aware they need some race wins soon, but to do waht? Beat a Brawn ...
Brawn winning things is an upset; if Honda were doing it, there'd be a badge of acceptabilty about it. (But it's fun for us at the moment.)
That Toyota shared the grid with Ferrari was a good association; for Toyota to be beating Ferrari why they themselves are being beaten by ....., well you've knocked the invalid right off his crutches.
But to fundamentally to change the whole shape of the highest form of racing there is, is going to be a monumentally political challege. I think there are going to be some substancial casualities.
Quite how F1 becomes F3000/F2 without a massive change in world order is difficult to comprehend.
F1GP was never going to be inexpensive and there were always going to be dominant teams (because they were rich.) Now we're going to bring everyone down to the level of the lowest and some top company board rooms won't want to know.
I'm sure there will be all sorts of strange and oddball alliances and arguements, most short term.
imho
I'm not sure we're quite ready for quite such socialism in motorsport.
MM's suggestion to use budget capping in F1 to reduce costs fundamentally strikes at the heart of all present values and completely upsets the equilibrium.
For example, so far it's been OK for Toyota to be beaten by Ferrari because everyone that mattered knew Ferrari were using a budget, influence and experience, far exceeding those of Toyota's. Which sort of made it 'alright' to be beaten by them and they 'lost' nothing. If Mac Mercedes were right up there, this was the might of Mercedes you were taking on, so in terms of acceptable pecking order, it was about right, they were second or there abouts (and could 'blame' McLaren if their performance was 'suspect').
But now, Ferrari are looking stupid (no disrespect) and if they can't throw 500 Million at it, well then it's not Ferrari/Italy we're taking about. Mercedes must be having second thoughts and BMW will be accutely aware they need some race wins soon, but to do waht? Beat a Brawn ...
Brawn winning things is an upset; if Honda were doing it, there'd be a badge of acceptabilty about it. (But it's fun for us at the moment.)
That Toyota shared the grid with Ferrari was a good association; for Toyota to be beating Ferrari why they themselves are being beaten by ....., well you've knocked the invalid right off his crutches.
But to fundamentally to change the whole shape of the highest form of racing there is, is going to be a monumentally political challege. I think there are going to be some substancial casualities.
Quite how F1 becomes F3000/F2 without a massive change in world order is difficult to comprehend.
F1GP was never going to be inexpensive and there were always going to be dominant teams (because they were rich.) Now we're going to bring everyone down to the level of the lowest and some top company board rooms won't want to know.
I'm sure there will be all sorts of strange and oddball alliances and arguements, most short term.
imho
I didn't realise Mosely and Berger were that close. Berger always struck me as a nice, down-to-earth kinda guy, from what I've read in Senna's Biography. Murray Walker even labelled him as one of his F1 heroes on the basis of being 'everybodies friend'.
In fact, the only similarity I could find between Mosely and Berger was the fact they both went to Ratzengerger's funeral. If you have any dirt on Berger, I'd love to hear it.
In fact, the only similarity I could find between Mosely and Berger was the fact they both went to Ratzengerger's funeral. If you have any dirt on Berger, I'd love to hear it.
flemke said:
The two-tier idea is laughable; everybody knows that.
Even with that bit of idiocy written into the rules, there is nothing that would prevent all the teams from agreeing amongst themselves to enter in the "Capped" category. That would preclude a two-tier competition. The issue would be the size of the cap.
The technical freedom available to the capped teams will mean that their cars are much faster than any un-capped cars, that must be a deliberate ploy to preclude a two tier competition by making one option much more attractive than the other.Even with that bit of idiocy written into the rules, there is nothing that would prevent all the teams from agreeing amongst themselves to enter in the "Capped" category. That would preclude a two-tier competition. The issue would be the size of the cap.
Having classes in a race is an eminently sensible way of filling grids, LMP1, LMP2 and the various GTs makes for exciting racing. The idea is that teams make their way up the scale as they can afford to invest more and more. I know it doesn't always work that way but it does give a route in. But this is not what the Mosley machinations will produce. No one knows which rule will be faster so a team like Ferrari will be taking a massive risk whether they got for capped or uncapped.
Motor racing is a business for the teams and risking being beaten by Force India because of some quirk in the regs is not really the way to go for the big hitters.
And this does not take into account that the big teams want a cheaper F1 so any regs brought in should reduce costs and this does not seem to be the aim of these. You can't have it both way: either it is a way of reducing costs or it is not. And this is not so there is no justification for the two-tier system.
I'm against a budget cap but as the teams seem to want it I don't expect my opinion to prevail because I've got nothing to do with trying to finance a team. The same goes for Mosley. If the teams want a cap then a cap it should be.
It would appear that this is another move in his professed aim to rid the grid of manufacturer teams. Be careful what you wish for, Mossy.
Motor racing is a business for the teams and risking being beaten by Force India because of some quirk in the regs is not really the way to go for the big hitters.
And this does not take into account that the big teams want a cheaper F1 so any regs brought in should reduce costs and this does not seem to be the aim of these. You can't have it both way: either it is a way of reducing costs or it is not. And this is not so there is no justification for the two-tier system.
I'm against a budget cap but as the teams seem to want it I don't expect my opinion to prevail because I've got nothing to do with trying to finance a team. The same goes for Mosley. If the teams want a cap then a cap it should be.
It would appear that this is another move in his professed aim to rid the grid of manufacturer teams. Be careful what you wish for, Mossy.
Patrick Head says the adjustable rear wing (on its own) is worth two and a half seconds a lap.
So under the current proposals the uncapped teams don't stand a chance.
Also it appears that USAF1 (or whatever) and Lola both intend to use Cosworth engines so we are heading back to the garagistas.
Interesting that the yanks go on about using superior yank technology yet come shopping in England for their engine. Why not use a sleeved and de stroked LS7?
So under the current proposals the uncapped teams don't stand a chance.
Also it appears that USAF1 (or whatever) and Lola both intend to use Cosworth engines so we are heading back to the garagistas.
Interesting that the yanks go on about using superior yank technology yet come shopping in England for their engine. Why not use a sleeved and de stroked LS7?
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff