Is Mosley set to push forward budget cap plans?
McLaren face Formula 1's disciplinary and legislative assembly, the FIA World Council, on Wednesday to answer charges arising from their decision to mislead race stewards at the Australian Grand Prix - but the sport is braced for other decisions that day that would affect all the teams.
It is widely expected that FIA president Max Mosley will also use this World Council meeting to push through further changes regarding next year's rules - particularly his plan for a budget cap.
Mosley has already announced that he intends to have a two-tier championship next year - with teams accepting a £30m budget cap allowed greater technical freedom than those who choose to operate without it.
In traditional Mosley style, that was always only going to be a starting point for negotiations.
It is his standard modus operandi to come up with a proposal the teams will consider outrageous - the teams run around trying to stop that happening, succeed in bargaining him down, but still end up with something further away from what they originally wanted than they would have done had Mosley gone in softer at the start.
Problem is, this time there have been very few negotiations - the teams have been too busy a) preparing for the new season; and b) arguing over the controversial 'double-decker' diffusers which have come about because the rules were left with loopholes.
(The double-decker diffusers, incidentally, run counter the FIA's original intentions for the 2009 rules - but wicked cynics have suggested they fit Mosley's wider political plan by driving a wedge between the teams and proving that success does not always have to be about money).
The Formula 1 Teams' Association (Fota) is planning a meeting to discuss the budget cap, among other things, on 6 May - ie, a week after the latest decision by the FIA is expected.
They are certain Mosley will unveil his latest proposal on Wednesday - but they are unsure what it will be.
Much of the discussion in F1 has been about how high the cap should be set.
Some say it should be £30m, but with drivers' salaries and marketing excluded. Some say it should be £60m. Some say it should start reasonably high and 'parachute' down over a number of years to £30m.
But it seems only Ferrari are opposed to any form of cap at all - with president Luca di Montezemolo saying the legendary team stay in F1 for the competition and to benefit from advanced research, some of which feeds into road cars.
Di Montezemolo wants stable, clear regulations, not the constant change F1 has at the moment, and Ferrari's wishes do need to be taken into account, so important are the team to F1.
But the betting is still that Mosley will plough ahead with the cap - and that it will be set lower rather than higher.
He and F1 commercial supreme Bernie Ecclestone are desperately worried about some of the road-car manufacturers following Honda out of F1 at the end of this season.
In the global financial crisis, there are doubts about whether manufacturers not enjoying success can justify their commitments to F1 at current spending levels - with the focus currently on Renault and BMW, who are both struggling to varying degrees this year.
So Mosley and Ecclestone want the cap low enough to encourage new teams to enter - and that almost certainly means closer to £30m than £60m.
One thing most people in F1 certainly hope, though, is that Mosley will abandon his plan for two sets of rules for the teams operating within and without the budget cap, with the FIA manipulating them to keep the cars level.
That, most realise, is just going to add another unnecessary level of complexity and make F1 even harder to follow for the general fan than it already is.
Whether Mosley heeds those concerns, though, remains to be seen.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~29~RS~)
Comments
The obvious compromise is to have two championships racing at the same time - as is common in other classes such as Porsche, or the BTCC where there used to be the works racing with the Independents.
As long as the performance is similar then that should not be a problem, but the whole rigging of the formula between capped and uncapped teams is unworkable and the winning team will largely be dictated by the direction in which the regs happen to favour that year.
The other trick is to win an F1 championship for £60m - sandbag for a year, get the formula rigged in your favour, then turn the wick up - that has got you an F1 championship for £60m instead of £300m a year.
The last time we saw that was Minardi who were allowed their V10 when all others switched to the V8.
If racing on the same track the capped teams win, it would simply destroy the FIA credibility as nobody would see the capped teams as winning a fair fight.
Complain about this comment
Could have been a better title . I thought there was something even more going against McLaren not with Mosely
Complain about this comment
It would be nice to know if the FIA was "owned" by Max or just run by him? I don't recall J-M B selling it to Max! If it is the latter, is there no discussion at committee level on what new regs should be brought forward? I get the feeling nothing is done by consensus here.
If Max is just the messenger, who are the nameless faces behind closed doors that make the rule changes. If it is all down to Max, I think its time that no one person in f1 has that much power, even Bernie
Complain about this comment
It strikes me (and a number of other F1 fans) that the sole purpose of Max and Bernie at present is to create as much disruption into F1 as possible. Between them, they've effectively destroyed the chances of a British GP in future years, they've created a situation where none of the teams really know the rules (plus they change too frequently for anyone to fully understand what is going on). The sport should be all about what goes on on the track and the fans who pay to watch, the political infighting should have no place in F1 at all but unfortunately with the dynamic duo it seems that that is the true sport.
Complain about this comment
There is one small problem to the budget capping scenario, Max wants it, but Bernie on the other hand wants more races in the calendar. The two are mutually opposed ideals, a case of having your cake and eating it too if both ideas are to be put into place. Will the budget therefore be a race by race one or a sliding budget dependent on numbers of races in any one season; or will it be a case that some races are poorly attended by the teams because their budget is stretched due to the number of races that season....
I agree that there does need to be some financial control otherwise the sport is likely to run itself into the ground, but if the two guys at the top have opposing ideas, what chance is there of an effective and simple policy being put in place........
Complain about this comment
Its time for Mosley and Bernie to go. Between them they have destroyed the sport. Theres clear favouritism over one team from another, theres clear hostility over one team from another. Rules are interperated differently from one race to another.
Standardise engine designs, allowing each manufacturer to design their own engine to the specifications set out by The FIA, each team is then inspected at the start of each race weekend and then key parts of the engine sealed.
Design and test verious rear diffuser's to find the one that allows the car behind to follow more closley but retain most of its downforce properties and then make it so that each team must have that diffuser on the rear completley removing the so called "interpretation" aspect.
Complain about this comment
I'm in favour of budget caps, as long as it applies to all teams, makes no sense to me to have some teasm capped and not.
I was taking about this to a taxi driver the other day, i have often thought whether it would be possible to make all the cars to one standard, eg - all built to a rigid set of specs (so as to avoid diffuser issues and the like) i'm a fan of touring cars and wondered if its possible to have all f1 cars the same ? then surely its down to the driver ?
give the teams a choice (as i believe was being considered) either get parts etc from one manufacturing outlet, or build them yourself to the same specs as all the other cars.
the other reason im in favour of lowering the budget in f1 is purely as it might attract more teams, there is talk that lola may make a come back, and i also believe pro drive (or some one / something to do with them) might consider it as well, there is also the usf1 team which i heard would be racing next year ? although as im not up to date on news and such like i dont know if thats still happening.
Complain about this comment
I am highly amused by the very thought of a Budget Cap on a F1 Team being enforceable!
I'm no accountant, but just as an example, how would you control CFD Spend by a Team Sponsor such as IBM or SUN?
It's a joke and the Championship will be won by the Team with the most creative Accounts (not Engineers).
Is that what we want?
V12
Complain about this comment
"One thing most people in F1 certainly hope, though, is that Mosley will abandon his plan for two sets of rules for the teams operating within and without the budget cap, with the FIA manipulating them to keep the cars level."
Well that's a dead cert then. We would expect nothing less from Max Mosley - more petrol on the flames of the diffuser debate.
He has carved his position out by destroying the unity of FOTA just as he did with the GPWC. Exploit the teams' inherent self interest - get them calling each other names and get them fighting over money.
Remember the interviews before Melbourne...
"FIA president Max Mosley has told The Daily Telegraph that he can foresee a huge row brewing in Melbourne over the legality of certain teams' diffusers, with it now too late to resolve the matter before the start of the season. "
Honestly, if he had wanted the problem solved it would have been cleared up a long time before it got to Melbourne. It's not as if he didn't know about it. It suited him to have the teams squabbling.
And as for McLaren... Oh deary me, what a tangled web we weave. And what a gift to Max is his plan to sideline FOTA.
This is all happening because of the recession. F1 recessions are always delayed because of the sponsor contracts they have in place at the start cushion the initial blow. The real pinch is yet to come when those contracts come up for renewal. The plan is to make it possible for a team (like Brawn) to compete on the existing TV money alone so losing those sponsor contracts has no impact on the sport.
We are going to have a budget cap because Max wants it and it suits Bernie. Whether the two are connected, we can only speculate, but with the teams spending cut by up to 90%, any calls for a greater share of the TV money might sound a little absurd, don't you think?
Of course they will find a way to keep the glitter - the drivers will be exempt so Kimi's £20 mil is safe - it would not be F1 otherwise, but if it brings new teams onto the grid then it might just work.
Whichever way though, budget caps and cost cuts mean that people will lose their jobs. We should not forget that in all the intrigue.
Complain about this comment
To #7
I'm a fan of touring cars and wondered if its possible to have all f1 cars the same ?
A1GP ring any bells?
My opinion (feel free to disgree) is that F1 is surely meant to be about the combination of the car AND the driver, the battle on the track and the battle off it, with the development in new technologies a key part of what makes F1 the pinnacle of motosport. Whatever budget cap is brought in will shake things up but it should not be done at a detriment to the sport itself, which so many fans like myself try to follow with a passion by find it harder each time Max or Bernie have a 'lighbulb' moment.
Complain about this comment
I find all this talk of budget caps and adapting to the current economic climate somewhat frustrating when we are losing some of the best and most historic GP's because Bernie continues to demand government investment in £100 million tracks and charges so much to host a race that you can't make money from it.
Time for major change in F1's governance methinks...
Complain about this comment
Max and co are slowly destroying FI. Left in their hands it will end up as a poor imitation of drag racing.
Here are a few thoughts on making F1 interesting, putting it back at the front of vehicle development and making it a showcase for driver skills.
Stop refuelling during the race. Any commercially available energy should be permitted. The maximum energy allowance should be based on calorific value, not volume, to accommodate different types of energy. To get started we could take the average amount of fuel used per race per car last season. Perhaps the allowed energy could be reduced by 5% each year. This rule could accommodate electric cars.
Engines should be free choice, with energy recovery systems unlimited both in design and how they are used.
Tyres should be free choice of manufacturer with only 1 set each of: Dry, Intermediate and full Wets available for the race.
The starting grid should be reverse order of previous race. Practice will be just that, practice with no limit on the amount of fuel or tyres.
The only rules should be in the interest of safety, perhaps a minimum weight designed to prevent the jockey syndrome.
Taken as a whole the above ‘rules’ would promote design and development in chassis, engines and tyres in a more useful direction. Drivers would be better able to demonstrate their skill and races would be decided on the track. Cars would have to be able to overtake or stand no chance. Yes top speed will be affected, but a race is a race, out and out speed in is not relevant. The testing of the driver and the best technology can provide should be the point.
Complain about this comment
Max is the puppet - it is Bernie who pulls the strings.
Max says spending is out of control in F1. This is because going racing in F1 is financially untenable, thus manufacturer money is required to subsidise a team's income. In previous years Bernie was all in favour of this happening. Where was Max with his budget concerns in 2000 when Jordan, who had fought for the world championship in 1999, found themselves unable to compete with the big boys. Where was he when Jordan were changing hands year after year or when Super Aguri folded?
The reason Max is now so concerned about budget caps is because Bernie cannot afford top pay them more.
If winning in F1 were to pay better then sponsorship would be cheaper, there would be less reliance on manufacturers to bankroll teams. Teams could race and win for less so why pay more. However F1 cannot afford to pay better than it does for one reason.
In 2006 Bernie sold the sport to an investment capital firm accruing an astronomical debt on the sport's behalf. An action sanctioned by the FIA and Max Mosley. The repayment of this debt is the reason why 50% of the wealth that F1 generates cannot be returned to the sport. To the people that make it possible, that make the history that others such as myself enjoy on a Sunday afternoon. The people who basically give a damn.
It is this debt that is responsible for the disappearance of the US, Canadian, French and, soon the British Grands Prix from the calendar. It is this debt that is responsible for farcical twilight races to increase European TV audiences. Formula one ticket prices are so high because Bernie wont allow a circuit to break even because he needs their money to pay off this debt. The reason that the British Government is unwilling to bankroll the Grand Prix in this country is that is sees F1, fat with its wealth asking for bailouts and wonders why they cannot spend a little of their own money to save themselves. Instead this money lines the pockets of the very businessmen who have hamstrung this sport.
Most of the problems in modern F1 are attributable to a single act of greed on behalf of the very people who are supposed to be looking out for the interests of this sport. Compared to this McLaren's offences are trivial.
Article 151c of the FIA international sporting code term a breach of the rules as "... any act prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motorsport generally" I think that Mosley and Ecclestone are in breach of this article and should face severe sanctions.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The sport is run by two old men who have lost their marbles.
Complain about this comment
It’s really a shame but it seems to me that F1 is loosing its attraction. Formula is the top of the moto world. Fans want to see not only competition on the track but also off it. High level technologies combined with driving stiles of different pilots. Competition of technologies – that is essential for F1. One team discovers something new (like double-decker diffusers) and the others want to find out all the details – and they are doing their best – spying, taking pictures – everything. It makes engineers to think harder to find the best solutions. Each team chooses its own path – and later these discoveries are used in different cars. It makes the Championship more interesting to follow. Watching races we are trying to catch what technical solution gives an advantage to this or that team.
But also there is a question of money. We can’t make comparisons of the sums of money that teams-manufacturers can put in the development of their cars and private ones. During the economic crises all teams want to cut expenses. But it must be teams (FOTA’s) decision. Mosley has no right to change rules each year according to his desires. Some of them are really creasy. Maybe he sees them when he is sleeping!!! Weirdo!!! F1 needs stability!!! It will guarantee that no one will leave the Championship.
This year we have good evidences how Mosley’s cutting money and increasing overtaking program is working. There are new leaders in the Championship – that’s good like a fresh air - and Grandees who put even much money in their cars’ development to catch the first ones. Double diffusers and KERS (which makes overtaking even harder) are debatable decisions.
As soon as teams have overcome the double diffuser disputes Mosley again wants to change the rules what can make relations in FOTA tenser. New rules with some loopholes – and we will get a shakedown in F1.
I’m fully confident before accepting this or that decision FIA should talk it over with teams and listen to their opinion. Dialog is needed here to help F1 to survive in hard time. Democracy is the best policy where every voice is counted.
Mosley’s intention to use common engines in F1 is unacceptable. How for example Ferrari or Mercedes or BMW can use not their own engines. It’s silly. An engine is a heart of the car, its symbol, every team-manufacturer is proud of it.
I’m fully against the budget cap in this way. It will destroy F1. The championship will be divided into several parts. It won’t be Formula.
Complain about this comment
It can't and wont work.
How do you ensure that the cap is followed?
What is to stop Fiat doing a bunch of development work on something like KERS and then selling the results of that work to Ferrari for peanuts?
Mercedes could spend millions on testing sections for their engines and then give that to McLaren for free.
as for this
To #7
I'm a fan of touring cars and wondered if its possible to have all f1 cars the same ?
Touring cars, you mean the form of racing with DIFFERENT makes, models, shapes, engines, power outputs of cars?
Complain about this comment
I've read that "Refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy"
But how can the cars get fueled at all if the equipment is still in the factory?
Complain about this comment
Banning refuelling seems to be one of the minor details on here, but I think that the whole business of refuelling is integral to action in the race. It's hard enough to overtake as it is, but if you take out the strategic fuel stops, you won't see the entertainment of lighter cars shooting through only to then have to pit. Pit stops do add value, strange as it may sound.
Complain about this comment
Number 12, Wagolynn - your suggestion:
The starting grid should be reverse order of previous race. Practice will be just that, practice with no limit on the amount of fuel or tyres.
You were talking sense until this one! This would lead to the bizarre sight of anyone outside the points towards the end of a race purposely trying to come last to be on pole the next Grand Prix!
Also qualifying is one of the more genuinely exciting elements of F1 and should be left as is (with the exception of all having the same fuel loads in my opinion).
People say Bernie and Max are ruining F1 and on the surface of it their schemes do seem a little madcap and intrusive - but on the other hand, the cars are closer than ever before performace wise and this season is already turning into a classic, so what do we know?
Complain about this comment
How can refuelling not be the most important thing here? Surely this will determine how fast the car goes in qualifying? Also if there is no refuelling the race will start off sluggish and get faster so whoever can get the lead while they are still burning off some of the weight...in fact it just sounds crazy as the race will just become about who can do the best maths with relation to speed and fuel. I don't believe the reasons for stopping refuelling in fact I am not going to write any more of the comments I am thinking about it doesn't seem worth it. MM and BE at least Platini and Blatter in football are not as bad.
Unlimited engines I believe has been tried in motorbike racing before it didn't work I believe.
Complain about this comment
Really dont like the idea of the penalties for running over budget not being fixed ones. They should be fixed beforehand so that everyone knows what to expect, otherwise you're going to get differing penalties to differing teams, leading to appeals procedures, etc etc etc. Could be a proper messy way to do things. Fix the penalties from the start, and make them the same for everyone (or at least relative) and people can go racing confident that there are no grey area's, because not having fixed penalties is one massive grey area, and we all know that people like to exploit those wherever they can!
Also, how are the FIA going to "police" wind tunnel testing time limits and stuff like that? The only realistic way I can see that happening is to post an FIA rep permanently within each team.
Hmmm, this all sounds a bit hare-brained and like an idea that was quickly knocked up on the back of a fag packet, it does'nt sound like its been thought through to me.
Complain about this comment
Cosworth to supply engines that rev to 20,000 and are more competative that this years enigne spec ??
Yup, that would be the same Cosworth whose 21st century offerings deposited more oil across the land than the Exxon Valdez.
Complain about this comment
New teams should be allowed to compete with one car. Granted this would not halve the budget, but it would be a significant cost saving. Me and the Vectra would be first in line come 2010!
Complain about this comment
"The starting grid should be reverse order of previous race. Practice will be just that, practice with no limit on the amount of fuel or tyres."
Never, never, never! To borrow a phrase from Ian Paisley.
That's just a horrible idea and would make the WDC a lottery.
Complain about this comment
unlimited revs for budget teams is a good idea. the whole budget cap idea is good and should entice new teams/
however, there are problems with manurfacturers etc doing stuff for the teams like fiat for ferrari merc for mclaren etc, but if we can get round these issues F1 can be great again.
Complain about this comment
There is another problem with budget caps. How do you deal with investment spend? Existing teams will already have facilities like wind tunnels. New teams will need to build the facilities. Unless investments of this type are kept outside the cap then existing teams will have a massive advantage having spent to their personal limit before the cap.
Complain about this comment
Sounds about right...
10 million for cars, tech
5 million for the driver
5 million for spy ware
10 million for party "devices" and costumes
10 million for spin doctors
Complain about this comment
Nice idea, but impossible to police. I'm sure Ferrari have already worked out that if the head company simply buy things, then 'rent' or loan them to the team for a notional pittance, they can get away with murder. 'Wind tunnel for a week? - Oh that's 50p to you sir....' Other teams without a wealthy holding company can't do that. And how about this lovely rule.. 'Any expenditure the team can demonstrate has no influence on its performance in the championship'.... Oh what fun. So how about R&D that doesn't directly result in a widget on the car? They will be arguing about what that rule means till doomsday.
We move from who has the best lawyer wins, to who has the best bean-counter wins. Can see MB interviewing them on his grid walk now... 'If we just shove our way through these drivers, we can perhaps get a quick word with the Chief Accountant at Mclaren....'
Complain about this comment
Riggadon, it might be an F1 myth, but I believe that one year in the early 80's, someone at Ligier wrote the set up for the car on a fag packet and it worked, however the team then lost said packet and unable to find the same set-up the competitive soon dropped off.
There's bits I like, bits I don't. I think making the sport more financially viable however needs to be a process over a few years and leads to a slightly hop-scotch plan. I still don't like limiting the entrants, though logistics do ultimately play a part.
Complain about this comment
Methinks Herr Mosley is empire building with an emphasis on job preservation. It wasn't so long ago everyone was calling for his head, but who but him could possibly take on this brave new world and make it work but him, when re-election time arrives?
Can't argue with the objective of reducing costs, but what a b_____s muddle! vtwelve is right - the emphasis on development within F1 teams will move from the design office to the Accounts Department. As hackerjack and telnolies point out, associated companies will absorb the development costs, loan rent or give it to its accociate team, who will just need to show build and test costs for their 40mil.
The very sad part of the plan is the number of staff who will be made unemployed in the larger teams - not very politically correct at this time. Oh well, they could all be re-employed to work for Max as part of the vast beaurocracy that will be required to police this harebrained scheme. He will be digging up Korpsfuhrer Huhnlein to run it for him, no doubt.
At the risk of being accused of changing sides in mid-stream, rather than technological advantages for teams acquiescing, why not add weight on a pro rata basis equating to how many millions more you spend over the limit - far easier to police.
Complain about this comment
I think Max is maybe hoping if he can get everyone to believe F1 is hard up, we'll all have a whip-round for him...
Complain about this comment
Already far too much of F1 is decided in stewards inquiries, WMSC hearings and court cases. Can you imagine what it will be like with a budget cap?
Teams of accountants will be required to administer it both in-team, and by the FIA to police it. None of us really understood the diffuser rules, can you imagine what it will be like when McLaren (let's face it, it will be them) get nailed for some supposed infraction because toilet rolls that were used to wipe rain from Lewis Hamilton's helmet were not marked down as items within the cap under rule 103 subsection [iii] ? 3 race ban I reckon.
Besides the fact that the whole concept of adjusting the benefits for capped teams during the season is completely absurd. It is basically handicapping as you go; if the capped teams do badly, you give them more benefits, then if they start doing too well you take them away. But you can never let the capped teams win, otherwise it will be ludicrous to have some team on 40m beating some team on 160m just because they were running to different rules.
I mean, imagine this in the Premiership. Capped teams are allowed smaller goals and 13 players while the big teams have to struggle with 11 guys and normal sized goals. When the capped teams start beating Chelsea and Man Utd you 'adjust' the rules and make their goals bigger and take them down to 12 men, with the aim to ensure a close match but to ultimately let the 'best' team win.
The rules should be the same for everyone, like this year. And we'll get close exciting races with 'unfancied' teams surprising everyone. Change the rules drastically each year to shake up the field, close loopholes to avoid such controversies and maybe standardise some parts to limit the differences between cars. And the winner will know that they have done it not by clever accounting or by different rules, but by having the fastest car/driver.
Complain about this comment
LOL @ # 32
Anyway, my question regards people selling research on to other teams.
Take for instance, Red Bull. If they were to have one team capped, and one uncapped, While the uncapped could be doing all sorts of research and improvement, and the capped one doing none. Surely the uncapped team could then sell this new part/development on to the other team for peanuts? Or if "selling" is illegal, the capped team would mysteriously develop it at a fraction of the time, effort and money.......
Hmmmm.
Complain about this comment
two points:
realistically how much will it take to monitor this proposed cap - i'd say a huge amount of money knowing already what some of the bigger teams (namely mclaren and ferrari) try to get away with.
There's always a way around it - fia tend to bodge up their rule making as has been seen with the double diffuser row, I don't think they can monitor it effectively enough anyway so will teams try and basically cheat the system anyway and either find a way around this or just blatantly cheat.
So we will end up with those who cheat the most winning the championship?
Complain about this comment
Seems like everyone has missed the point.
2 tier formula especially with ambiguous or changeable regulations = BIGGEST STEP TOWARDS CHAMPIONSHIP MANIPULATION
I wonder what legendary names such as Ferrari Mercedes and BMW are still doing tarnishing their history and reputation as Moseley's puppets. Instead of bitching against each other get the hell out of their pantomime and let the Virgins the Red Bulls and the Coca Colas race against each other. And let's see how many will keep watching.
Complain about this comment
Let's get this right:
In 2007, McLaren were fined £49.2m for serious breach of rules. Let's say that another team is stupid enough to do something similar next season and gets caught. A similar punishment is inflicted. Suddenly they're over their budget cap by around £45m (allowing for contingency). Then the wise and almighty FIA, who, by the way, want to decrease teams spending so much, imposes yet another fine proportionate to the amount the team has gone over the budget cap. This is possibly around £5m-£10m?.
Is there any logic in this proposal? I think that any penalties imposed on those who go over the budget cap should be limits on the cars, not fines. Maybe a lower rev limit or prohibiting the use of KERS?
Complain about this comment
So, no refueling.
Yet another variable being removed from the spectacle.
First they publish the weights of the cars so teams know who was fat and going for a long stint and who was light just qualify.
Now no refuelling. So no speculation on whether they can 2 stop or 3 stop. The only thing they will be coming in for is tyres.
The option to put in some fast laps just before refuelling is over. They will have to start full which will reduce the interest in starts. How is that going to make them more fuel efficient if they have to carry a full fuel load from the start? Are they going to shorten the number of laps or have huge fuel tanks?
The format will be start slow and the lap times will improve as the fuel burns off for all the cars at the same time. It will be a procession.
Complain about this comment
fabre - fines are specifically excluded from the cap. Otherwise Mclaren couldn't afford 4 wheel-nuts after the first race, now could they!
Seriously, for once I think Max has the right idea in principle - getting the costs down - but as everyone here is saying it's unworkable. A two-tier system in particular is ridiculous, especially if you add that if the 'lower' tier start winning you'll change their rules so they don't!! If you seriously suggested this in any other sport people would think you were taking the xxxx. Only in F1 can they actually intend to do it...
Complain about this comment
Could you imagine the reaction of Man Utd, Liverpool and Chelsea etc if the FA introduced a budget cap?
Dont get me wrong, Im all in favour of reducing costs and making the sport more environmentally friendly, but the whole ethos of formula one is that it is an open formula to allow teams to freely develop their cars with certain specifications not within an imposed budget.
The main reason why some teams have pulled out of F1 in the past or are struggling today is the fact that the FIA (i.e. Mad Max!!!) keeps changing the rules every season. They make a change, and then undo it a few years later, contradicting the reasons for the change in the first place. Take refuelling for example; they introduced it to reduce the risk of a serious incident near the start of the race, but have now banned it for next season. They have also suggested removing the engine rev limits for teams complying with the cap. Wasnt the reason for the limit, to slow the cars down due to driver safety concerns and to help preserve the engines to last more than one race?
Not only are the FIA changing the rules, but they arent making them clear enough for teams to follow. The diffuser issue must be costing teams a fortunate at a time when the FIA are on about reducing costs. They caused the issue. A simple cost cutting measure could be to ban in-season modifications, i.e. the design of the car that you start the first race in, is the same at the end of the season, or to allow only one modification pack from at a set date. Similar to the football idea of a transfer window, then you have to make do with what youve got.
The FIA were also considering a standard Kers system for next season, but what about the millions the teams have already spent in developing their own. What a waste. The FIA needs to get its own house in order before laying the law down on the teams.
And dont get me started on the medal idea; why not just increase the winners points to 12.
Complain about this comment
The budget cap is fine, i see no problem with it, provided its not too low!
I still want to know why we cant have single car teams, which would surely reduce the costs further and fill up the grid. The more cars on track the better, i say!
Complain about this comment
the only thing i can think of that would make this work and not take away from F1 is just make the cap compulsory from year to year and level the playing field. how much more fairer can it get?
Complain about this comment
this phrase sums the whole thing up for me.....
'The sport is run by two old men who have lost their marbles.'
never a truer word spoken!
in my humble opinion,the FIA has run its course.
what we have is a group of people who have been seduced by their own self interest.
what happened to the idea that was put around in the early 90's?
the teams were (allegedly) putting up 2 fingers to the fia and having a sport that was run by racers,for racers.
so what happened?
i am HORRIFIED by the thought of a 2 tier system,in fact i would never watch f1(if you could even call it that....'(f-bernies pension' seems more appropriate) again......after almost 30 years.
refueling brought a new variable into what was (at the time) becoming a rather dull affair.
now we hear that its being banned.
/sarcasm mode on- 'great way to make the racing fast and interesting.' -/sarcasm mode off
it seems to me that the powers that be (ie-the money grabbing one,and the power-hungry one) just dont know what the average race fan wants to see....tho im not really sure they ever did to begin with.
budget caps,however,may be a good thing.
but only if they are handled in a sensible manner....tho we all know that common sense and fia are a contradiction in terms.
can anyone honestly tell me the last time they heard anything sensible from max or bern?
i would be eager to hear any suggestions.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS