Ari Vatanen had been a favourite among motor sport fans, the former rally driver promising to shake-up the FIA and make the organisation more transparent. However, Todt had received the backing of the outgoing president and was even said to have been a good candidate for Mosley succession way back in 2005.

The election, held at the FIA’s headquarters in Paris, was supervised by an external Huissier de Justice, the French state-appointed public witness. There were 12 abstentions or invalid votes and Todt’s victory was a comfortable one.

The news of Vatanen’s defeat will undoubtedly cause many fans of motor sport to be upset, many feeling that Todt is unsuitable for the role given his public support from Mosley and his former ties with Ferrari. The FIA has been accused in the past of favouring Ferrari and Bernie Ecclestone even admitted that the Scuderia receive benefits (both monetary and in the deciding of new rules). Although Todt has long been resigned from his post of team principal at Ferrari and recently resigned from the company entirely, many will still feel uncomfortable at his appointment.

Despite claims that Todt may fail to shake-up the FIA and will merely continue in the vein of his predecessor, the Frenchman does have a lot of experience in motor sport, primarily Formula One and World Rally. It was Todt who helped rejuvenate Ferrari into a dominant force that won many titles in the late ’90s and early ’00s, and his management style has received considerable praise. The Ferrari company was named by the Financial Times as the best company in Italy to work for in terms of employee satisfaction in 2008.

While many of us fans may have been hoping for a more radical change at Place de la Concorde, we should allow Todt some time to settle in to his new role before making judgments. The president of the FIA does not just deal with motor sport and much of the organisation’s aim is to improve motoring for the general public the world over. Of course, Formula One is at the forefront of their operations though, the international sport garnering much of the headlines that involve the FIA.

We shall have to wait and see how Todt deals with the pressures of being the president, but despite trying to offer the man a chance, I feel the Internet-at-large is about to get a little crazy. But before we all get hysterical, let us remember one very important rule that has just come into force: the president of the FIA may now only preside for two terms at the very most. Something I’m sure we will all agree on as being a very good idea.

Original article by BlogF1.

Jean Todt Comfortably Wins FIA Presidency Election

The Concorde Agreement sets out how the sport is run, its commercial income and how it is divided up among the competing teams and also what became a real sticking point up until very recently, the rules and how they will change in the coming years.

Following approval by the World Motor Sport Council, late last night FIA President Max Mosley signed the 2009 Concorde Agreement, heralding a renewed period of stability for the FIA Formula One World Championship.

The Concorde Agreement – a contract between the FIA, F1’s Commercial Rights-Holder and the participating Teams – sets out the basis on which the Teams participate in the Championship and share in its commercial success.

The WMSC has also approved a slightly revised set of stable Sporting and Technical Regulations (to apply from the 2010 Championship onwards), which have been agreed by the FIA and the Teams and which will be published shortly on the FIA’s website.

The new Concorde Agreement, which runs until 31 December 2012, provides for a continuation of the procedures in the 1998 Concorde Agreement, with decisions taken by working groups and commissions, upon which all teams have voting rights, before going to the WMSC for ratification.

In addition, as agreed in Paris on 24 June 2009, the Teams have entered into a resource restriction agreement, which aims to return expenditure to the levels that prevailed in the early 1990s.

With the 2009 Concorde Agreement and the resource restriction agreement in place, the FIA looks forward to a period of stability and prosperity in the FIA Formula One World Championship. FIA Statement.

All teams have agreed to the terms of the new Concorde Agreement with the exception of BMW who withdrew from the 2010 championship earlier in the week. However, should the German motor manufacturer wish to sell the team on to another company, they will need to sign the agreement, and the FIA have apparently set a deadline of August 5th for this to happen.

The new Concorde Agreement appears to be a continuation of the already-in-place measures contained in the previous 1998 Agreement, but with an added section pertaining to the need to reduce costs back down to those levels seen in the early ’90s. According to the FIA, the rules for the 2010 championship have been altered slightly, and these will be published to the FIA website sometime soon.

Original article by BlogF1.

New Concorde Agreement Signed

Mosley is well within his right to support a future presidential candidate, but the FIA cannot be seen to be fully backing one candidate over another until the time comes to vote. The voting system should be private as well, just as it is with other political elections that many of us are familiar with.

Mosley stated that he felt Todt would be the best person to replace him, and it wasn’t the first time Max has spoken highly of the French rally, Formula One team and car manufacturer head. Vatanen, a former rally driver himself, retaliated with concerns that Jean Todt represents an older era, and that he himself would bring a new freshness to the role of president.

But it’s not good that a leader stays in the post for a long time, and when that happens, the best thing is a change. And I represent that change, a new era with more freshness.

On the contrary, Jean Todt represents the old era, and it’s not right that Max wants to impose a new leader, and that he uses the power of the federation to support his campaign. The FIA is not a kingdom; it’s a republic where the leaders are chosen democratically.

At Ferrari they don’t want Todt to be president, and so they have told me, because they think they sport would lose credibility. The same would happen if it was Ross Brawn or Flavio Briatore running. The president of the FIA must be someone neutral. Ari Vatanen.

It is the second paragraph that has annoyed the FIA Foundation, with Vatanen using the phrase ‘using the power of the federation to support Todt’s campaign’. Furthermore, Vatanen also claimed that the FIA were paying for a private jet for Todt to allow him in the running of his campaign. Ari wrote:

At the expense of the FIA Foundation, Jean goes with a private plane with his girlfriend, supposedly as a FIA representative, to various parts of the world, sometimes he has gone to Asia, sometimes to Canada, sometimes to Buenos Aires, whatever. In fact, he is doing a campaign totally supported and paid by the FIA. Ari Vatanen.

In a response letter written by the Chairman of the FIA Foundation to Ari Vatanen, Carlos Macaya refutes the suggestion of the FIA funding Todt’s campaign, and explained that the travel expenses Ari may be alluring to actually apply to Todt’s partner, Michelle Yeoh.

These assertions are totally false. For the last two years Jean Todt’s partner, the internationally acclaimed actress Michelle Yeoh, has served in a voluntary capacity as the global Ambassador for the Make Roads Safe campaign which is co-ordinated by the FIA Foundation. In this role Michelle has travelled all over the world to support the campaign especially in advance of this year’s first ever global Ministerial Conference on Road Safety to be held in Moscow on November 19-20. [...]

These activities have nothing whatsoever to do with the FIA, or the recently announced election. It is very disappointing that you have chosen to misrepresent the work of a fellow Trustee in this way and belittle the magnificent contribution being made by Michelle Yeoh. [...]

I appreciate that during the forthcoming election for the FIA Presidency there needs to be open and robust debate. However, I would ask that you do not again misrepresent the role of the FIA Foundation in this way. Carlos Macaya.

Macaya also explained that recently, while Michelle Yeoh was travelling to Dar es Salaam in Tanzania for an FIA function, Jean Todt tagged along as he was attending a workshop in the same city helping to promote intelligent vehicle safety systems in his role as the eSafety Aware president.

It would appear that no further sanction will come of Vatanen’s claims and Macaya’s response, and perhaps the former world rally champion was wrong in his accusation. However, it is interesting that Ari has raised the topic, as conspiracy theorists around the world concoct reasons as to why they feel the FIA are still pro-Ferrari and manage their affairs in a deeply private and suspicious manner.

Of course, Todt was the head of Ferrari’s Formula One operation for many years, praised with rejuvenating the team into world champions once again. But in late 2006, Todt resigned this role and took up the position of CEO for the whole company, dealing with the road car division as well. In 2008, Todt resigned this role, although he was still involved with the Maranello company until July 2009, when he completely resigned in order to focus on his campaign to become the next president of the FIA.

Should Jean Todt defeat Ari Vatanen in the election later this year, there will be cries of corruption the world over. Whether correct or not is almost irrelevant as some fans of the sports that the FIA govern, Formula One included, will still feel that the FIA are not 100% straight up, as they say.

So, to the perhaps slightly more thoughtful fans who I know this site attracts, but additionally also pleasing because I know the passion of motor sport runs deep with all… who do you want to see as the next president of the FIA? I can imagine what the answer is already, but before you comment, think for just a moment about the successes Todt and Vatanen have achieved over the years, and how you think they may run the organisation that still controls the sport we all love.

Original article by BlogF1.

Ari Vatanen Already In Hot Water With The FIA Foundation

The news will undoubtedly be welcomed by the eight FOTA teams who are currently still trying to sort out a deal with the FIA and commercial rights holders, all the time trying to piece together a breakaway series should a deal not happen. Alluding to this in a short statement, Vatanen said that he felt it was time for a change in the FIA, and for the organisation to become more transparent.

Responding to requests from many FIA member clubs, I shall stand for presidential elections of the FIA in October this year. I think the time has come for a change. My main focus is to reconcile views within the FIA and bring transparency to its stakeholders. The duty of President is to defend a billion automobilists and the great sport of ours. Ari Vatanen.

Vatanen is a former motor sport competitor and since retiring from rallying, the Finnish 57 year old has undertaking many different roles, notably that of a European MP (from 1999 until earlier this year) as well as continuing to make the occasional appearances at various rally events. Vatanen took the 1981 World Rally title with Dave Richards as his co-driver. Richards would go on to start Prodrive and field his own rally cars before attempting to break into Formula One. Ari has also won the Paris-Dakar rally four times.

Vatanen also isn’t afraid of the written word either, and a quick perusal of his website, I found a nice piece titled Colin McRae – Fragile Life, describing the time he received the news that McRae, his son and two other children had perished in a helicopter crash not too far from the champion’s home.

It is difficult for us to admit how small we are in the grand scheme of things. Our illusion of power and control over life is like the morning haze, in that our judgement is often clouded. The great Konsta Pylkkänen (a well known fictive philosopher by Finnish writer Veikko Huovinen) once said “In the celestial scale, the human has the power of an ant.” I couldn’t agree more. Ari Vatanen.

I’m sure I have more to write on this, but for now, I’ll leave it there.

Original article by BlogF1.

Ari Vatanen Confirms He Will Run For FIA Presidency

Since Wednesday, it has been claimed that a series of rumours and allegations have been made by FOTA, and in a letter to FOTA’s chairman Luca di Montezemolo, Mosley voiced his anger at these claims and stated the team’s association has deliberately attempted to mislead the media.

In his letter, which was sent to di Montezemolo on Thursday, Mosley references the suggestions that FIA Senate president Michel Boeri has now taken over Mosley’s role in relation to Formula One, that Mosley was forced out of office and that he would have no ongoing role within the FIA.

Mosley has slammed FOTA and demanded an apology and correction to the statements made. According to Autosport, the letter was sent to di Montezemolo prior to Thursday’s FOTA press conference, where no apology was forthcoming.

We made a deal yesterday in Paris to end the recent difficulties in Formula 1. A fundamental part of this was that we would both present a positive and truthful account to the media.

I was therefore astonished to learn that FOTA has been briefing the press that Mr Boeri has taken charge of Formula 1, something which you know is completely untrue; that I had been forced out of office, also false; and, apparently, that I would have no role in the FIA after October, something which is plain nonsense, if only because of the FIA statutes.

Furthermore, you have suggested to the media that I was a ‘dictator’, an accusation which is grossly insulting to the 26 members of the World Motor Sport Council who have discussed and voted all the rules and procedures of Formula 1 since the 1980s, not to mention the representatives of the FIA’s 122 countries who have democratically endorsed everything I and my World Motor Sport Council colleagues have done during the last 18 years.

If you wish the agreement we made to have any chance of survival, you and FOTA must immediately rectify your actions. You must correct the false statements which have been made and make no further such statements. You yourself must issue a suitable correction and apology at your press conference this afternoon.

Formula One is run entirely by our 5-strong team without any help from me or any other outsider. There was no need for me to involve myself further in Formula One once we had a settlement. Equally, I had a long-standing plan not to seek re-election in October. It was therefore possible for me to confirm both points to you yesterday.

However, given your and FOTA’s deliberate attempt to mislead the media, I now onsider my options open. At least until October, I am president of the FIA with the full authority of that office. After that it is the FIA members clubs, not you or FOTA, who will decide on the future leadership of the FIA. Max Mosley.

Unfortunately for Mosley, this letter only furthers the perception that he is a dictatorial manager, and it also suggests that he no longer commands the respect of the teams – the very fact Mosley felt compelled to send this indicates that. Mosley is clearly clutching at straws. While Mosley does not need the support of Formula One fans, he cannot work against them either. And unfortunately for himself, this letter will only push more away rather than reach out to newcomers. It also shows a man who is desperately trying to retain the power he seemingly craves.

It would also appear that Mosley is taking the alleged actions of FOTA somewhat personally. The letter apparently did not come from the FIA, but from Max himself. While it is perfectly acceptable for the FIA president to write a letter or send an email, it does seem a little strange that in this case, he would put his name at the bottom. Perhaps the letter would have carried more weight if the FIA had sent it.

It is very clear that FOTA have no issues with the FIA itself. In the past, they have made it known they are unhappy with the governance of the sport, which could be interpreted as the FIA. However, it would seem that Mosley agreeing to not stand for re-election again in October was what finalised the deal on Wednesday. The very fact that Mosley is now bringing that into question leads me to believe that he is aware that this is the point that could cause the deal to collapse. Otherwise, he could have threatened a return to the £40m budget cap.

If FOTA now resurrect their plan to create a breakaway championship – and it would seem this is the only course of action for FOTA aside from backing down and/or apologising – we will be back to square-one again. Formula One will face falling apart at the seams, fans will be confused and in this time of financial turmoil, the sport will be further rocked through its core.

If it is all about Mosley – and it is looking more and more like it is – perhaps the FIA Senate need to think about what is more important to the sport it holds so close to its heart and that helps promote all the work the organisation does away from motor sport. Formula One, or Max Mosley?

Further Reading

• Breakaway Averted: Max Mosley Will Not Stand Again
• Formula One To Split As Talks Between FIA & FOTA Fail

Original article by BlogF1.

Clutching At Straws: Mosley Isn’t Ready To Rule Out Re-Election

The apparent resolution of this crisis means that the planned breakaway series will no longer happen and the eight FOTA teams have been confirmed as entrants to the 2010 FIA Formula One World Championship. Ferrari, McLaren, Brawn, Renault, Toyota, Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso and BMW will compete alongside Williams and Force India, as well as newcomers Campos, Manor and USF1.

There will be no alternative series or championship and the rules for 2010 onwards will be the 2009 regulations as well as further regulations agreed prior to 29 April 2009.

As part of this agreement, the teams will, within two years, reduce the costs of competing in the championship to the level of the early 1990s. The manufacturer teams have agreed to assist the new entries for 2010 by providing technical assistance.

The manufacturer teams have further agreed to the permanent and continuing role of the FIA as the sport’s governing body. They have also committed to the commercial arrangements for the FIA Formula One World Championship until 2012 and have agreed to renegotiate and extend this contract before the end of that period.

All teams will adhere to an upgraded version of the governance provisions of the 1998 Concorde Agreement. FIA Press Release.

The teams must also sign up to the new Concorde Agreement which will help ensure the sport’s future until 2012 with the current squads.

Earlier in the week Max Mosley had been adament about standing again later this year, saying that it doesn’t matter if he remained or left, as his successor would behave in a similar fashion as the role of the president is to ensure the matters of the FIA are looked after. However, the teams have made it known that they are unhappy about the way Mosley has governed Formula One, and it would seem that this, along with the acceptance of their cost-cutting proposals, has eased the tension and allowed the issues to be resolved.

Original article by BlogF1.

Breakaway Averted: Max Mosley Will Not Stand Again

The pomp and circumstance surrounding KERS came primarily from the president of the FIA, the forever embattled Max Mosley. His dream, along with the FIA’s it should be noted, was to make Formula One more environmentally friendly. Or at least, to make it look more environmentally friendly.

It shouldn’t come as any surprise that Formula One cars aren’t particularly fuel efficient, although in the same breath, it should also be noted that they aren’t as bad as you think as this advantage can prove to be the difference between winning and not finishing. And that is a good enough incentive to the engineers to ensure their cars are making full use of the fuel.

Other areas where Formula One falls into the clutches of the green-brigade is the travel and transportation of all the materials around the world. The teams move several hundred tonnes of equipment each time they go to a race, and most of the time that involves an aeroplane and several trucks.

So the idea behind KERS was help the sport become more friendly to the environment by using energy that would have previously been lost. When a car is braking, it is still using the engine and therefore the fuel and other electrical systems. However, with KERS this otherwise lost energy is stored in the form of electrical energy in a battery, and used at the drivers command to give him an extra ~80bhp boost.

However, the system isn’t simple and has been in development since last year for most of the teams. Williams even attempted to try a potentially-safer flywheel solution that negates the use of batteries (as there were some electric shock incidents in testing, notably with BMW). Ferrari’s system has plagued them with troubles since they first tested it, and on more than one occasion a Ferrari driver has ultimately retired from a race this year due the system’s unreliability. Although it must be said, their device has improved significantly in recent events.

And BMW, who haven’t used KERS since the Bahrain Grand Prix, have now decided to completely shelve it in favour of spending more time, energy and resources in improving the aerodynamic efficiency of their car. This is in despite of the fact that BMW were originally all for KERS and were one of the first teams to use the technology in pre-season testing.

We evaluated different alleys, proceeding with KERS or proceeding on the aero side and what could we do with no KERS on board.

We had made some significant progress on the aero side which does not allow to fit KERS, and we have taken a decision just a few days ago to no more run KERS this year because we see a more promising alley in developing the aero. Mario Theissen.

Of course, the other side of the issue is the fact that many drivers felt the need to shed some weight over the winter in order to accommodate the huge weight of the system, something I feel is wrong for the sport to be indirectly encouraging. With the minimum weight set at 605kg, taller and therefore heavier drivers felt they were being penalised. In the BMW garage, Nick Heidfeld was able to use KERS for the first four races, whereas team mate Robert Kubica (who is one of the grid’s tallest pilots) was forced to only test system later in the year.

With all the money that has gone into developing the technology, it would appear to have been a complete failure. Mario Theissen insists that it is not a flop, and that BMW have made good use of the information collected by the Formula One branch of the company. However, within the circles of the racing teams, only Ferrari and McLaren still use the technology.

Considering there are ten teams, and that McLaren Mercedes supply Brawn and Force India with engines and technical support, and Ferrari supply Scuderia Toro Rosso with similar, one could rightly expect these teams to be running the same system as the suppliers. Alas not, and it is perhaps because the technology really isn’t all that useful in the grand scheme of things.

It would appear that KERS will not make into next year’s championship, whichever way the current issues surrounding the breakaway series are resolved. FOTA have called for it to be shelved, and with teams like BMW ceasing development work on it, it does seem unlikely that the planned mandatory introduction of the system next year will now happen.

And while running the risk of alerting the green activists, I say that is a good thing. In my own personal view, Formula One shouldn’t be green. Simply because it isn’t, and it never will be. I therefore feel that all the faffing around trying to change something that is inherently un-green a total waste of money. Formula One is a bit like a vice – it’s naughty, we know it shouldn’t be allowed, but it is. The well-paid playboy drivers thrash their cars around with little regard for their own safety and well-being, and we watch because it is fun, entertaining and most of the time, a darn good spectacle.

And at the very end of the day, it is only 20 or so cars every other weekend. Instead of thinking up of hare-brained ideas, wouldn’t it be better to develop better fuels, reduce unnecessary transportation miles/weight and insist the factories that house the teams make better use of alternative energy sources and are more environmentally sound? Honestly…

Original article by BlogF1.

BMW Abandon KERS For Good: Isn’t It Now Formula One’s Turn?

The funny thing is, all we want, “we” being the millions of fans around the world, is for a season’s worth of damn good racing with an epic fight for the world championships that comes down to the final corner of the final lap of the final race. Swiftly followed by a sporting handshake between the participants and lots of celebrations.

Alas, while we may get that, we also get the political manoeuvrings that should stay in the background, but nearly always end up in the foreground.

The FIA have released a statement – the second of the day – which explains they are starting legal proceedings against the eight FOTA teams.

The FIA’s lawyers have now examined the FOTA threat to begin a breakaway series. The actions of FOTA as a whole, and Ferrari in particular, amount to serious violations of law including wilful interference with contractual relations, direct breaches of Ferrari’s legal obligations and a grave violation of competition law. The FIA will be issuing legal proceedings without delay.

Preparations for the 2010 FIA Formula One World Championship continue but publication of the final 2010 entry list will be put on hold while the FIA asserts its legal rights. FIA Press Release.

So it would appear that the FIA believe FOTA and Ferrari seriously violated the law and breached legal obligations. I particularly like the FIA’s choice of language in this statement. It reads “[...] and a grave violation of competition law.” Wowser! Maybe it’s because I was raised on music manuscript, but whenever I read the word “grave” I think of the term as a musical direction, which essentially means what the word means; we’re talking deathbed here, serious undertones of darkness and sadness. And I fail to see how any of the FOTA-8 have behaved in this manner.

I’m also struggling to figure out why Ferrari have been singled out in the statement. Ferrari are a member of FOTA just like the other seven, and previously nine when Williams and Force India were members. While they may have separate deals with the FIA and/or FOM, it seems odd to single them out in a statement that otherwise appears to be relatively generic. Of course, the reason is clear – the FIA want Ferrari in their championship, and in all likely, Ferrari are probably the main protagonists in this saga.

I also fail to see exactly what the FIA are hoping to get from this. Presumably they do want Ferrari (and the other FOTA-7) to stay. But taking them to court isn’t exactly the best way to chummy up to someone or some company. If the FIA are just out to prove a point, then it may turn out to be a very costly mistake. If the FIA are out to break FOTA’s unity, then that is just childish and if the governing body feel they are owed money, then that too seems to be a bit of a mystery – the FIA is a non-profit organisation. Sure, I bet it costs a fair amount to run, but then that is why they charge for licenses etc…

And now because the FIA intend to start legal proceedings, the final 2010 list (which would never have been the final 2010 list anyway) has been put on hold.

Original article by BlogF1.

FIA To Start Legal Proceedings Against FOTA & Ferrari

The eight teams – Ferrari, McLaren, Brawn, Toyota, Renault, BMW, Red Bull Racing and Scuderia Toro Rosso – met at Renault’s Enstone factory yesterday to discuss the issues surrounding their Friday deadline to remove the conditions they had placed on their 2010 Championship entries. Through letters sent back and forth between the two parties, it was made clear that the FIA have little intention of backing down over the teams demands. The FIA had stated that the £40m budget cap would remain for next year and rejected FOTA’s recent complaint against Steward Chairman Alan Donnelly. FOTA claimed that Donnelly was intentionally trying to cause a rift in FOTA by misrepresenting the teams during meetings at the Turkish Grand Prix.

With little sign that the governance of the sport will improve to FOTA’s liking, the four hour long meeting resulted in the association releasing a statement that has sent shockwaves through the sport and it’s fans.

Since the formation of FOTA last September the teams have worked together and sought to engage the FIA and commercial rights holder, to develop and improve the sport.

Unprecedented worldwide financial turmoil has inevitably placed great challenges before the F1 community. FOTA is proud that it has achieved the most substantial measures to reduce costs in the history of our sport.

In particular the manufacturer teams have provided assistance to the independent teams, a number of which would probably not be in the sport today without the FOTA initiatives. The FOTA teams have further agreed upon a substantial voluntary cost reduction that provides a sustainable model for the future.

Following these efforts all the teams have confirmed to the FIA and the commercial rights holder that they are willing to commit until the end of 2012.

The FIA and the commercial rights holder have campaigned to divide FOTA.

The wishes of the majority of the teams are ignored. Furthermore, tens of millions of dollars have been withheld from many teams by the commercial rights holder, going back as far as 2006. Despite this and the uncompromising environment, FOTA has genuinely sought compromise.

It has become clear however, that the teams cannot continue to compromise on the fundamental values of the sport and have declined to alter their original conditional entries to the 2010 World Championship.

These teams therefore have no alternative other than to commence the preparation for a new Championship which reflects the values of its participants and partners. This series will have transparent governance, one set of regulations, encourage more entrants and listen to the wishes of the fans, including offering lower prices for spectators worldwide, partners and other important stakeholders.

The major drivers, stars, brands, sponsors, promoters and companies historically associated with the highest level of motorsport will all feature in this new series. FOTA Statement.

The news is very damaging to Formula One, and while preparing for this weekend’s race, many drivers have voiced their concern for the sport’s future, but vowed to follow their respective teams. Many of the comments coming from the drivers centre around the fact that with so many new teams entering next year, the sport will not be as challenging or technically advance. In essence, the drivers do not want to race in a dumbed-down series.

FOTA seem confident that they can set up a breakaway series and that there will be transparent governance – something the fans have been crying out for. FOTA say they will listen to the fans and generally try to improve on what Formula One has pretty much failed at doing; cheaper tickets and one set of organised regulations. FOTA also say that the major drivers, sponsors and promoters will follow them to the new series, which if true, particularly for the promoters, will give the new championship and excellent starting position.

It is almost certain that when FIA president Max Mosley responds to FOTA’s announcement, it will be a response filled with optimism for the future of Formula One, of new teams, new faces and stability for the future. However, loosing many of the sport’s big names will have a costly impact and even with the little knowledge we have at the moment (literally, it is just the FOTA statement), I can foresee many fans following FOTA and the drivers they employ to a new series.

For Bernie Ecclestone, the future may not be quite so clear. Ecclestone controls the commercial rights to Formula One and therefore he is not directly linked to the negotiations that have happened in the past few months. However, the wealthy Briton obviously has a vested interest in the sport, and losing so many household names will not make his job any easier. It is likely that for now, Ecclestone will have to remain with Formula One, but if the breakaway championship proves successful, the lure of it may prove too much of an opportunity to miss.

Of course, this is big news for Formula One, but it also affects the future of BlogF1. I will not lie, the recent political mess the sport has found itself in has worn me down somewhat, but BlogF1 still holds a very special place in my heart. The site will always remain as will the 1600+ article archive. But what to do in 2010? Well, I’ve been up all night thinking about it – I’m literally stepping out the door to go to work – and although I cannot really make decision until more is known about the championships, a new domain will likely be set up and efforts moved over accordingly.

So, what’s next…?

Original article by BlogF1.

Formula One To Split As Talks Between FIA & FOTA Fail

The FIA don’t usually give in to demands very easily though, and the eerie silence from the sport’s governing body since the entries were submitted has been deafening. It is known that the FIA want to introduce a budget cap from next year onwards, but most of the teams are unhappy about how this was introduced, and the fact that the proposed budget is huge step down from what the squads are currently spending each year. The FOTA-9 also want the Concorde Agreement agreed and signed by June 12th.

It has been suggested by many that the FOTA-9’s conditions that were sent in along with their entry forms is actually against the rules itself and therefore invalid. Therefore, while the current crop of teams (Williams aside) feel that they are doing the right thing by pressuring the FIA, it could still backfire.

Max Mosley has suggested that getting a Concorde Agreement put together in the next week is nigh-on impossible, and that the FIA lay out the rules for the Formula One championship, and if the teams want to create the rules, then may be they should set up their own series.

A Concorde Agreement which one receives so late can’t be signed by June 12.

We now have a conflict and we will see who succeeds in the end. I say to them: If you want to draw up your own rules, then you can organise your own championship. But we have the Formula 1 championship.

We draw up the rules for that. We have been doing that for 60 years and we will continue doing so. Max Mosley

Mosley’s words suggest that the FIA are not willing to back down over their proposed introduction of a budget cap, and that the nine entrance forms submitted by Ferrari, BMW, McLaren, Toyota, Renault, Brawn, Red Bull Racing, Scuderia Toro Rosso and Force India are in fact invalid. If these teams are not allowed to partake in the 2010 championship, then the series would be rocked.

Should the FIA disallow the FOTA-9, it would be expected for Brawn and Force India (and possibly McLaren) to bow in to the FIA’s rules and re-submit. There is a clause in the rules that allows teams to submit an entry after the deadline, and should this happen, it is likely they would be let in. However, whether or not there will be space for them is another matter entirely.

At the time of writing, 10 new teams have apparently submitted entry. Currently, it has been reported that USF1, Prodrive, Litespeed, Brabham, Campos, Superfund, N.Technology, Epsilon Euskadi, March and Lola have all applied for the 2010 championship. Add in Williams who broke ranks with FOTA and submitted under the proposed rules of 2010, means there are just 2 places left.

The FIA do not have to accept any entry, and need to consider the finances and organisation of each entry to assess their ability to race in Formula One for many years. Some of the new entries are likely to be disappointed and not allowed in, which would free up some places, but given that the FIA are in strong disagreement with FOTA, it seems unlikely that any critic of the FIA will be allowed in, despite how potentially damaging to the sport that may be.

Of course, come June 12th we could all be reading how the FOTA-9 are in, along with Williams and few new squads to bolster the numbers. At the current time, we simply do not know. Either way, I think next Friday is going to be very, very interesting.

Original article by BlogF1.

Max Mosley Suggests That The FIA Are Not About To Bow To Demands

Ferrari is also a car company that produce luxury sports cars. Of note, they are quite the exception to the general automobile industry at the moment as it was recently reported that profits at Maranello are only very slightly down on the same period twelve months ago. Where the entire industry is panicking and closing down factories, Ferrari are actually still making a fair amount of money.

But this aside, Ferrari are also an older company and have competed in every year that Formula One has existed. From the first season in 1950 right through to the most recent race, Ferrari have been there, mostly in their famous Rosso Corso colour. There were one or two races when the team changed to blue, but that is because of another dispute many years ago.

So one could argue that because of their ability to generate money, their history and most importantly because of their own desire, Ferrari should remain in Formula One. The two are very closely associated, and although Ferrari has in the past and could in the future participate in a different form of motor sport, Formula One will still likely be considered the pinnacle, and therefore attractive to the top brands.

There is another reason why Ferrari may want to remain in the sport as well. You see, while Stefano Domenicali* was at Heathrow earlier today discussing the budget cap matter with FIA president Max Mosley, Ferrari lawyers were applying for an injunction in the French courts to stop the FIA from pushing through its new rule. The reason for it happening in the French courts is because the FIA are based in Paris. The reason for Ferrari starting this process is even more interesting.

It was stated recently by Bernie Ecclestone that Ferrari do get special treatment in the sport. It turns out that should Ferrari win the constructors title, they get an extra £80m on top of what other teams would get should they win the title. This preferential treatment didn’t cause the stir among the other teams that would normally have been expected, indicating that it is common knowledge inside Formula One.

And now it has become apparent that Ferrari also have the right to veto any future technical regulations. In other words, they have to okay them before they happen. As Ferrari are seeking an injunction, one can presume Ferrari believe this process was not followed by the FIA when they announced the introduction of the budget cap plan. Joe Saward of Grandprix.com has mentioned this agreement regarding the vetoing of rules on his personal Formula One blog, and as it is new to me, I thought I would share a little with you.

The legal argument is apparently based on an agreement that was made in January 2005 between Ferrari, the FIA and Formula One Management.

[...]

The details of this agreement have never been made public but it seems that it included not only a substantial payment each year to Ferrari, but also a veto on the technical regulations in the future. According to our sources, the document even stated that if the new agreement was not validated by all the other teams, the old Concorde Agreement would prevail. Joe Saward.

Joe goes on to say that during the course of the meeting, Max Mosley was willing to raise the budget cap and introduce a “a glide path”, which presumably means a sliding scale whereby the cap would decrease by a set amount each year. However, the meeting apparently didn’t get much further than this as Ferrari and Toyota brought up the legality of the introduction of the rule and refused to back down on this point. They wanted the 2010 regulations cancelled in their entirety.

We can therefore presume that Ferrari believe they have a strong case; an organisation like Ferrari wouldn’t just go to the courts on a whim. However, the fact that Ferrari have this power in the first place is interesting enough. Despite all the possible points one could discuss right now (feel free to in the comments), this does show that Ferrari do want to stay in Formula One. A team wouldn’t bother wasting money on seeking an injunction and enduring the possible embarrassment if it wasn’t granted if they wanted to leave.

Max Mosely believes the same as well, stating as much to Autosport after the meeting. However, Max also believes that Ferrari won’t go through with their threat of leaving the sport and expects them to lodge an entry, either before the deadline or after. From what I can work out from all the quotes and new insights into Ferrari’s position in the sport, it would seem quite the opposite. Yes, Ferrari do want to stay. But if it cannot be done on their terms, then they will leave.

Needless to say, Formula One just got a whole lot more intriguing. Politically, anyway.

*As a footnote to this post, it should be noted that Ferrari Team Principal Stefano Domenicali was representing the team today instead of FOTA and Ferrari President Luca di Montezemolo. Although Luca was meant to be present, his father passed away yesterday. I would like to extend my condolences to the Cordero di Montezemolo family at this sad time.

Original article by BlogF1.

Ferrari Clearly Want To Stay, But Also Want It On Their Terms

The budget cap plan is causing considerable unrest in Formula One at the moment and it is envisaged that all manufacturers will add their voice to the debate and threaten to quit if the rules are not amended. Teams whose companies centre around Formula One motor racing are likely to enter, those being Williams, Force India and Brawn, with possibly McLaren as well. However, the argument isn’t strictly centering around the manufacturers as Dietrich Mateschitz has stated that he will not enter his two teams either if the cap remains in its current form.

In a statement, Renault said that they are not happy with the way the capping rule has been introduced and Flavio Briatore is particularly upset as FOTA’s own proposals were largely ignored. This echoes the other four teams who have stated that they are also unhappy with the way the rule was brought in with little-to-no consultation, and Ferrari are even investigating its legality due to the fact that they have a strong involvement in the introduction of new rules.

There is frustration that FOTA’s constructive proposals, including major cost saving measures to be adopted progressively between 2009 and 2012, which were carefully constructed by FOTA members, have been completely ignored without any form of consultation by the FIA with the teams.

It should be stressed that FOTA has set the same, if not lower, financial objective as the FIA, but Renault strongly believes that this must be introduced through a different procedure agreed by all parties. Renault Statement.

Renault went on to say that the governance of the sport needs to incorporate all parties involved, including FOM and FOTA as well.

The decision of the Federation International de l’Automobile (FIA) to introduce two sets of Formula One technical regulations for the 2010 Formula One season has caused the Renault Group to reconsider its entry in next year’s FIA Formula One World Championship.

Renault also believes that it is paramount that the governance of the sport is coordinated with a spirit of consultation with all parties (FIA, FOM, FOTA) in order to achieve a better balance between the costs and the revenues. Renault is also of the firm view that all entrants in the World Championship must adhere to and operate under the same regulations. Renault Statement.

It is also my view that all the teams should operate under one set of regulations. Not only does it make policing the sport much easier, but the potential to have one set of teams performing considerably better on the track than another set would be negated under a single set of rules. As stated previously, I cannot believe for a second that the FIA will get the potential performance difference right from the word go – they couldn’t even organise qualifying properly with changes being made mid-season in previous years.

While Renault remained calmly professional but firm in their statement, team boss Flavio Briatore showed his typical emotive side, indicating that while the Italian may not always be right, Formula One is clearly still held very close to his heart.

Our aim is to reduce costs while maintaining the high standards that make Formula One one of the most prestigious brands on the market. We want to achieve this in a coordinated manner with the regulatory and commercial bodies, and we refuse to accept unilateral governance handed out by the FIA.

If the decisions announced by the World Council on the 29th of April 2009 are not revised, we have no choice but to withdraw from the FIA Formula One World Championship at the end of 2009. Flavio Briatore.

It is this “unilateral governance” that has caused much of the problem, and had the FIA spent more time discussing the options with FOTA rather than seemingly ignoring their efforts, then this issue would have likely been avoided.

As the 29th May deadline for entries to the 2010 World Championship approaches, it is still unknown if a compromise can be hammered out. FOTA chairman and Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo is expected to meet with Max Mosley prior to the Monaco Grand Prix, where solution will surely be found. Until then though, Formula One will once again endure bad press after bad press as the sport makes the headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Further Reading

• Ferrari Joins Toyota & Red Bull In 2010 Boycott
• Dietrich Mateschitz Becomes Latest To Voice Non-Entry To Two-Tier F1
• Budget Cap Causes Consternation Among The Teams
• FIA Adjust 2010 Decisions: Budget Caps
• The Future Of Formula One – Capping The Budgets

Original article by BlogF1.

Renault Become Fifth Team To Reconsider 2010 Entry

It’s very easy to focus on the negative points when discussing someone’s success in a position of authority that is also played out in the international media. Mosley is the front man of the FIA and isn’t solely concerned with Formula One. Many other motor sports fall under his and the FIA’s command as do various safety initiatives designed to improve technology and awareness in relation to safety in the automotive world, be it in the manufacturers factories or for the humble driver behind the wheel.

However, despite the organisations good work, it is Formula One that captures the imaginations of most. It is the sport that makes the most headlines for the FIA and because of this, it is also where Mosley is mostly judged from. And currently, it isn’t looking like Max will be remembered too fondly.

The introduction of a £40m budget cap for the 2010 season onwards is in essence, a good idea. Expenditure needs to be controlled in a sport that is lavishly costly at the moment. In order to thrive, the sport needs to be open to new teams, but it must not become a common-as-muck sport; many say that Formula One’s exclusivity is exactly what draws people to it in the first place.

The balancing act is quite hard, and while the FIA feel that currently a $40m budget for a season’s racing is acceptable, the current array of manufacturer teams plus Dietrich Mateschitz’s family of two feel it is not.

In Spain this past weekend, Toyota’s John Howett stated that if the cap is not discussed and amended, the Cologne-based squad would not lodge an entry into next year’s championship. Yesterday, Red Bull Racing and Scuderia Toro Rosso followed suit and stated that unless the rules change, they’re out as well. And now Ferrari have gone on record with a similar concern.

If the last thing you do in any given role or position is what you will be remembered by, then Max Mosley could be on the verge of being remembered as the man who destroyed a sport that up until recently, not perfectly, but was adequately ticking over. I am certain that this fiasco over the budget cap will be resolved by the end of the month and those who had every intention of entering prior to the initial budget cap proposal will indeed lodge an entry.*

It’s interesting though to think about how Max will be remembered. He has been a driving force in Formula One for so many years. Whether you agree with what he has done in this time is almost irrelevant as the fact remains that he has been a driving force, either for the good or the bad. And as someone who spends so much of his time in the (motorsport) public eye, Max will be remembered for a very long time to come.

It almost makes me wonder if, come late-summer, Mosley announces his intention to run again. I’ve said it before, but I will say it again: I can’t possibly leave the FIA while Formula One is such a state of flux with many changes happening. Thus, the only honourable thing I can do is to remain for another term to see these changes through.

We all know what that translates to, but now I’ve thought about it a little more and depending on what happens with the 2010 entry saga, I believe Mosley may also want to continue to ensure he leaves on a happier, more respectable note.

*I’ve worded that phrase carefully as I’ve had suspicions about Toyota and Renault since Honda withdrew last year.

Original article by BlogF1.

Will Max Mosley’s Legacy Be The Death Of Formula One?

A resident of St Luke’s Mews in Notting Hill, Alexander was said to have battled with drugs during his life and it has been speculated that the cause of his untimely passing may have been an overdose. The FIA, whom father Max is the president of, released a statement of condolences and asked the press to respect the privacy of the Mosley family.

The FIA extends sincere condolences to the Mosley family on the sad news of the death of Alexander Mosley. Our thoughts are with Alexander’s family and friends, and we would request that the media respect the Mosley family’s privacy at this difficult time. FIA Statement.

Max Mosley has cancelled his planned trip to this weekend’s Spanish Grand Prix in order to be with his family.

Original article by BlogF1.

Max Mosley Grieves The Loss Of His Son, Alexander

At the start of the season, both McLarens, both Ferraris, both Renaults and Nick Heidfeld used KERS and we saw in the opening race in Melbourne that it produced some interesting overtaking moves, particularly from the Spanish Renault pilot.

However, Ferrari suffered some problems with the device over the winter and after Kimi Raikkonen retired from the Malaysian Grand Prix due to another KERS failure (the device overheated and caused the cockpit extinguisher to fire while Raikkonen was driving), Ferrari removed the device from both cars. In China Felipe Massa said the removal of KERS is a step backwards for the team, and Stefano Domenicali stated that perhaps taking the device off the cars wasn’t the wisest of moves as the F60 is essentially designed with KERS in mind.

In Bahrain this weekend, Felipe Massa is using the device while Kimi Raikkonen isn’t, the Finn probably fed up with it and wanting nothing to do with energy recovery.

However, while FOTA may want the technology banned, the FIA are very keen on its widespread use. The reason is down to Max Mosley’s insistence that Formula One be green and environmentally friendly. In a world where people are measuring their carbon footprint and trying to reduce it, and in a world where companies are developing clean fuels and reducing emissions, Formula One motor racing looks like the sore thumb of antiquated ventures that should be banned in some people’s eyes. Obviously, the FIA are trying their best to ensure this doesn’t happen.

With energy recovery, the FIA can tout out lines that describe how the sport has been carbon neutral for a long time and that the energy lost while a Formula One car brakes (but its engine is still running) is recovered and reused via batteries storing the energy in the form of electricity (although Williams are developing a fly-wheel system). The technology though is complicated and expensive to develop, going against the FIA’s other trend of wanting to reduce costs in the sport to ensure its financial future.

We understood immediately that KERS was a money-sucking genius, and the FIA should have taken note of that. It should have been discussed before the start of the season, and the same goes for the diffusers. Having failed to do that has forced on us expenses that are crazy as much as useless. Flavio Briatore.

Of course, Briatore is already furious because his Renault team, that already runs a very tight budget, is now forced to develop a ‘double-diffuser’ which is another major part of a Formula One car that costs an awful lot to redesign. By changing the diffuser, the whole of the rear of the car has to be looked into and potentially redesigned. Briatore is not happy about this and has been mouthing off at Brawn since the FIA ruling earlier in the month.

Officially, we are yet to hear from FOTA as it would appear that Briatore is representing himself with his current comments. In his capacity of Commercial Development leader at FOTA, there is surely little Briatore can do other than bring the discussion to the table and add opinion. Unfortunately for Flavio, his new arch nemesis Ross Brawn is the leader of the Technical Working Group within the organisation, but thankfully for Briatore, Brawn are also yet to introduce KERS to their car.

My own opinion on the matter of KERS is that it is a waste of money. With only some cars running the device it is interesting and it was great to see Mark Webber dice with Fernando Alonso during the saturated Malaysian Grand Prix. The Red Bull pilot was able to pass the Renault through the corners thanks to its great chassis that works beautifully. However, as soon as the pair exited the corner Alonso was able to press the magic button on this steering wheel and power past the RB5 as the throttle was opened and KERS applied.

However, I still believe the technology is a colossal waste of money and when/should each team have KERS fitted to their cars, I fear that the effect of it will be negated. Every driver will press the button at the same points around the lap and essentially we will be back to square-one. New technology is certainly interesting and is what makes Formula One so fascinating, especially when that technology is passed onto road cars. But to be tooting the green agenda when, to be perfectly honest, Formula One will never be truly green, is just nonsense. And that blame lies squarely on the doorstep of the FIA.

Formula One can and should improve its impact on the environment. Perhaps limiting the shipping of the tyres from Japan to the UK and then onto the race venues would be a good idea. Further limiting the amount of staff that travel to the grands prix would help. Developing clean fuels as Richard Branson recently mentioned when he became a sponsor of Brawn would be good. And funnily enough, most of those off the top of my head suggestions would actually save the sport money. In fact all them would if Branson sold his clean fuel to Formula One at a cheaper cost to the teams than their current suppliers.

The juggling act of Formula One’s survival is difficult and is enduring a tough time at the moment. However, the sport will survive and so far this season, the racing has been fantastic. What I believe will help the sport immeasurably is to have a leader that isn’t solely interested in one idea that appears to be his and his alone. The sport needs careful management from, dare I say it, a committee. A group of people who understand motor racing, who understand its limits but also its possibilities. Who understand what can and what cannot be done, and a group of people who understand the financial impact of implementing ideas.

The sport needs to unite and be run by itself, or at minimum in close collaboration with an outside organisation (to be fair and impartial). By constantly battling with the FIA the act of racing cars around a multitude of circuits the world over is almost doomed to disaster. By working together for the benefit of the teams and the fans, Formula One can have a prosperous future amid dark times elsewhere in the financial industries. KERS is just one example of how this won’t happen; the FIA will press ahead with its mandatory introduction for 2010 while the teams will voice their opinion of wanting it shelved. The argument will simply go on, and on, and on…

Original article by BlogF1.

KERS Hits The Headlines Again: FOTA Want It Banned

After discussions between the ten principals, the following proposals have been made in order to sustain Formula One into the future, to make the sport in to more of a spectacle, and to appease those who insist on reducing costs and increasing competition. The results of FOTA’s global market research has helped the organisation put together their ideas, taking into account what we, the fans, would like to see happen to Formula One.

FOTA’s chairman, Luca di Montezemolo had the following say to the media at the press conference in Geneva.

This is an unprecedented moment in Formula One history. Above all else, for the first time the teams are unified and steadfast – with a clear, collective vision. Thanks to this unity, all the teams have already managed to make a significant reduction to their costs for 2009.

And, while we will continue to compete vigorously on track, we all share one common goal: to work together to improve Formula One by ensuring its stability, sustainability, substance and show for the benefit of our most important stakeholder, namely the consumer. It is with this mindset that we now intend to work hard, with our partners at the FIA and FOM, our shared goal being to optimise the future of Formula One. Luca di Montezemolo.

The proposals are split into three main groups; Technical, Sporting and Commercial, neatly summing up the three main areas of the sport. Much has been said about the technical side of the Formula One, with one of the sport’s most radical technical regulation shake ups in years being implemented for 2009. The sporting regulations have also been tweaked for this upcoming season, but fans clearly want to see more made of these to ensure a better race. And of course, the commercial side of Formula One has come under scrutiny recently, and this is something the team chiefs are keen to work on.

Technical Proposals

For 2009

• More than 100% increase in mileage per engine (eight engines per driver per season)
• Reduction in wind tunnel and CFD usage
• Engine available at €8 million per team per season

For 2010

• Engine available at €5 million per team per season
• Gearbox available at €1.5 million per team per season
• Standardised KERS (put out to tender, with a target price of €1-2 million per team per season)
• Target a further 50% reduction of the 2009 aerodynamic development spend
• Specified number of chassis, bodywork and aerodynamic development iterations (homologations) during the season
• Prohibition of a wide range of exotic, metallic and composite materials
• Standardised telemetry and radio systems

Sporting Proposals

For 2009

• Testing reduction (50%)
• New points-scoring system (12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1), to give greater differentiation/reward to grand prix winners
• Race starting fuel loads, tyre specifications and refuelling data to be made public

For 2010

• Commitment to recommend new qualifying format
• Radical new points-scoring opportunities (eg, one constructors’ championship point to be awarded for the fastest race pit stop)
• Further testing reductions (four four-day single-car pre-season tests plus one single-car pre-season shakedown)
• Reduction of grand prix duration (250km or a maximum of one hour 40 minutes) pending the approval of the commercial rights holder

Commercial Proposals

• Increased data provision for media
• Explore means by which the presentation of Formula One action can be more informatively and dynamically presented, common to other sports such as tennis and cricket, to dramatically improve engagement with the public
• Nominated senior team spokesman available for TV during grand prix
• Commitment to enhance consumer experience via team and FOTA websites
• Mandatory driver autograph sessions during grand prix weekends

For 2010

• Commitment to enhance consumer experience via TV coverage

So What Does All That Mean

FOTA would like the engines last a lot longer and be available for less money. Already for 2009 this has been partly achieved, but in order to help reduce costs even further, it is proposed that engines be available for €5m per team per season. And along with the engine, it is suggested other components be standardised and/or subsidised. There has been a fair amount of talk regarding the KERS unit, and FOTA are also throwing gear boxes into the equation as well. A standardised telemetry and radio system has also been mooted, and previously there had been talk of opening up all radio communication to be broadcast.

Also proposed is a limit on development work being made to the cars, which would obviously save a lot of money. This would coincide with a reduction in physical testing as well, something that has already been banned during the racing season this year. With more standardised parts, this could be easier to achieve, but then we get into the standardisation argument which has divided fans, although my personal impression is that it is generally seen as bad, or not wanted, for the sport.

In terms of the actual event of racing and the championship, the points structure has come under question. Before 2003, the points awarded to the finishing drivers (or those classified as finishing) was 10-6-4-3-2-1, obviously going to the top-six. This was changed in 2003 to 10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1, the awards going to the top-eight.

Recently, Bernie Ecclestone opened his mouth and suggested a fairly radical change towards medals. Ecclestone wanted the constructors title to remain on a points basis, but in order to promote overtaking in the minds of the drivers, Bernie suggested the top-three be awarded medals. There has been a lively debate on this ever since, and again, my impression is that it is generally considered unnecessary. Particularly having two systems within one sport, albeit for different titles.

Notably, the FIA have said little on this other than to put off making a decision, citing the wait for market research to be compiled. FOTA have also chosen not to mention this in their proposals. Although it was probably discussed, it is thought the team chiefs are against the idea, despite Ecclestone suggesting the opposite a couple of months back.

FOTA are suggesting what many of you have said (or close to at any rate); to increase the gap between the first and second placed driver (to add emphasis to the win), but to keep it as a points system and to also keep the top-eight as scorers. Well done BlogF1 readers, common sense prevails. FOTA have suggested the following: 12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1. Personally speaking, I dislike odd numbers, but it is in my opinion, a lot better than medals.

For 2009, FOTA would like race fuel loads, tyre specifications and refuelling data to be made public. Currently, it is an unknown at the start of the race exactly who is on what fuel load, and therefore what strategy they are running which ultimately means that new fans are left a little confused. By announcing this information, it would be easier to assess the qualifying efforts of the drivers as well make following the race a little easier, particularly for newer fans.

However, this too divides the sport’s followers, and former ITV commentator and now blogger James Allen has voiced his enjoyment of not knowing exactly who is doing what at the start of the race. I can see both sides of the story and appreciate the differing opinions on this. Although I feel that a return to qualifying of ye olde combined with fewer restrictions on tyre usage might help reduce some of the complications. Again though, and like Allen’s, it’s just another opinion.

For 2010, FOTA would indeed like to see commitment to sorting out qualifying. I’d put it higher up the list, but then I would say that! The association would also like to see new points added to the grand prix weekend, with perhaps a point being awarded to the fastest pitstop, this being added to the constructors championship. From this we could also suggest a point for the fastest lap. I would imagine the FIA might be keen on this as it may help Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen towards the championship, the Finn taking the majority of fastest laps last year.

FOTA have also suggested that testing be reduced again, and also that the race length be reduced. Currently, the maximum time allowed for a grand prix is 2 hours. Races only ever have to be stopped due to this ruling in seriously adverse situations. Only once can I remember a race being cut short because of time, but FOTA have suggested a maximum of 1 hour 40 minutes. This would mean presumably that races get reduced in proportion to the maximum time. Currently, a grand prix lasts for about 200 minutes or so, and I cannot see what is wrong with leaving it like that.

In terms of the commercial side of the sport and making the spectacle more fan-friendly, FOTA would like to see a nominated spokesperson for each squad, available throughout the weekend to talk to the media. They would also like to see more information being made available, for better engagement with viewers, more to be done with the online side of the sport as well as mandatory autograph sessions at races.

Sum Up

All in all, FOTA’s recommendations aren’t too far away from what I as a fan feel the general consensus is. We would all like more information to be made available, many of us feel the points system could do with a little tinker, but nothing too radical, and we would all like the sport to be a little more open and friendly to those who keep it going.

Regarding the technical side, perhaps it is leaning towards standardisation, but it should be noted that only KERS was really mentioned. It is a feeling I have that Max Mosley may get his way on certain things, particularly if he is re-elected as FIA president in November. However, credit where it is due, FOTA have only presented KERS as being a potentially-standardised part. All other components were just mentioned in a cost anaysis perspective. FOTA’s unified presence may help dissuade any future FIA shake ups without first assessing them properly as well.

So this is what has been presented, and I’ve included a few of my own thoughts, feeling and opinions on various matters. Now it’s over to you. What do you think of all this? Agree, disagree? If it ain’t broke don’t fix it, or more still needs to be done? Unlike many other websites out there, BlogF1’s comments are open, so please have your say…

Image © HondaF1.

Original article by BlogF1.

FOTA Announce Proposals For Formula One’s Future

Over the course of the last season, the drivers met with the FIA and Max Mosley regarding the increase in fees for the mandatory super license. According to the GPDA, who issued a statement today regarding the ongoing issue, they were not consulted or informed of the increases made between 2007 and 2008, and only found out when the team’s received their invoices and the story hit the media headlines.

This doesn’t sound like unusual activity for the FIA, who stripped Canada of their grand prix without as much as a telephone call, according to reports at the time. The GPDA have also stated that the FIA had requested details of the driver’s salaries so they could better ascertain what an appropriate fee should be, to which the driver’s declined citing that this information is confidential and only known by the relevant teams, the drivers management and financial advisors and of course, the relevant taxation authorities.

The drivers appear to be concerned that their super license funds are being used to make up a shortfall in the operating expenses of the FIA as well as the continuous improvement of safety in the sport. The statement reads:

The drivers contend that the Super Licence fees should not be a revenue stream for the FIA and such a change constitutes a major departure in principle for both past Super Licence fees and fees for any other drivers’ licences. The FIA should raise sufficient funds from the exploitation of its commercial rights.

As a principle, the drivers should not be taxed to fund the costs of others fulfilling their legal duty to the drivers. It is the teams’ duty to provide the driver with a safe car, it is the circuit owners’ duty to provide a safe circuit and it is the duty of the manufacturers to provide helmets, fireproof overalls, etc. fit for the purpose of safety.

The FIA, as the governing body, has a duty to impose safety regulations and to supervise through licensing the parties carrying out their duties, e.g. licensing a circuit. The licensing process for drivers is to ensure that the drivers are competent to race at the level necessary in Formula One.GPDA Statement.

The statement goes on to talk about about how the drivers attempted to resolve the matter privately, which culminated in a meeting at the Italian Grand Prix last year. This is where Mosley asked for the drivers gross earnings.

The drivers are not opposed to a reasonable increase in the Super Licence fees, the fee which should cover the administrative and other costs relating to the issue of the licence. Therefore, the drivers have offered to pay the 2007 Super Licence fees adjusted upwards by inflation for the 2008 season with a corresponding increase for the 2009 season.

In addition, the drivers have offered to explore fair ways in which they can assist the FIA in raising funds to meet the apparent €1.7 million shortfall required to run the Federation in 2008 and a further €3 million shortfall that will be required in 2009, according to the figures cited by Mr. Mosley at Monza. GPDA Statement.

According to Autosport, Mosley has said that any driver without a super license will not be able to race in the championship.

All I can say is that nobody is going to drive in a world championship race in Australia unless they have a superlicence.

In the present climate, somebody who is earning several million a year and doesn’t want to spend one or two percent of that to get a licence for his trade is not going to get a lot of sympathy. And maybe we will have a quiet Friday in Melbourne… Max Mosley.

From what has been said and written, it seems as though the drivers have a fair point. If their collected fees are being used for more than just improved safety and administration costs involved with processing and issuing licenses, then that is sort of wrong. And despite myself just saying that some of the money should be spent on safety, the drivers are also correct in pointing out that the teams provide safe cars, the circuits provide safe circuits and other suppliers supply safe equipment. It is up to the individual companies to ensure their products meet certain criteria. The only issue I can see here is one of policing. If the FIA need to check that these companies are producing safe products, then perhaps some of the funds raised from the licenses should be used for this.

However, Mosley also makes a fair point about the percentage of a driver’s earnings being discussed here. Assuming the average net income of a midfield driver is €1m, then should they really be moaning about having to fork out €100k for a license that allows them to race and to earn that €1m? Admittedly, and once again assuming the €1m figure again, the fee is a lot more than the suggested 1% or 2% that Mosley mentioned. Five-to-ten times more, in fact. Although it should be pointed that in the case of Kimi Raikkonen, whose annual salary has been suggested at around €40m on Wikipedia, his super license fee will only be about 0.5% of his income.

So what say you? Rich kids moaning, or racing drivers raising a fair point?

Original article by BlogF1.

Should A Million Euro Earning Driver Really Complain?

The USA have endured a rocky relationship with Formula One in recent years; the farcical 2005 grand prix and the race’s ultimate demise, Scott Speed unceremoniously leaving the sport to return to home, the loss of Montreal from the calendar… it has all painted a bad picture of Formula One on the other side of the Atlantic. From a fan’s perspective, it is surprising the sport is still watched in America. But watched it is, and although Formula One and the global economy have enjoyed better times, America appears to still want to be a part of Max and Bernie’s game.

Of course, Bernie Ecclestone would do very well to welcome the involvement of a tenth/eleventh team to the grid, bringing the number of competing drivers back up and reinstating his position as someone who can push the sport forward into the future, rather than kicking it when it is down. The logistics of setting up an F1 team are immense though, as are the still extortionate costs. With Max Mosley continually attempting to drive the financial burden down though, the mooted 2010 entry season for USF1 could be a good year for a team to enter.

The USF1 project appears to have been born from the mind of former Ligier and Onyx technical director Ken Anderson. After his stint in Formula One, Anderson returned to America and found much more success with the Chip Ganassi Racing and AJ Foyt Racing teams. Anderson went on to design chassis for the American open-wheel sport before turning his attention to the ever popular NASCAR series.

Also mooted to be involved with the team is Peter Windsor, a name more familiar with European fans due to his presence at grands prix and his reports in F1 Racing magazine. Windsor has been involved with Formula One for a long time, starting out initially as a journalist before working with Williams and Ferrari. Ultimately though, writing appears to be Windsor’s true passion and the Australian-raised Briton continues to write while carrying out duties for SPEED TVs coverage at the races. Peter is often seen on the grid and also conducts the driver’s post-qualifying and race press conferences.

So it would appear the people behind USF1 are of motor sporting pedigree. But despite this, many questions immediately come to the fore, primarily related to funding. With current teams strapped for cash and seeing some of their sponsors walk out the door, one has to ask where the initially injection of finances will come from to create the team, and after that, where the running budget will be sought?

The current trend of private Formula One teams would suggest a wealthy backer to inject a large lump sum into the squad to get things moving. Following this, sponsors would be needed to keep the finances required for the running of the team fluid. Being an American team, they may prove quite lucrative to the many internationally recognised companies based over the pond. Coca Cola and McDonalds are just two that immediately spring to mind, but would these behemoths be willing to part with the amounts of money USF1 would need to be competitive in a primarily European-based sport? Would the extra brand placement be enough to justify the costs?

Also of question is the team’s location. As mentioned, Formula One is more of a European racing series, with drivers often citing their route to the sport via other Europe-based formulae. There almost appears to be an invisible divide running down the Atlantic Ocean, with Formula One on the East and IndyCar and NASCAR on the West. IndyCar and NASCAR usually stay in America, only venturing North to Canada or over to Japan a handful of times a year. Formula One isn’t heading to America any time soon, but the emergence of USF1 could bring America to Europe.

The position of the team could prove problematic though. The current teams already pay quite a lot to travel around Europe and Asia, and despite receiving help with this (the team’s are awarded transport fee reductions for scoring points), the cost of transporting the team around the world is still substantial. And this is for a team based in the UK. For a squad having to cross the Atlantic for each event is borderline ridiculous. Of course, USF1 could lease a smaller factory in Europe to use as an in-season base, but this will only add to the budget.

Despite all the doom and gloom though, the thought of an American team entering the sport, even if just a little pipedreamish at the moment, is very exciting. It could help reinvigorate the sport around the world, improve competition and possibly even help Ecclestone along the way with returning the sport to North America for a race or two.

And so I am just left with one question which has already been very well pointed out grandprix.com… Why haven’t USF1 already purchased Honda?

Original article by BlogF1.

No Driver, No Race, But Could America Be Building A Team?

Ecclestone felt sure his idea would encourage overtaking as the world champion would be decided by the driver with the most gold medals (or in other words, the most wins). This, according to Bernie, means that drivers would be more willing to overtake as the difference between first and second place would be that little bit more crucial.

However, Mosley wasn’t so keen on the idea and after a little bit of debate where Ecclestone didn’t get his way, it was decided to defer any decision until after some market research had been completed. And this is where it does get a little confusing.

Almost immediately after Ecclestone failed to get his idea passed through the FIA’s approval process, the sport’s commercial rights holder put an article up on the official Formula One website (which Bernie controls) outlining the idea behind medals. Included at the bottom of the post was a voting poll, very similar to those you occasionally see here on BlogF1. It wasn’t labeled as official market research or anything similar, but at the time caused some furrowed brows while some us attempted to work out exactly where Bernie’s voting thingy fell in the grand scheme of things.

Little more happened over the holiday period and to be honest, most of us had hoped that the idea had been forgotten about. Alas, we are not quite that lucky and today the FIA has published some analysis. What is fantastic about what the FIA have published is that we can clearly see who would have won a championship with medals in comparison to who did win it with points. We can also see if a new driver would have been world champion or even different multiples of world champion had they raced under the medal system.

What it isn’t though is market research. And that is what I really want to read. It is all well and good getting an intern to sit down at a computer and run through all the championships applying Bernie’s scheme, but that doesn’t tell us what you, I or indeed the FIA want. For the record though, the statistics tell us that:

• Stirling Moss would have taken Mike Hawthorn’s title in 1958
• Jim Clark would have taken the ‘64 and ‘67 titles from John Surtees and Denny Hulme respectively
• Mario Andretti would have won the 1977 championship instead of Niki Lauda
• Alan Jones would have beaten Jody Scheckter in 1979
• Nelson Piquet would have lost all three of his titles, once to Nigel Mansell and twice to Alain Prost
• Didier Pironi would have been the 1982 champion and not Keke Rosberg
• Nigel Mansell would have been a triple world champion, winning Alain Prost second title in 1986 (before taking Piquet’s and his own)
• Ayrton Senna would have also stolen a title from his nemesis, Alain Prost
• And of course, Felipe Massa would have won in 2008, beating Lewis Hamilton

• Michael Schumacher would still be on 7 titles
• Juan Manuel Fangio would still be on 5 titles
• Alain Prost would have equaled Fangio’s record though
• Jim Clark and Ayrton Senna would each win 4 titles, two and one more than in reality
• Jack Brabham, Jackie Stewart and Nigel Mansell would each have won 3 titles

Also of note, 14 championship battles would have been shorter with medals, the eventual world champion having wrapped up the title sooner than they actually did under the points. 8 championships would have been longer and we would have lost 5 final race showdowns had the medal system been in place since 1950.

The full results can be downloaded from the FIA website, and while they do make for interesting reading to someone who enjoys statistics, I’m still eagerly awaiting the market research to see what you all think. Or at least, those who were asked. Presuming of course, some of you were asked…

Further Reading…

• FIA Press Release: Formula One Medals
• F1.com Article & Vote On Medals
• BlogF1 Championship Almanac
• So About These Medals…
• Are The FIA Seeing Sense Over The Medals?
• Public To Decide On Bernie’s Medal Idea?

Original article by BlogF1.

Is This Market Research Into Bernie’s Medal Idea?

The era of big change is now essential because the sport has grown larger than either the governors or the commercial-rights holders. And that’s just a fact. It has taken too long to achieve the things it should have achieved years ago and that other sports have long ago matured to, and other sports have prepared themselves more fully for the opportunities that have come their way. Jackie Stewart.

Jackie Stewart clearly believes that all the changes the FIA are now rushing through in an act of almost desperation should have been in place years ago, making a smoother and better planned journey into the future. The Scottish champion also believes that Bernie Ecclestone controls too much power over the sport.

Bernie has such power and influence that he could suffocate almost any performer who would dare to suggest that there must be change.

He [Ecclestone] has been so used to total control that if you look at his structure you have to ask yourself ‘is there a successor?’ and you would say ‘no’. That is wrong. The commercial reality has to be recognised… and there has be continuity that the aging process makes necessary. Jackie Stewart.

Ecclestone is now 78 years of age, and Jackie Stewart is right to ask about the future of the sport and it’s commercial aspects. While Max Mosley has hinted that he will not run for president again when his current term expires in 2009, there is no obvious structure to Ecclestone’s side of the sport. What would happen if Ecclestone could no longer function in his current role? Presumably CVC would appoint someone, but is that the best thing for Formula One?

Last month Ferrari president Luca Di Montezemolo attacked Ecclestone saying that the way the revenues are distributed needs looking at again, which in turn caused Bernie to fire back and admit that Ferrari get more than the other teams when they win the titles. Now, following on from this, Stewart has decided to back Di Montezemolo and ask for change.

The financial distribution of Formula One appears to have been sorted out by two people who have directed it in whichever way they have seen fit. Although this has been a significant benefit in some ways, it has also hurt the sport because the balance of contribution within Formula One is absolutely untenable. Jackie Stewart.

Stewart went on to also mention the fact that the circuits see little to nothing of the revenues, and all they have to re-invest with are the sales of tickets. It is no wonder that many tracks are struggling in the current economic climate.

The interview conducted by The Times is likely something Stewart has wanted for a while. The Times don’t often back Formula One chiefs, certainly not after Mosley tried to take Martin Brundle to court of the use of the word “witch-hunt” in an article of his. But what Stewart speaks of is certainly true, if perhaps not the best way to put your views forward.

Ecclestone will undoubtedly have to respond to Stewart, and it will be interesting if anything else comes of the cupboard, as did last time when Bernie rebutted Di Montezemolo. However, with Stewart being only indirectly involved with Formula One now, it is hard to see how his voice can be silenced.

Original article by BlogF1.

Jackie Stewart Slams Bernie Ecclestone

However, it isn’t always that black and white with Mosley, and recently the embattled Briton has hinted that he will not give a definite answer to the question of running again until mid-2009, just a few months prior to the end of his term. While speaking with Formula One’s official website, Mosley suggested that any potential successor should “think very carefully before standing for election”.

A great deal of patience [is needed] and ideally an ability to understand quickly a great variety of technical and legal issues. I would advise a potential successor to think very carefully before standing for election. [...]

The difficulty is finding somebody who has the necessary experience, but also the time and inclination to do the job. You mention Nick Craw. He is the president of ACCUS, which controls all the different forms of racing in the United States. With all this to contend with, he is probably not exactly looking for work. Max Mosley.

Is Max being very open and honest here, or is this a warning to anyone who might be thinking of putting themselves forward for the role? With Max, as I said before, it isn’t always black and white.

If Mosley were to stand again, it would no doubt be because of the instability currently facing the sport, and that there are many changes happening which Mosley will need to see through. Which to a degree is accurate, but taking this stance means that the presidency will never change hands; there is always going to be something happening, otherwise the job of the president is moot.

Alternatively, I can see Mosley citing the many people who write to him all the time expressing their wishes for himself to continue as president. When Max’s position came under question earlier in the year, the barrister claimed that he had received many letters asking him to not stand down and to continue as president. These letters never saw the light of day, nor do we know who sent them. But if there are people within the FIA who are keen to see Mosley carry on, I wouldn’t put it past Max to cite this as good enough reason to run for re-election.

The bottom line is that I feel the FIA needs a new president. Change can be good, and although Mosley has contributed many a great thing to both the sports that come under the FIA’s control and the general motoring industry, he also been criticised for his draconian approach and implementing ideas without much thought or common sense used.

Admittedly, this does appear to be changing though. Mosley has expressed a desire for the FIA to become more transparent, and a shake-up in the stewarding process at grands prix is a good start. When asked by F1.com about the planned changes to the stewarding process, Mosley had the following to say:

This change was prompted because people were criticising the stewards’ decisions without having the information which the stewards had. The obvious way to deal with this is to make that information generally available. Once people understand why a decision was made, they will be less likely to disagree with it and any criticism will be informed rather than uninformed. Max Mosley.

Unfortunately, Mosley then ruined it by suggesting the following when asked about what he thought his greatest disappointment was from his tenure as president:

The greatest disappointment has been the tendency of some fans to criticise without understanding what we are trying to do. Max Mosley.

Perhaps, as Mosley has already stated, the reason why the criticism occurs is because we fans are generally kept in the dark. When we have little-to-no information, we have to resort to common sense to understand why something has happened. And recently, common sense has suggested that the FIA and the stewards (to continue the theme, but there are many others) are ridiculously ill-informed about the rule book and general racing etiquette.

At the end of the day, I wouldn’t be surprised if Mosley ran again. I see his statement as a warning to others who may be considering running for president, and I can see a whole slew of excuses coming out next June or July attempting to reason why Mosley should continue for a fifth term.

Original article by BlogF1.

Max Mosley Doesn’t Know If He’s Coming Or Going

Grandprix.com have an article up today suggesting a similar theory – apparently it’s doing the rounds in the Japanese paddock at the moment. They are suggesting that Jean Todt will resign from Ferrari altogether at the end of the month and take up a new role in the FIA soon after. Combined with the recent announcement that Marco Piccinini will stand down as the Deputy President in November, certain puzzle pieces seem to be falling a certain way.

However, there are many cats who could stir the pigeons, most notable of which is Mosley himself. Last year, Max had said that he intended to step down as president at the end of his term, but after everything that happened in April and May, it seems the ageing Briton has a new spring in his step and Mosley recently suggested he isn’t absolutely certain of what will happen in 2009. If Max were to stay though (and of course only at the urge of all these nameless people who write to him all the time), then it will likely be another four years before any change will happen. However, if Max were to be organising a way for him to get what he wants, then I can see Mosley stepping aside into a newly created position of power in the background.

Of course, the president is elected by the member organisations, but if only one man stands, and Mosley decides he doesn’t want to continue, then the vote is worthless. And currently, it seems to only be Todt who is being suggested as a possible successor. I had mooted a few other names previously, and Piccinini was one that kept constant in my mind. But with the Italian out of the picture and all others seemingly not bothering to show their hand, Mosley may be about to get his way. After all, Max has already offered his support to Todt should he wish to stand.

However, if Jean Todt were to become the next president of the FIA, then there will be an outcry from fans. Clearly the Frenchman has kept himself away from the media, toiling away in the background of the Ferrari company, but he will always be known as the man who helped orchestrate the rise in dominance of the Scuderia in the mid-nineties. And with Mosley himself feeling the need to defend the rumours that the FIA are biased towards the very same company, I can see the fans and team owners getting seriously annoyed.

Original article by BlogF1.

Is Jean Todt Preparing Himself For FIA Presidency?

Currently, there are three stewards at each grand prix, and they vary from event to event. In the past, the sport was overseen by a permanent steward – Tony Scott Andrews – but 2008 has seen the new rotational system, designed to eradicate any chance of bias towards a particular team or driver. However, it is the people who advise the stewards that have perhaps inadvertently caused a lot of the controversies recently, notably Alan Donnelly – a close associate of the FIA president – and race director Charlie Whiting.

Mosley would like to see four stewards at each race, but many Formula One employees and former-employees would rather see a permanent steward; the idea being that one person at each event will see more consistent rulings. A lot of the fans don’t really mind what punishment their driver gets, as long as it is the same as another driver, who infringes the same rule, gets the same punishment. This hasn’t really happened recently and the very people who keep the sport ticking over have been littering the blogs and forums for about a month now, airing their disgust at the FIA.

So to answer my question; are there changes on the way for stewards? Unlikely. It’s just seems that there will be another voice in the mix, adding to the time it takes to reach an agreement, delaying the penalty and potentially the race result even further. Nice one Max!

Original article by BlogF1.

Are There Changes On The Way For Race Stewards?

During the Friday driver’s briefing at Monza, Race Director Charlie Whiting clarified with the pilots what they should do in the event that one of them skips a corner, just like how Hamilton did at Spa Francorchamps less than a week previous. Whiting stated that the drivers should return the position, if gained, to the other driver and wait at least one more corner before attacking again. This way, Whiting believes there can be no argument about possible advantages.

Mark Webber, a GPDA director, welcomed the clarification as he felt the rules were too vague previously. Speaking to Autosport, Webber had the following to say:

We are still trying to find a solution for the second chicane here, because we still think there is a way to roll through there. But generally, it is pretty clear for people to probably not attack immediately again, which wasn’t mega, mega clear in the past. Mark Webber.

Also speaking out today was the FIA’s president, Max Mosley. Max came to the defence of the FIA after certain members of the media (and some of the sport’s fans) have lashed out against the organisation, stating that the FIA are biased towards Ferrari and are trying to prevent McLaren from winning the titles. The feeling of contempt among the fans goes back quite a long way, and in the sport’s more recent past, certain decisions do appear to have helped the red cars. However, Mosley was adamant that the FIA are unbiased and do not get involved with the championship battles.

Any suggestion there is a bias for or against any team or driver is completely untrue, absolutely not. I think it’s a reflection, and I’m sorry to say this, of the stupidity of the people who say it because they haven’t really thought the thing through and put themselves in the position of the people who have to take these very difficult decisions. Max Mosley.

Max then praised Lewis Hamilton for his outstanding driving this year, and went on to say that he thinks Hamilton will make a very good world champion. The FIA president reiterated that the governing body will remain completely neutral and they will not help or hinder any party.

Interestingly, Max then went on to talk about his future as the president of the FIA. Of course, Mosley has been through a lot this year, and all of which was entirely his fault, despite the man’s pleas to the media. However, Max’s activities away from the office put immense pressure on the 68 year old to resign his presidency. Alas, Mosley did not and now a few months have past, it is clear he is once again feeling relaxed in front of the cameras.

But it was during this ’saga’ that Mosley announced he would not stand again. While it wasn’t an official announcement, Mosley did mention that he had been thinking about standing again next year when his term is up, but ultimately decided not to. However…

I have to say there is an awful lot of pressure coming from different parts of the world saying ‘continue’, which is very nice of them, and is very widespread, I have to say that. But it’s very hard work and I am really quite ready to take a less active role … There comes a point with that sort of thing where you think maybe a slightly quieter life would be ideal, but we shall see.

You can’t rule anything out. No. You should never say never, as the old cliche goes. But at the moment my inclination is that I would like a quiet life. Max Mosley.

Max has changed his mind over running again more times than I care to remember, but I honestly thought (although I did say I wouldn’t be surprised if I was wrong) that Mosley would not stand again and quietly disappear into the background. Maybe Max is just playing some games with the press, maybe he is seriously considering his decision again… who knows? I don’t believe Mosley would run again, and I firmly believe it is time for someone else to preside over the FIA, but Mosley never ceases to amaze me, mostly for the wrong reasons.

Original article by BlogF1.

The FIA Attempt To Clear The Air

The News Of The World had published photographs and a video extract on it’s website on the day of publication, and the story took up a lot of space within the printed paper. In the text, the paper claimed Mosley had introduced Nazi overtones to the orgy through role-playing, and Mosley decided to fight his case on grounds of privacy invasion, saying the episode had destroyed his life.

Since that spring-Sunday, Mosley has been forced to fight for his position as president of the FIA, deal with the general backlash from Formula One employees, fans and general opinion from the public, as well as deal with his relationships with other authoriative sporting people and of course, his own family. However, Mosley was always adament that despite his family’s history, there were no Nazi overtones to his actions.

I found that there was no evidence that the gathering on March 28 2008 was intended to be an enactment of Nazi behaviour or adoption of any of its attitudes. Nor was it in fact. I see no genuine basis at all for the suggestion that the participants mocked the victims of the Holocaust.

Of course, I accept that such [S&M] behaviour is viewed by some people with distaste and moral disapproval, but in the light of modern rights-based jurisprudence that does not provide any justification for the intrusion on the personal privacy of the claimant. Mr. Justice Eady, presiding judge.

Mosley has won £60,000, which he promised to the FIA a while ago, and the News Of The World will have to pay costs, believed to be around £1m.

Of course, this now pretty much puts an end to the saga that has dragged on for a few months now, and while Mosley has been embarrassed and caused embarrassment, he can now go about re-focusing his efforts on his job. Whether or not that is a good or bad thing is not entirely relevant to this article, but suffice to say that Mosley will remain president until the end of term, unless something else happens in the mean-time.

Original article by BlogF1.

Max Mosley Wins Case Against News Of The World

The article essentially uses one piece of evidence for its arguement, but to be fair, it is quite a compelling piece of evidence; it comes from the words written by FIA themselves. The Federation has statutes by which it must comply – these are a list of rules and they are published on their website to the public domain. Here’s the part that Sylt and his team noted, and then questioned.

The World Motor Sport Council shall consist of :

• the President of the FIA;
• the Deputy President;
• the 7 Vice-Presidents;
• the 17 Members;

a total of 26 Members who, with the exception of the President of the FIA, must represent an ASN having at least one event entered on the International Sporting Calendar of the current year, of whom 21, with the exception of the President, the Deputy President and the 3 Members by right, shall be of different nationalities. FIA Statutes, Article 14.

ASN stands for Association Sportif Nationale; the national association of motor sport. So, which national bodies do you think Ecclestone and Todt are in charge of? They’re not, and for Bernie it would be a conflict of interest if he were as he often negiotiates with these associations when he deals with the grands prix. And this is why Pitpass feel the decision made on 13th September, 2007, and also other decisions that have been recently made by the WMSC, are void.

Whether or not their story will be noticed or dealt with is another matter, but what it does show is that the FIA are not squeaky-clean as they might want us to believe. To be fair, Formula One fans have known that for a long time, and the recent saga to embroil the Federation (specifically, its president) only further highlights that. It would seem silly to suggest that the FIA did not know their own rules, it would be even sillier to suggest, as Pitpass do, that the FIA may have made a typo. It seems perfectly reasonable, to me at least, that the FIA wanted Ecclestone and Todt on the council, and to them, rules are there to be broken.

Isn’t it is about time the FIA were fined $100m for bringing the sport into disrepute?

Original article by BlogF1.

Should The FIA Be Allowed To Break Their Own Rules?

Oh yes, you heard me correctly: Max Mosley, in his letter which has been published on the FIA’s offical website and available as a downloadable PDF, clearly states that teams may submit detailed proposals, which can then be discussed and possibly turned into rules that will enable many of the FIA’s objectives while giving the team’s some lee-way on how it is done.

Here’s the majority of the letter…

Formula One is becoming unsustainable. The major manufacturers are currently employing up to 1000 people to put two cars on the grid. This is clearly unacceptable at a time when all these companies are facing difficult market conditions.

Also, with attention on energy problems world-wide, Formula One cannot afford to be profligate in its use of fuel. Indeed, without the KERS initiative, some major sponsors might already have left.

The FIA is therefore inviting the teams to make proposals

• to reduce current levels of expenditure. New rules must ensure that the costs of the manufacturer teams come down by at least 50% and that the independent teams become financially viable. Both must be done without affecting the spectacle in any
  way;
• to extract more useful energy from less fuel. The target should be a (very challenging) 50% reduction from today’s levels of fuel consumption by 2015, while maintaining current speeds. The rules should encourage manufacturer teams to research technologies which are road-relevant rather than Formula One-specific;
• to improve the racing, including rules to ensure that cars remain aerodynamically efficient when in close proximity to one another.

The matter is now urgent. We need proposals which we can turn into detailed rules. These must be ready within three months and have the support of at least a majority of the teams, failing which the FIA will itself prepare new rules for 2011.

Mosley has detailed his proposals further by asking the teams to devise ways to achieve the following:

Cost Reductions

Mosley suggested budget caps, and has left it up to the teams to decide among themselves what this should be if chosen. However, he has stated that this must allow “a back-of-the-grid independent team to operate profitably”. Also, the manufacturers could offer independant teams the use of their drive-trains (and associated energy-saving technology) and Mosley hinted at a price of around €2m per year. Mosley went on to say that shared technology would be welcomed if it helped, but the “reduce[d] costs must not affect the spectacle in any way”.

Fuel Efficiency

Mosley wants a “20% reduction in fuel consumption for 2011 progressing to 50% in 2015, while keeping lap times and top speeds at current levels.” Mosley has suggested that limiting fuel flow and the total amount used during races would be a good way to control this, and has also asked the teams to develop more energy-efficient technologies for use in the sport and in the general motoring industry.

Improved Racing

Mosley’s final point is, to be frank, quite funny. In his letter he gets into quite specific things, especially regarding the KERS device. However, when it comes to improving the racing, he leaves it at just one paragraph. In essence, his text states that he wants the cars to run in close proximity to one another to better enable overtaking. Mosley offers no suggestions on this, and again opens his letter up for invitations on how this could be achieved.

So, either Mosley is stuck for ideas or he has hired a very clever PR company and is in the process of rebranding himself. Either way, the rules do require attention for beyond 2009 and despite Max trying to make himself appear more open, he is still being very specific about a number of things, KERS for example. Perhaps he’s just asserting his authority over the sport, albeit in a more friendly manner.

Anyway, as Max is being open to ideas from the teams, why not the fans?

Have Your Say…

Readers of BlogF1, get your thinking caps on and add your suggestions for the 2011 rules here, be they new rules, updates to existing rules or way in which Max can achieve his dream of a lean, green Formula One machine. Or something entirely different. As ever, comments are open…

Original article by BlogF1.

Max Mosley Talks About The Rules, Politely

The drivers say they were not consulted on the changes and as previously reported on BlogF1, the reasons for the sudden and dramatic hike were not fully explained. There had been rumours of a strike at the British Grand Prix in July, and while GPDA director Fernando Alonso believes a strike may be a possibility, Robert Kubica is under the impression it won’t come to that and Kimi Raikkonen would prefer to find a more diplomatic solution.

It is a very serious matter, and we were talking about [the] superlicence price in the last couple of GPDA meetings. It has to be agreed between us, and we all agree that it is not fair that from one year to the next it increases 500-600 percent.

It is something we need to look at, and I don’t know what will be the solution and what will be our effort, but if there is a strike in Silverstone then maybe it is one possibility. Fernando Alonso.

For sure I support the thing. I don’t think there is any reason for us to go on strike and not race. A strike is never going to happen, that all the drivers will do it, so hopefully some nice solution will be found someway. Kimi Raikkonen.

According to Autosport, Max Mosley had said at the start of the year the increase in fees was down to trying to avoid huge costs for young drivers just entering the sport. I must have missed this quote, but if we take this as accurate, young McLaren driver Lewis Hamilton has faced a pretty steep bill for his debut 2007 campaign.

Mark Webber, another GPDA director, has also gone on record to Autosport, stating that he agrees with his fellow drivers and finds the costs high, but also quelled any possibility of a strike at Silverstone.

It’s absolutely clear that we are not happy with the superlicence situation and how much they charge, but I find it very unrealistic that we won’t race. We should just have a chat with Bernie. He’s got common sense, and we should see what he says. Let’s see if we can improve the situation and make it a bit more professional. Mark Webber.

While I agree with Webber that discussions are the way forward at the moment, I don’t fully understand where Ecclestone comes into it. Relationships between Ecclestone and Mosley are probably not the best at the moment, and this issue doesn’t directly involve the sport’s commerical rights holder.

Either way, Max Mosley has said that he will make himself available for talks should the drivers want and Webber is confident that some kind of compromise can be found in the coming weeks.

Original article by BlogF1.

Super License Causing Anger Among Drivers

It really does seem as though McLaren are getting a similar treatment to the men under the Duke of York’s command.

The Grand Old Duke Of York
The grand old Duke of York,
He had ten thousand men.
He marched them up to the top of the hill
And he marched them down again.

And when they were up, they were up;
And when they were down, they were down.
But when they were only halfway up,
They were neither up nor down!

When Bernie allowed McLaren to be in garage five, next door to Red Bull, Mosley stated he had received a complaint and requested Ecclestone to follow his own rules and move them back down. Bernie duly obliged and McLaren were relegated to the bottom with Super Aguri and Force India. However, in Monaco it would appear that McLaren were back in the middle of the pack. I honestly can’t say that I noticed, but apparently that is where they were, and where they are staying.

McLaren are setting up their garage in number five at Circuit Gilles Vileneuve this weekend, but nobody has given any real solid reason as to why this has happened. Ecclestone laughed off the question by jokingly saying it was ‘a mistake’, and it is perfectly possible that McLaren were allowed to be in number five for Monaco due to space reasons. But to hold the garage for the rest of the season? Perhaps this is a subtle way of Bernie sticking two fingers up at Max in the wake of everything that has happened recently? Maybe some money has passed between accounts? Maybe Bernie is going a bit senile in his old age? Who knows, but I’m sure it’ll all change again for the French Grand Prix.

Grand Old Duke Of York – Source and information.

Original article by BlogF1.

McLaren Get Grand Old Duke Of York Treatment

At Tuesday’s Extraordinary General Meeting, Mosley received a vote of confidence from 103 member clubs of the FIA, and therefore remained as president. However, since Tuesday a number of people within Formula One and the national motoring bodies have called for Max to stand down. Even Bernie Ecclestone has reiterated his stance on the issue, saying that Mosley may not be able to fulfil his duties effectively if those who are against him maintain their position.

It’s going to be difficult for him to act as a president of the FIA if the people who said before that they don’t want to meet with him maintain that position. Bernie Ecclestone.

Luca di Montezemolo spoke to Italian news agency ANSA earlier today and said that sometimes it is just better to simply leave.

I believe he himself should understand that at times it is necessary to say ‘I must leave the place for reasons of credibility’. Luca di Montezemolo.

Montezemolo has praised Mosley for his achievements as president of the organisation, but also understands that, for the better of Mosley’s reputation, he should probably resign his position. To reiterate this though is a little strange. di Montezemolo is normally the kind of person who will say his piece, put his thoughts out there, and then let everyone make an informed decision. Everyone usually being the FIA, the decision perhaps being as informed as Luca would like it to be.

However, to stress his point again leads me to think that Ferrari will gain from Mosley leaving. It is no secret that Jean Todt has been given the all-clear to run as president at the end of Mosley’s term, when he will supposedly stand down for definite. Of course, nothing is definite in Mosley’s world, but the approval from Max suggests that the former Ferrari team principal is a front-runner for the next president. Could it be that di Montezemolo is simply trying to accelerate the process?

Update: Luca di Montezemolo has since clarified his position on the Max Mosley saga. di Montezemolo said that he was pleased Max had received a vote of confidence and said it was up to Mosley himself to decide when he should step down.

I am happy that Max Mosley has been re-elected president of FIA. He has done excellent work for Formula 1 in recent years. With regard to the future, it will be entirely up to him to decide if and when he should take a step back. Luca di Montezemolo.

Original article by BlogF1.

Luca Di Montezemolo Thinks Mosley Should Leave