Tous Avec Jules #17
Sochi 2014
Russian Grand Prix
F1 fails to find “sustainable” cost control measures
News
XPB.cc
Posted By: James Allen  |  26 Jun 2014   |  7:28 pm GMT  |  217 comments

The small and medium sized F1 teams tried to get meaningful cost control measures introduced for 2015, what one team boss called “sustainable”. But today, the deadline for making rule changes for 2015, the FIA World Motor Sport Council in Munich voted through a modest bill of savings.

These came mostly via restrictions on testing and wing tunnel time and a reduction of the number of engines each driver may use in a season from five to four. They will save some money, but nothing like what was promised.

Furthermore the deadline for changes to the next year’s regulations is now March 1, rather than June 30.

The WMSC also rubber stamped the introduction of standing starts for GP restarts (with some restrictions) which will mean that F1 audiences may get to see the most exciting part of a race several times at some events.

The cars will also now be in parc ferme from Saturday morning’s FP3 onwards, rather than from the start of qualifying.

The budget cap for 2015 announced after a meeting of the F1 Strategy Group and the F1 Commission in Paris on December 9th has not materialised, blocked by the more wealthy teams on the F1 Strategy Group.

There are always rumours about F1 teams being “close to the edge” financially and in Austria these were again being aired with as many as four teams considered under pressure.

Speaking in Austria, Sauber team boss Monisha Kaltenborn said, “There was a decision taken last year by the (World Motor Sport) Council in which they endorsed cost-cutting as a target and they also agreed in principle to the cost cap and the FIA was mandated to implement that.

“Since then other decisions have been taken by other groups going in a different direction. Following that amongst other teams, ours as well, the non-Strategy Group teams I’d say were asked to bring proposals in about how you can achieve a sustainable cost base while still promoting competition. We did that, we also didn’t get anywhere on that.

“I really wonder what the FIA is now going to do and how Formula One is going to be governed in this respect.”

XPB.cc

Red Bull boss Christian Horner countered,

“I think what’s important to say is that everything that was agreed in the Formula One Commission meeting earlier this week was agreed unanimously. That means every team was around the table and every team had the right to vote against it but everything that went through went through on a unanimous basis. We’ve got what we’ve got.”

While Mercedes’ Toto Wolff had this perspective,

“We need to make sure that Christian is not running away with the costs. Christian needs to make sure that Ferrari is not running away with the costs. This is why we are all in favour, but it is a tricky thing and it’s difficult to get everybody under one umbrella.

“So I guess that what we have done for next year in reducing the in-season testing again, probably to even less the following year. We came back to Europe. All these are sensible steps and this must be on our constant agenda to further reduce the costs.”

As for the safety car standing restarts, there are some restrictions – standing starts will not be carried out if the Safety Car is used within two laps of the start (or restart) of a race or if there are less than five laps of the race remaining.

XPB.cc

However there is no mention of a cap on the number restarts in a single race. At some races we have seen as many as three safety car periods, so that could make for interesting, if slightly confusing, viewing.

Testing is cut back but there is a requirement to give young drivers seat time,

There will be three pre-season tests of four days each in Europe in 2015 (currently teams are able to test outside Europe). This will be reduced to two tests of four days in 2016. There will be two in-season tests of two days each in Europe (instead of the current four). Two of these four days must be reserved for young drivers.

Featured News
MORE FROM JA ON F1...
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:
217 Comments
  1. Paddy says:

    What surprise… The sport is doomed…

    1. Sebee says:

      It’s not doomed if they were spending these hundreds of millions on something that was F1.

      Instead they spent it on a 100kg ERS system that takes up the place of 50kg of fuel. They spent it on silent cars which don’t have good brakes, sound pathetic and have penile implants in a nose.

      They basically made cars we used to dream about driving into cars we laugh at and point at. We’re past 7 races and I still laugh every GP in disbelief. That this result cost so much more that 2013 is why the sport is doomed. Flavio is right. F1 has turned drivers into accounts who drive F1 cars at GP2 speeds.

      Bernie, bring on the sprinklers! It’s the only thing that’s left to do to improve F1.

      1. manonwheels says:

        Cars never looked more interesting than in the 70s and 80s, when there was a huge variety of designs, now the cars have got some design variety back, and if it’s just for those blokes like you that they’ll unnecessarily change the rules once again to make every car look the same again, which is, quite frankly, boring.
        Thank you for that.

      2. the_rh1no says:

        Great comment, I have no problem with how the cars look, its quite nice to see some change!

      3. Sebee says:

        I see a Caterham CT05 every time I go to wee. I don’t need to see it painted in green in high def scaring the female viewers every second weekend. If F1 would have gone to 3D broadcasts in 2014 it would all be X-rated.

        If you think that’s interesting then to you I say, to each his own. Expensive big sports cars do try to make up for “lack of manhood” they say. I guess F1 2014 design crop has taken it literally. Thank goodness for this Mercedes, it’s the only decent looking thing on the grid. At least they don’t lack in the manhood department, I give them that. Red Bull at least had the decency to put a Speedo on their unit.

        By the way, interesting doesn’t mean awesome or desireable or beautiful. It doesn’t meen “hey, I’d love to have one of those”. It means, hey, look at that giant growth on the back of that guy’s neck…interesting.

      4. T Nelan says:

        Totally agree!
        Who would’ve thought you’d have to listen carefully to hear an F1 car drive past, but that’s the way it is at the moment. F1 has been neutered.

        Drivers coasting as they approach a corner in order to save fuel… don’t tell me that’s part of the spectacle. I don’t tune in to watch that, I can do that myself in my Toyota Starlet. I tune in to SEE drivers driving cars in a way I know I never could. Instead, I’m told that I should appreciate that a driver is doing a great in conserving his fuel. Really, who tunes in to see that, because you can’t SEE it and there’s nothing spectacular about it.

        Why the emphasis on making F1 cars so efficient on fuel, even at the expense of the racing? If it’s a “give something back to society” arguement, it fails, because every road car company in the world already has teams of people chasing that goal, F1 doesn’t need to be so zealous to the point of self-destruction about it.

        Reducing the number of engines available will only mean that drivers will be more likely than ever to retire the car as a precaution. Great job there everyone.

        F1 has gone from the pinnacle of motorsport to the pinnacle of motorsport pandering to the lowest common denominator. Just make the drivers do X Factor and be done with it.

      5. Sebee says:

        T, I think I speak for everyone when I say off season sing-off between Lewis and Kimi may be more interesting than this formula.

        Oh look…Lewis used 1.73kg of fuel less than Nico. Amazing. Is that why he’s P2 in this race? :-)

      6. Steve Zodiac says:

        Umm? Improve the show?I know lets cut out fridays, lets cut test days, lets cut fuel, lets make the cars nice and quiet so that the audiences can sleep, lets put it on pay TV to stop less well off people from watching, oh and just for good measure lets do the “Pinnacle of motorsport” for a couple of hundred quid a year!

        ps and the world champ can be the driver who gets his engine to last all season.

        Umm, haven’t really been too fussed to watch this year and when they add sparks and standing re-starts next year perhaps it’s time to give up all together.

        If you want make F1 more interesting free up the rules and let teams innovate that way less well off teams have a chance to pull something dramatic off like Colin Chapman did on more than one occasion. It is the tight rules that are making F1 so expensive.

      7. mitchw says:

        I get a sardonic kick out of listening to F1 people pretend that IT IS THEY who are bringing efficiency to THE FUTURE. How about them over there in WEC with their multiple solutions to efficiency competing against each other? Eh? How about all the pedestrian car makers having teams of people forced by regulations into using less CO2 every year? Does no consciousness of that exist on inward facing planet F1? Does F1 not see itself making a mockery of itself?

        Don’t even get me started on the homologation rule hamstringing two out of the three power plant suppliers. I suppose I’m to happily wait for real F1 development competition until 2015, and just lap up the DUEL OF 2014 between the Merc drivers.

        I cannot get enough. Wait, yes I can

      8. Azza says:

        I 100% agree with Sebee, well said mate.

      9. Nickh says:

        I agree with Sebee, they’ve gone in totally the wrong direction and it was absolutely unnecessary. I’m not really bothered about going to any races with these current specs and regs.

    2. Satish says:

      Makes me wonder why the heck F1 needs the FIA, a governing body that has become toothless since Todt the [mod] Invisible Man became president.

      If the rich teams are going to run amok, let them do so without the FIA’s rubber stamp.

      If the FIA cares about reasonably fair competition and survival of the non-manufacturer teams, then for God’s sake it should not get cornered into voting schemes that give it virtually no say in the proceeding.

      This is all a sham!

      1. SteveH says:

        More than that, it’s a travesty of a mockery of a sham.

    3. littleredkelpie says:

      The sport IS doomed. I made a comment in another JA F1 article just 5 minutes ago about chasing the youth and one likely consequence of that demographics ever shortening attention span, that being, a race meeting made up of ridiculously short sprints. Lo and behold … it is already on the table … a race made up of shorter sprints brought about by ‘safety car’.

      What a joke.

    4. Phil McWilliam says:

      Patrick Head summed it up, they could easily provide 800hp engines (which would sound 800 times better) for £2m a year and instead F1 decided to become saviours of the planet with a rediculous engine formula that no-one seems to like that is costing teams in the region of £20m a year.
      In the same breath the sport keeps droning on about the need to cut costs. It does make you wonder about the intelligence of the people in charge………

    5. I know says:

      F1 annual revenue is in the region of $1.5b, mostly from broadcasting rights, track fees, and series-wide sponsorship deals.

      If 200m were used to promote and organise the series, $1.2b were distributed equally among all point-scoring teams, and the remaining 100m among all non-point scoring teams (that reach some minimum performance minimum criterion), most teams would have a guaranteed budget of more than 100m. Sponsorship money that the team get individually would come on top of that and would still act as a differentiator. However, all teams would be competitive, so even individual team sponsorship would be more balanced.

      Of course, right now, the commercial rights holder is by far the richest “team” in F1 – the top constructors get around $100m of shared revenue, but the ones at the bottom receive less than half of that.

      Real change will only happen when the commercial arrangement changes. Everything else is just gimmicks.

  2. RichB says:

    Just when I thought they wouldn’t dare come up with an idea as stupid as the double points, standing restart are somehow approved.

    Screw it, lets have Bernie’s medals idea, Max Mosley’s driver’s drive each car and they start each race in reverse championship order.

    Then it really will be Formula Farce

    1. Spyros says:

      Don’t forget the sprinklers… please.

      1. Phil says:

        And at each race, one car, secretly chosen at random, has a potato rammed up the exhaust while in parc ferme…

        Actually, I think the FIA have been trialing this idea with Sebastien Vettel’s car at a few races this year.

    2. Andrew says:

      I see nothing wrong in them having each driver drive each car during the season. For me that would produce a champion who could genuinely claim to be the best driver and it wouldn’t really change the winning constructor.

      If certain drivers can only drive a car with particular handling characteristics then they would be found out.

      You would have mixed up grids and it would be a test of overtaking and the ability to keep your nose clean in midfield when battling for 10th place. Every point would count and grabbing a point or 2 in a mid field car could make all the difference for the championship. There could be 5 or 6 drivers in contention for the championship with a couple of races to go.

      Also, you wouldn’t have the same 2 drivers or driver dominating every week because they have the best car. So you wouldn’t need so many gimmicks as each race would be more interesting. You also wouldn’t have a driver being champion because he has easily the best car and has loads of second places whilst his team mate has won more races but had more reliability problems.

      You could also have automatic promotion and relegation so that the GP2 champion and World Series by Renault automatically get a year in F1 whilst the bottom two are relegated.

      This would also help the small teams to get more sponsors as they would have more tv coverage when the championship leaders are in their cars.

      For me this would be the perfect F1.

      1. RichB says:

        so nothing at all like the F1 we have today, or any other racing series, each to their own I guess.

    3. Rob says:

      Here it is, F1 has finally reached its ‘jump the shark’ moment. For me it’s not the standing re-start – that’s a genuinely anti-safety step that speaks more of lunacy than spectacle – but the titanium skids. “because it’s cool.” sparks.

      What we have just witnessed is the modern sport becoming a caricature of itself. Trying to outdo itself in order to capture more ad dollars in a declining market.

      F1 is the only motorsport that I have watched since 1990. Nothing else seemed to measure up to the human and technology drama. Yes, the early naughts were spotty, but we have had some cracking racing since.

      What’s missing now? Competition and development. This freeze thing is ridiculous. I like the new engine formula, it’s high tech. I would prefer fatter tires and less aero, but engineers don’t unlearn things, so aero is forevermore key. I can live with that.

      Costs. Teams. Development = more costs = less teams. That seems to be the pundits’ equation nowadays.

      OK, so let’s fork F1. The F1DC can be a spec series where only setup and drivers make the difference. Take last year’s F1 winning car and build it for a bunch of drivers. You’ll get your close racing and driver to driver comparisons. You can cost cap that forever, not nearly as difficult. Then, F1-CC can be a constructor series, more like today, each team must build a unique chassis. No cap. Costs a bloody fortune to join. Only the brave and foolhardy do it.

      Then, let’s see which drivers covet which series. And then, where non-Ferrari teams go.

      They could even run both classes concurrently, like LMP run multi class races.

      Yeah, that would kill F1. But at least it would be a quick and shocking death.

      Watching F1 go slowly senile is a lot more gut-wrenching, and I am growing tired of babysitting it on alternate Sundays.

  3. Gaz Boy says:

    Three words.
    What a surprise………….
    Having said that, I suppose it’s inevitable. Human beings are not cut out for unanimity! That’s true if you’re a racing driver, a team owner or spectator. whatever. I know we’re supposed to be concerned for the greater good……………but at the end of the day, as Jeremy Clarkson says aren’t we all Thatcher’s children and we put No.1 first – ourselves?
    I’m not saying it’s right or wrong with F1 at the moment. What I am saying is F1 is a reflection of Western society and the pervasive free-market capitalism and all it’s benefits and flaws. Western societies main doctrine is the primacy of the individual and the sports that reflects the world, Formula 1, football, tennis, et al sort of reflect that?
    Sorry to be negative folks, but having watched F1 for 20 odd years I cannot once remember the teams ever collectively agreeing anything for the greater good of F1!
    Yes, good old British cynicism……………but there is a reason for it!

    1. Gaz Boy says:

      PS Glad to see clutch starts mandated for a re-start.
      Safety car and rolling starts are too dreary. Clutch starts offer a better spectacle!

      1. Dave P says:

        As always these things are anounced with out any thought on the consequences… How long willit take for each restart? The teams will want to bring out their equipment, tyre blankets, etc.. more costs (when they want tosave money) time…. We will ose 15 mins each re-start.. 4 restarts half the race gone…then therewill be complaints from drivers that it took them ages toget the tyres warmed up correctly to have to restart and they are cold again…. never mind some questioning the safety.

        I am not against re-starts, but goodness me,that bunch never think anything through..

      2. Sidecar says:

        Its bit going to be like that. They will reform as if its the warm up lap after the safety car goes in. It will only take an extra few seconds.

      3. Robb says:

        Yes clutch starts are a spectacle, but is a gimmicky spectacle that turns races into lotteries what we want F1 to be? I don’t.

      4. Steve Zodiac says:

        Yep broken clutches every where races ruined, huge smashes as the leader tries to hang on to his slot with worn tyres while everyone else tries to take it.

    2. Thomas says:

      This is why you need regulators like the FIA to step in and force changes which, in the long run, are to the benefit of everyone. Look up “tragedy of the commons,” I think it explains the situation in F1 at the moment quite well.

  4. Grant H says:

    standing starts is just a complete gimmick, if you build a gap, manage a race only to lose out under a standing start, how unfair is that!!!!! In a sport are you not meant to reward the best etc, starts are a little bit of a lottery

    quite like the rule parc ferme at FP3, if there are changing conditions between Friday / Saturday there will be a lot more guess work on set up which may possibly put some cars out of position and make for interesting races

    1. Matías says:

      It’s the same, if you do a standing start, or with the pace car rolling: any gap you’ve builded it’s gone, anyway.

      1. Kristiane says:

        The point is, with rolling restart, you can still maintain your position. With standing restart, you are very prone to being overtaken just because simply of standing restart.

        Take Alonso for example, say the leading Mercedes screwed over themselves and lost the leading positions as a result of their fights, a RBR slipped down the order as a result of being caught in the middle of the fighting pair of Mercedes, Alonso took a huge advantage out of this by navigating his car carefully around the chaos and got himself into the lead, was on the way to win the race until the final 7 laps or so, an Intercontinental Ballistic Maldo-missile slams somebody out of the race causing a safety car period, in turn standing restart, Alonso has basically lost the race as upon the standing restart, he would be swamped. Had the race been a rolling restart, Alonso through his driving may just able to fend off cars behind rather than having lost the race due to the car can’t get off the line well.

        That’s where the unfairness goes.

    2. James Clayton says:

      “standing starts is just a complete gimmick, if you build a gap, manage a race only to lose out under a standing start, how unfair is that!!!!! ”

      To be fair, you loose a lot of your advantage under the Safety Car anyway. Doesn’t stop this being a **** rule, though.

      This is the second time in a few months that a universally-despised idea has been passed (at least we were given some warning about this one, for all the good it did). Even the TV commentators have been laying into it; though I expect them to fall in line to their employers wishes now and either only hit as much as they can about what they think of it (as with double points) or desperately try and defend it (like they tyres and DRS).

      As for James’ comment (” the introduction of standing starts for GP restarts (with some restrictions) which will mean that F1 audiences may get to see the most exciting part of a race several times at some events.”) – Overtaking [or attempted overtaking] was one of the most exciting parts of the race until DRS & Pirelli ruined it – and this will have the exact same effect on starts.

    3. Yak says:

      I don’t want to see someone put in a fantastic race on a great strategy to be leading 10 laps from the end but on slightly mangled tyres, only to be completely screwed by a ridiculous standing restart if the safety car comes out. A safety car with the current arrangement can already be a big penalty; at least with a rolling start they’d have some hope of holding on to the lead and making it to the end with some good defensive driving. A standing restart? Not a chance.

      As for saving costs by cutting the power unit allocations from 5 to 4… I don’t see that saving any cost at all if the reliability isn’t there to actually be able to make it through the year on 4 power units. Some drivers are already on their 4th of various components this year and we’re not even half way through the season yet.

      And then put the two together. A standing start puts a lot of stress on the powertrain. Race starts are also a likely place for contact and car damage. Expensive front wings and whatnot.

      On a lighter note… good thing Webber’s left F1. With standing restarts, a few safety cars over the course of a race and he’d have gone from leading the race to fighting for position with the Caterhams.

      1. aezy_doc says:

        To say that drivers are on their 3rd/4th component of the year whilst technically true neglects to see that the teams haven’t binned the previous engines/ parts. They cycle them. Engine 1 is still available for use.

    4. Jeff says:

      Standing restarts are a wrong headed misguided gimmick. With varying degrees of tire degradation, and cooling issues there will be more mayhem and random carnage on standing restarts. It is less sporting and more of a roll of the dice. They may as well hide land mines around the track — that would be quite the spectacle, and maybe they could give some random spectators shoulder fired missiles…

      Furthermore, It is inconsistent with cost cutting and safety. How much money is lost with cars crashing at the start of a race? Does it equal the cost of one engine per team? Does it amount to a few hours of tweaking the setup?

    5. Gary Naylor says:

      Standing restarts are utter nonsense. What happens with lapped cars, when do they get released to join the back of the field, at what speed can they go. You can imagine situations where lead cars get fried on the grid waiting for everyone to take position, tyres going cold, engine overheating, losing a race because of someone else’s mistake.

      Restarts have become dull because the lead car massively slows the field at the restart, opens the throttle at the tightest part of the track.

      Simple idea, remove that variable, at restart – last half lap run at pit lane speed behind the safety car; it pulls off on the start finish straight, limiter removed from all cars on green light so everyone accelerates at about the same time. In other words, slow, controlled rolling restart.

      F1 become more like whacky races every season.

  5. David says:

    Standing restarts after a safety car? What a joke.

    The whole point of the safety car was to keep the race going while dealing with an incident. With standing restarts you may as well save the money on the safety car and just throw the red flag.

    If you really wanted to keep the race going outside an incident zone you’d do a Le Mans style “yellow zone”, but F1 seems to be hell-bent on ruining the show and turning itself into a weird shadow of what it used to be,

    The cost cutting measures do barely that, I expect at least one team to quit this year for a more sustainable series. I suspect my viewing loyalties will do the same as well.

    Go on, Bernie and Jean, go the whole hog and turn F1 into a NASCAR style spec series and then wonder where your viewers have gone…

    1. Thomas says:

      I think F1 tracks are a little too short for “yellow zones,” but I do think standing restarts have the potential to spoil the show. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

    2. Kristiane says:

      Hmm… so what next? Next they might gonna do it the old-school Le Mans way, drivers run across the track, start the engine and race off, possibly some dont’ care about seat belts, just to spice up the show.

      Then are they gonna take a leaf out of Mark Webber’s Le Mans and Valencia crash where cars have to do a 360 flip in the air, land on their wheels before they gotta complete a lap, again just to spice up the show.

      Better still, make it mandatory that F1 cars to install skinny tyres, so they have to drift through corners like rally cars, just for the sake of spicing up the show.

      Anyone can dream up anything, but whether they are great or stupid doesn’t take Einstein to tell.

      The FiA is just getting too far, it is getting ridiculous.

    3. Steve Zodiac says:

      Might as well get rid of the safety car and just send the cars back to the pits, whats the point in driving round behind the SC for several laps only to then stop. H e whole idea is bonkers and is another nail in the coffin of F1. The only problem F1 has is, too many rules and it is trying to work around them that is driving costs up.

  6. franed says:

    Standing re-starts? Are they completely mad?
    Absolute chaos.
    The nearest thing is the current restart rule where cars line up in single file on one side of the grid. The only time I have seen this used it was not done properly.

    A huge failure on the part of the FIA to impose some common sense instead of allowing the front teams to have their way.
    Pathetic.
    Todt should resign.

    1. aezy_doc says:

      Interesting point – say we are at a track where the dreaded marbles are prolific, would a standing start from a grid slot off the racing line not be a massive impediment? At some races I know that p2 is a problem anyway and this will just exacerbate the issue.

      1. mitchw says:

        Wow. Now that is a great point, aezy_doc. The marbles that build up outside the racing line. James Allen, read this out loud to Christian and Toto. Read it slowly

  7. Sebee says:

    You want to save money? Give absolute power to 1 individual. Allow consultation period and then what he says, goes. Otherwise, bunch of multi-millionares and billionares who race against each other for money every second weekend are NOT going to care or agree about savings.

    1. Spyros says:

      Do you have Max Mosley’s number?

      1. Sebee says:

        Now there is a man who could get things done and who knew how to throw a party!

        Come to think of it, he was resourceful at cost savings. If I remember correctly he threw a party with 4 guests when that NY politician paid more to throw a party with just one guest. Cost saver to the max!

    2. Tim Scarratt says:

      Problem, the 1 individual with the most power over F1 keeps coming up with Wacky Races gimmicks like medals, sprinklers and shortcut lanes.

  8. Terry says:

    Bizarre that the FIA is always pushing the cut costs issue whilst simultaneously introducing engine,aero & reg changes that cost the teams billions of dollars every other year above and beyond actual race costs.
    It sounds tough,but if a team can’t afford to be there,please leave instead of expecting the FIA to resrict the more financial teams.These are also key issues with an earlier topic-uneasy-feeling-around-paddock-as-f1-does-some-soul-searching.

  9. Sebee says:

    We need to save money. Any ideas?

    Yeah, let’s do standing restarts.

    Great idea. Let’s crash!

    1. Thomas says:

      Ha, good point!

      1. Sebee says:

        Who’s odds of a crash are higher in a standing start? Big budget teams who are up front or the strapped teams mid field and at the back?

        This rule is like a giant middle finger to the cash strapped teams really when you really think about it. Excitement, and most likely at their cost.

      2. aveli says:

        that’s why i think the cash should be shared equally at the end of each season and teams can raise as much cash as they can from sponsors for themselves. in addition to the cash they get from fom, they can spend as much as they want.

  10. Jonathan C says:

    1. So what is the difference between safety car followed by standing start, and a red flag followed by restart? Other than cars pointlessly circling the track counting down the laps?

    2. Parc ferme from the start of FP3… So if weather wipes out Friday testing, there is no second chance to try different setups? Also, how does this save money?

    1. Steve S says:

      “Parc ferme from the start of FP3″

      No, I believe it’s from the conclusion of FP3.

      1. Kristiane says:

        I believe the same, however, from what Sky has quoted, it does seem to say from the start of FP3, weirdly enough…

      2. Robb says:

        Everywhere I’ve read about this so far says the start of FP3.

  11. Mike says:

    “As for the safety car standing restarts, there are some restrictions – standing starts will not be carried out if the Safety Car is used within two laps of the start (or restart) of a race or if there are less than five laps of the race remaining.”

    Yippee let’s make F1 even more gimmicky and unnecessarily complicated. I’m already fed up with DRS dulling the excitement of overtaking, the engines sounding awful, being able to watch only half of the races live. The drivers appear bored because they are unable to push due to artificially restricting the performance of the cars. Technology exists to allow drivers to push themselves to the limit, let them do this. Watching top level sport is about witnessing excellence and pushing the boundaries. Something that is gimmicky and artificial is nothing more pantomime.

    No wonder viewing figures are down. F1 needs to find its roots again and go back to basics.

    1. Matías says:

      i don’t know if the viewers are down because of the F1 itself, or because in most of europe and in 100% america the broadcast is in PPV format… As for the DRS, isn’t that bad; what it really is bad is the tilke mickey mouse circuits, and the aero-dependence. If the cars have mor mechanical and less aero grip, the show will be a lot better, don’t you think?

      1. Kristiane says:

        Definitely agree with you on more mechanical over aero grip.

        Their wish in getting rid of the tyre blankets isn’t going to help that clause.

        Heck we should just go back to early 1990s with wider cars (they had less downforce due to less knowledge on working of aero on wings), hot slick wide fat tyres to give as much tyre grip as possible, no aero flips and just let them go racing!

        FiA should note that fans want RACING, FIGHTS, not merely overtaking. As I’ve emphasised many many times before, overtaking is simply an act where a car overtakes another, it could be for position or merely lapping another car, but it’s FIGHTS that excite people, i.e. like the one HAM vs ROS in Bahrain. ROS from behind didn’t overtake HAM (well did, but just for the sake of argument here, say he didn’t pull it off successfully), but nonetheless the world appreciated the fight and ROS’s effort, and was hailed as the best race of modern times. THAT is what we want.

        FiA should just stop making up silly rules when we can do thing easy and simple.

      2. RacingFanatic says:

        I honestly could not agree with you more Kristiane, I love your comments, it basically stops me having to say what I was about to say lol.

        F1 needs a major reshuffle and fast, if someone as crazed and obsessed with motor-sport as I am is finding it hard to watch current F1 races then I dread to think of what is happening around the world. Mind you, Formula 1 has no-one but Formula 1 to blame for its current decline. Hell it certainly isn’t the “pinnacle of motor-sport” anymore, hasn’t been for some time now actually.

      3. Robb says:

        Agree with your grip analysis. We aren’t seeing the benefits less aero should have brought because the tires are less grippy too. We lost grip overall, but the grip BALANCE didn’t change. We need more, not less mechanical grip to fully realize the benefits we were hoping for from reduced downforce.

  12. DC says:

    Another nail goes in… Honestly, I used to defend recent Formula 1, but it really has become something that I find it hard to be interested in any longer.

    I’m not an ‘old’ fan (being in my early 30s, though having been hooked since 1993), and I don’t think I would consider myself a ‘purist’ (I don’t have a big issue with DRS or the current noise, which is actually quite tuneful). Nor do I have rose-tinted glasses over the old days, where a couple of overtaking moves a race were the norm; but there is something about the endless tinkering with the rules and the focus on trying to attract new fans that either only tune in to see mayhem or apparently will want to watch motorsport because it’s fuel efficient, that is taking ‘my’ sport (which I think all fans think of it as) in the wrong direction.

    I’m not stupid, in that I understand ultimately F1 is a business (from the point of view of the venture capitalists that see it as a cash cow anyhow), and if I was a team boss with pots of money I would want to keep my advantage too – but I honestly think that the sport needs to simplify and focus on being more fun, more fast and more accessable.

    There is no going back to the old days (which were never as great as people like to recall anyhow), but i’m not sure what would be wrong with a race series where everyone races hard (with penalties where something malicious or clearly stupid is done, but does not punish a fair attempt at a move), restricts the worst excesses of spending, and where I can go to a race weekend for a reasonable price and have at least a chance to interact or see a driver outside of the drivers’ parade; and not to mention where I can (at a cost) stream the race live.

    What a mixed up approach to have when a sport makes itself ever more expensive to view (whether in person or via the media) while catering its rules to a casual fan-base, with a technology platform from a decade ago. Make it more fun, faster and more accessable, and everything else will take care of itself.

    1. Thomas says:

      I agree on pretty much all points.

    2. David says:

      Spot on!!

    3. Kieran Donnelly says:

      Largely agree – well said

    4. Robb says:

      Well said.

    5. Rudi says:

      I agree with your points, especially the first paragraph. I don’t defend F1 any more either, it’s emberasing. I haven’t been to a race in 4 years. This season was the first time I have missed watching a race without it bothering me.

      Don’t worry James, I will still come here to get the latest stories, but for me F1 is in decline and way less of a priority.

  13. Phil Glass says:

    Forgive me, but I would rather have 18 or even only 16 cars going round the track with no cost controls no restrictions on testing or fuel, no single tyre supplier.

    or if not
    How about CVC agree to a cut in profits
    How about the small teams using their own nuts to raise more finance

  14. HP says:

    Ridiculous!
    I know changes are inevitable but we don’t want a freak show! Too much ‘drama’ will ruin the sport.

  15. Iwan says:

    A sport lost at sea…

  16. Bearforce1 says:

    I just don’t understand. I am so far from being knowledgeable about F1 but I know what I like.

    I don’t like restrictions that make the sport a lottery rather than a competition, the premier motor racing competition of man and machine.

    I like the settings/tuning of cars and think increasing parc ferme will just lead to teams being caught out with temperature and weather changes thus ruining the chance of a real race with cars at their finest, most highly tuned. A lottery result again and not a true race between cars at their best.

    Cutting back on in season testing with engine freeze means if one team is ahead at the beginning of the year the season is over with no chance for recovery or catch up by other teams. Just like this year.

    How little does this save the teams I wonder.

    They take away the things I like and bring in stuff I really really dislike (double points etc).

    1. +10 Change can be helpful and even desirable, especially when there is good reason to expect improvement. Artificial fiddling which produces no meaningful improvement in the competition or the competitiveness of the entire field does not seem at all relevant. There is an article on one of the other F-1 sites which compares the efforts of the FIA and Rights Holders groups to a failed “gimmick” American football league. Seems those lessons have not been considered.

      Would rather provide the following thoughts in more of an off-line manner, but don’t find a “contact us” opportunity for feedback. SO: On the same subject (change) and with all due respect for the much appreciated efforts JA on F-1 makes to provide good coverage and information, and after using the “new website design” for some time – today’s format is not, in this consumer’s view, has not provided an improvement in the usefulness of the presentation. It is, however, perhaps ‘glitzier’ in some ways but lacks efficiency when one is interested in getting to the most recent information or looking back to find the most recent articles when you’ve missed a few days. Not sure what the redesign was intended to accomplish but from this end of the elephant it is now much more onerous to use.

      The information, however, is still very much appreciated – if that helps any at all.

      1. Thomas says:

        Re: Website redesign

        I do wish there were a way to easily browse the most recent articles from the homepage. I always end up clicking on “more news” which seems like an unnecessary click/page load. Also, not enough real estate is devoted to the actual content. The old blog format may not have been as pretty but it was far more functional.

      2. SteveH says:

        Yep. Agree.

      3. Bearforce1 says:

        same

      4. Monktonnik says:

        Completely agree. I’m terrified of missing articles. Don’t like the new format at all.

      5. RacingFanatic says:

        100% Agree

      6. Kristiane says:

        “Artificial fiddling” <- these are the words! Exactly the kind of thing we don't need or want from the FiA.

    2. Bearforce1 says:

      Sorry forgot the standing restarts. Another lottery.

      Someone in the lead or in a good points position in the last stages of the race with tyres going off would most likely hold that position under rolling starts but would lose that position under standing restart. This is just something that doesn’t sit well with me. It feels wrong and unfair. It would leave me feeling unhappy and frustrated if someone loses out because of a standing restart.

      ps I am not receiving any email notifications of replys. I am using Chrome.

  17. Stephen Taylor says:

    What about lapped cars unlapping themselves behind the safety car -how is this rule affected? I hope personally that the rule which allows those a lap down to catch up to the lead lap is got rid of -it wastes too much time?

    1. the_rh1no says:

      I wish they just dropped to the back of the field.

      1. Tyemz says:

        Drop to back of the field? What happens when the leader laps the field up to fifth and under the safety car, lapped cars are simply asked to drop back. Would you count those cars as having a lap deficit in which case they can’t really challenge any of the leading cars for the race lead or would you award them imaginary laps they have not run?

    2. eric morman says:

      yep i agree,
      that just saved 3 dam laps we had to wait for while cars unlapped themselves,
      that is just stupid, when they could just full back.

  18. Andrew M says:

    “The WMSC also rubber stamped the introduction of standing starts for GP restarts (with some restrictions) which will mean that F1 audiences may get to see the most exciting part of a race several times at some events.”

    Ugh…

  19. Robert Daffin says:

    Greed won another round.

  20. Ben says:

    Simple – ban ERS and the ridiculous aero winglits on the front wing and body covers. Limit number of team staff in the garage on race week end.

    1. Random 79 says:

      Not so simple:

      Banning ERS will mean that three engine suppliers just wasted millions for nothing (it’s here now so it might as well stay).

      Banning the winglets is what the 2009 regs were supposed to do, but somehow they’re back anyway. Even if they did manage to successfully ban them the teams would just spend the extra cash on perfecting a more simple front and rear wing anyway.

      Last of all you could limit the number people in the garage but I imagine they’d just end up working back at the factory – putting them out of sight won’t change how many employees the teams use.

      Basically it’s situation normal – the teams will spend whatever cash they can to win and the ones that can spend more will always spend more.

      It is disappointing that the FIA couldn’t (or wouldn’t) find a realistic way to really limit costs but I’m not sure anyone could say that they’re surprised.

      1. Thomas says:

        “Basically it’s situation normal – the teams will spend whatever cash they can to win and the ones that can spend more will always spend more.

        That’s the core issue. How can you really enforce cost cutting measures?

      2. manonwheels says:

        Simple:
        You keep the technical regulations stable and mandate each team to sell their car’s complete design for 10 Million Dollars at the end of the season to anyone who wishes to buy it.
        They would stop investing more than necessary after 3 seasons, because it won’t buy them a big enough advantage anymore.

      3. Sebee says:

        manonwheels – interesting.

        Since it’s not my money I always kept saying let them spend to death. Let them pay 17000 euros for a bolt because it saves 1.5gram of weight.

        They don’t care, and neither do I.

        I don’t get these suck-up small teams. They should max out their lines of credit and borrow as much as they can to pay up their staff maybe get a front from Bernie against their pay-out and then fold their F1 operations 2 weeks before the season starts. See ya. You don’t want us here anyway, so we’re gone. Good luck, all the best. Lotus, Sauber, Caterham, Marussia – 4 teams, co-ordinated shut-down on the day cars are to be loaded for Australia. Go out with a bang like men, not a wimper like HST or whatever they were called.

      4. Sebee says:

        Do any F1 teams ever get properly audited?

      5. Ben says:

        Obviously you put it in the too hard basket like the FIA. Cut losses and make necessary changes.

      6. Random 79 says:

        “Obviously you put it in the too hard basket like the FIA”

        Not at all, I just pointed out that it’s not as simple as you suggested.

        As far as I’m concerned the whole exercise would be a whole lot simpler except for two faults of the FIA:

        First, they let the teams have too much power so what do they really expect will happen? They’re supposed to govern the sport, not pander to individual egos and agendas.

        Second, they don’t listen.

  21. Paul says:

    safety car changes so silly! Making things more random is not what fans want.

    First time Im posting on the new site James as I find the layout very confusing (sorry).

  22. Web says:

    Peanuts. All these changes are peanuts. No wonder this sport is in decline.

  23. Jacobo says:

    Standing restarts sounds like a totally artificial spicing up, in line with the double points retard rule. It says a lot the direction the “sport?” Is taking… No wonder le mans is gaining momentum with its innovative technical rules and straight racing concept without artificial spice up. F1 is turning itself to a circus. I hate the later standing restarts idea, it is just plain stupid. Did i mention it is also a way unsafer manner to restart the race?

    1. Robb says:

      You would think after the fan uproar over double points the FIA would start getting the idea the F1 fans don’t want their sport to be a lottery. All I can think is they apparently want to drive fans away.

  24. Anil Parmar says:

    The standing starts thing is an absolute joke and sums up everything that is wrong with F1. All this constant ‘we need to do what the fans want’ is complete and utter rubbish and it’s clearly that the guys running the so called ‘show’ have no idea what on earth Motorsport fans actually want.

    Why, oh why, should a driver with a 20-30s lead be put in a situation where he may actually lose 2-3 positions at a restart? Terrible idea and I’m disgusted that the teams didn’t complain about this. The current system behind the safety car is perfect (although we often spend too much time behind it) but at least it’s not gimmicky.

    First it was DRS, then tyres that needed nursing, then double points and now this. Don’t get me wrong, F1 is my favourite sport but I’m so close to not watching it anymore it’s ridiculous. F1 is NOT a show, it’s a sport, and the people that watch it understand that it is different to Football and basketball..it’s MEANT to be complicated and that’s what makes it so appealing. Please please PLEASE start listening to the fans and stop destroying this sport.

    I’m so disheartened by all of this :(

    1. Laurence H says:

      I agree 100% with you. I’ve been watching F1 for over 30 years and maybe that’s the problem, I’m not in the demographic that is being targeted any more. DRS, double points, standing restarts… losing interest, but I don’t matter to anyone.

      1. Robb says:

        I think there is a certain kind of person who is capable of being a true Grand Prix racing fan. There are so many options available on TV and internet now that the attention span challenged speed junkies no longer have to sit through entire GPs, they’ll turn to anything from skateboarding to Rallycross to get their fix so it’s natural that F1 will lose some of it’s share of the market. What I think the FIA don’t realize is that with all this artificial spectacle-making, they’re losing some true Grand Prix racing fans in order to appeal to a demographic they’ll never attract anyway.

    2. KRB says:

      Standing restarts is so stupid. I also don’t get why they would want to bring parc ferme forward to FP3. What is the reasoning behind that? How ’bout if someone has an off? Of course they will allow any damage to be repaired, but then you think that setup changes won’t be made also?

      Double points is still the stupidest idea. Rule changes that I would like to see are: unsafe releases to incur WCC penalty points, plus next-race grid drops for BOTH of the team’s drivers. I would also like to see the DWC go back to a best x of y results format say “best 16 results of 19 races”, to eliminate or at least soften the blow of DNF misfortune through the season. I’m also of the view that the premium for a win is too low … right now a win is 1.39x the value of 2nd, and is only 24.75% of the total points doled out at every race. Those figures used to be 1.67 and 38.46% in the W10 Top6 era, or 1.5 and 36%, when it was W9 Top6.

  25. OsellaMan says:

    F1 is bureaucracy gone mad. The solution is more simple than being allowed as they want to modify from the edges in, they need to clear most of the slate and start from a point not dissimilar to late 80′s rules.

    Who am I to suggest this? Don’t take my word for it, Gary Anderson continually points out problems with rules well before they are implemented, the noses for instance. Also listen to one of the greatest designers ever as interviewed in the podcast below. It sounds too simple until you realise who is recommending it. I appreciate Adrian Neweys brilliance, however aero is only a single component of the F1 puzzle and it has been dominant for too long, even with the introduction of the engine rules the focus on aero due to its scope is burning money.

    http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/audio-podcast-with-gordon-murray/

  26. Grant H says:

    Excellent summary on this guys blog below, worth a read….agree 100% with everything contained

    http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com

    As this blog highlights, ultimately its a safety car not any kind of gimmick, may as well just concede F1 is going to ennd up like NASCAR, i may give up on F1 and start watchin LMP cars

    why why FIA do you have to do such stupid rules, [mod]

  27. Andy says:

    “which will mean that F1 audiences may get to see the most exciting part of a race several times at some events” – waiting for lapped cars to unlap themselves behind the safety car isn’t exciting, it just robs the fans of racing laps. A standing restart raises the chances of another safety car and the possibility of more lost racing laps.

    The introduction of Parc Ferme at the start of FP3 raises the question of how much running we will see in FP3, what will the teams have to gain by running if they cannot make changes.

    Despite what some of the team bosses say, they and the strategy group seem to have little regard for either the good of the sport or the fans. The FIA are looking weaker and weaker under Todt.

    Max Mosely had control and used to crack the whip, if you’ll pardon the expression. Allowing teams to have such a major say is like letting kids run a sweet shop.

    1. Robb says:

      “which will mean that F1 audiences may get to see the most exciting part of a race several times at some events”

      As a Grand Prix fan, I tune in to watch teams and drivers manage the ebb and flow of an entire race. That’s what “Grand Prix” means. If I’m just interested in “exciting parts” I’ll watch X Games or something.

  28. Kevin says:

    I’m part of the 20% decline in viewership,,,, after watching F1 as long as it has been aired in the US. I now have little interest in seeing it and no motivation to go look for it. I have seen a couple races from this year on DVR at friend’s houses. Doesn’t make me want to see more of the new F1, just makes me miss the “Old” F1.

    Oh well, I don’t suppose they miss me. I’m sure it’s never going back towards being interesting. I am plenty satisfied with just reading what happened. Saves hours every race weekend for me actually.

    1. PaulL says:

      My sentiments, exactly.

  29. PaulL says:

    For heavens sake, end the boa constrictor of technical restrictions and allow some smaller teams to fold.

    Right now, we’ve got an engine freeze, aero restrictions up to our ears, a control tyre, etc. And look what’s happened the last two or more years: a static pecking order. Whoever has the fastest car at race 1 will have the same advantage at season’s end (except for the extraordinary Pirelli debacle when new tyres were introduced mid-season).

  30. I know says:

    Only one car can win each race. Whatever the rules are, and however marginal the gains, as long as winning races gives you many times the income in terms of sponsorship than running near the back, the budgets of the front-running teams will always be many times higher than those running at the back. If there is only a rear wing to adjust, then teams will find ways to spend £100m a year on rear wing development. And, of course, without the possibility for technical development, the car manufacturers who currently provide a lot of the sponsorship will lose interest completely.

    This problem has no technical solution.

    The only solution is to distribute television revenues more equally between teams, recognising the fact that without a Caterham, Marussia or Sauber, there would be no sponsorship money for the front-running teams either. However, that needs a fundamental change in the F1 ownership and revenue sharing model.

  31. Kiran says:

    Once again the circus clowns win put instead of the paying audience. Why are they cutting things that don’t really make huge savings. We needs to space hundreds of millions not 1 million here and another million there.

    As for the standing restarts, this goes in the same boat as double points. I would like to know who these supposed fans are who management are listening to. Its certainly not anyone who is a true fan. I can only assume its a blow in 12 year old with the attention span on 2 seconds. This is not your target audience. There are millions of people who like cars and getting them to watch F1 instead of NASCAR of V8 Supercars should be the aim, people who are already into Motorsport, not the blow in gamer fan.

    1. Robb says:

      Exactly! Grands Prix are by definition long(ish) races. The real fan watches to see a true story progress over the course of a race (and the season), not to see some artificially created excitement. They are bastardizing F1 to try to lure the fans that find following a story boring and just want a spectacle. What they are ending up with is something in between that neither group is interested in, still too long and storyish for the attention span challenged, but too artificial for the true fan.

  32. BMG says:

    Standing starts, are you joking? Talk about panicking, the only time it should be used is the first 2 laps.
    So we restrick testing and then the silver arrows will continue to dominate because they have already spent billions on the new regulations.
    This will only succeed in new a domination from a different team, sometimes you need to step back and allow competition,remove development restrictions so the wealthy team can catch up.
    It’s a sport, may best team win with out restrictions on development.
    The FIA are picking winner’s.

  33. Thomas says:

    On paper these changes are disappointing. Four engines have to last a 20+ race season? That means we’re going to see even more nursing of the engines next year. I’ll have to reserve judgement on standing starts, but this seems like it could really throw a wrench in teams’ strategy plans. I would have preferred them addressing the real issue with safety car periods which is that it took too long for lapped cars to unlap themselves. I agree with Bearforce about parce ferme and car tuning. Moving pre-season testing to Europe is a mistake. Remember how unproductive pre-season tests in Jerez were compared to Bahrain? Track temps are too low in Europe in Winter. I’m also against cutting back on in-season testing.

    It’s also disappointing that the F1 prize money pie isn’t sliced more fairly. The backmarker teams are clearly struggling and in dire financial straits. What F1 really needs is more cash flow, and that comes with more viewers which will bring more sponsor money. As has been discussed in other articles, the source of the problem is FOM’s refusal to adapt to a changing media landscape that dominated by online viewing and cheap/free access.

    1. James Allen says:

      No, five engines if there are 20+ races

  34. Matthew M says:

    None of this sounds good to me or cost savings… If we’re getting Standing restarts then do away with yellow flags altogether and just use red flags..

  35. kenneth chapman says:

    does anyone here have todt’s personal email address?

    1. Kristiane says:

      Doubt he’d get to read it as either it’d get filtered through (by his assistants / the FiA office / himself), or it just cannot be found.

      Best is just to visit him in person and sit him down to talk.

  36. Pkara says:

    This is F1 you need testing & I cant believe that having standing starts every time a safety car comes into play, is going to be that exciting, as we all know there is more risk of another safety car coming out if we get a crash.
    Sustainable racing are we that off our rockers?
    Ultimate racing means ultimate teams, high rollers with wad loads of green.
    If the little teams can’t take it financially…then they should stick with Karting or tiddly winks or start a book group in bar & talk about the old days.
    F1 is being destroyed by the little hitters like Caterham Marrussia whingeing constantly. The teams have had their days adios amigos. Lets get Haas in & whoever else who has the Kahunas to dance with Bernie.
    Sustainable no way . The F1 Juggernaut needs to leave a trail of Rubber, Petrol Fumes & some eye candy on the grid . Come On Lads the Ozone layer needs a few more holes :-D

  37. Elam says:

    If this is their idea of adding excitement, why even wait for safety car? Let’s just have three (or any other random and variable number) restarts per Grand Prix, each randomly called by Charlie, or the ex-F1 driver steward.

    1. Spyros says:

      And don’t forget Bernie’s old idea, about those sprinklers… with everything else that’s been going on, I’m amazed this hasn’t happened yet.

  38. Steve S says:

    Trying to devise effective cost controls is probably an impossible task, both practically and politically. So scrap that idea and approach the problem from the opposite end – more equitable distribution of the revenue stream.

    1. Spyros says:

      Brilliant idea, would definitely work… ain’t gonna happen.

  39. hulliby says:

    Standing restarts…obviously this is the true reason Webber left F1?

    In all seriousness though, I’m 22, been watching F1 for 3 years, and have many friends in a similar boat – and the reason we watch is to see the ‘old racing’ – the Rosberg/Hamilton at Bahrain, the Webber/Vettel at Malaysia, the overtake Ricciardo pulled on Hulkenberg on the final lap of Austria. We are just as much putting up with the gimmicks and rule changes like double points and restricted downforce as everyone else, in the hope of seeing F1 (aka the top formula) of RACING.

    1. Kristiane says:

      Good to hear from from a recently joined fan like you =)

      Welcome to F1, though er…. at the moment with the way things are going, it doesn’t seem at all welcoming to new fans joining in.

      I have been watching F1 since 1998, I liked the first 10 years of racing until 2009 when rules were brought in to make cars look ultra ugry, and that got worse and worse.

      In the recent years even more stupid rules like double points, standing starts plus other things are just getting too much. Might be time for me to switch off my TV, not that I watch much TV anyway as F1 has always been my major TV entertainment. Will definitely be a whole lot better off doing something else which may interest me more.

  40. Sujith says:

    I always was the guy supporting F1. Talking so highly of the new era. Not anymore. I am disgusted to say the least.

    Will watch Formula 1 next year to see how much the rules have spoiled the sport and will painfully say goodbye to the sport that has amused me from 1993.

  41. Elie says:

    There is only one thing left thats keeping me interested in F1- Raikkonen- hes the only genuine thing left about it. When he goes Im done with it..30 years of reasonable rules replaced by : sparks, standing starts ,Double points for one circuit,..I might not even bother with 2015- in fact Im pretty sure I wont.

    If I want to watch a car “show” I switch to top gear
    If I want to be “entertained” I’le watch a magic show- Dynamo can fool me far more easily than these [mod] who run F1.

    From now on if I want to watch great car racing I might revert to Le Man,V8 supercars. Anything but this crap called F1- its an insult to the great names of the past and current racing talent on the grid.
    Even great designers are walking away because its too restrictive..One sight that will live in my mind forever is that Mclaren MP-20 -winglets and all viewed front to back toward the air intake , screaming up the hill after Eau Rouge at maximum tilt.

    It may well be that Bernie / CVC attract more fans but how long will they keep them and how long will it take to undo the damage and return a lasting fan base.

    1. Kristiane says:

      Hear hear.

      I missed half of 2013, quite a bit of 2012 due to cars being ugly, rules being stupid, and domination by one single driver. I can certainly miss more races or even the whole season if it gets anymore stupid. There are better things that entertain me better than what the FiA do in TRYING to make it more entertaining, which they fail. Heck I find it even more enjoyable to play a racing sim game alone than to watch an F1 race, which I can probably pull off some better overtaking moves and put up a better fight for position than a straight-forward DRS pass assisted with KERS.

    2. Spyros says:

      Raikkonen? Really?

      1. Elie says:

        Like I said hes the only genuine thing about F1…I hate anything fake

      2. Spyros says:

        Well OK but I now believe he is genuinely slower than Massa.

      3. Elie says:

        Is that because your comparing a Mercedes powered Williams to a prancing donkey- or because your 5 years old

  42. Thomas Warner says:

    Surely the point of a safety car is to allow the race to continue without needing to stop and restart the race? I think it is a bad idea and will spoil a race. Why doesn’t Formula 1 consult more with the fans before they introduce new rules?

    If they insist that they need to make restarts more exciting why not enable DRS as soon as the safety car comes in? I wouldn’t support this idea as I think the current rules work just fine but it would be better than a standing start.

    1. Kristiane says:

      What’s even more stupid is that they say they want fans’ opinions.

      Now they stamp down rules without listening to anybody, including drivers and teams.

      Hopeless…

      1. Kieran Donnelly says:

        “… but but but we did listen – the fans said that they wanted more overtaking so we gave them DRS and, now, standing restarts! There will be more overtaking. No one can say that we are not listening to the fans!”

        Obviously tongue firmly in cheek as opposed to the places many tongues in F1 are normally stuck! :P

  43. Harshad says:

    Judging by the way things are going, in a couple of years time, they might abandon Driver’s championship (WDC) altogether.

  44. Nick Hipkin says:

    No mention of double points James, does this mean it stays for 2015?

    1. James Allen says:

      Very good question! Will check

      1. Nick Hipkin says:

        Thanks, it’s one thing bringing it in but the FIA cannot say they haven’t had negative about that. If it stays they are guilty of ignoring fans

      2. Stephen Taylor says:

        What about cars who want to unlap themselves? Will that still happen?

  45. manonwheels says:

    Drivers mandated to give way on blue flags – but only if they’re waved (which is when they’re lapped), DRS – but only if you’re just 1 second behind anyone at a certain point of the track, mandated tire-compound changes, lapped drivers may pass – after race control has told them, when following the safetycar you might not leave too much space – just because, in the formation lap you may not overtake – because Damon Hill once found that was rude, only one change of line to defend your position, double points – but only in the in the last race, standing restarts (because the last crash just wasn’t enough) – just when there hasn’t been a standing restart recently, now the new interesting different nose shapes, that gave the cars some individuality get wiped out for no obvious reason apart from “aesthetics”.

    Formula one has become a mess of rules, because every time someone thinks there is a problem and screams loud enough, they make a new rule that may contain an exception for when this new rule creates a new problem.

    I can totally understand that people find Formula 1 confusing.

    What’s going on with the sport?
    Why do the rule makers always react on the screaming mob that never ceases to complain anyway?

    Can we please cut back on all this artificial show-mumbo-jumbo and get back to the basics?

  46. Neil says:

    Another waste of time meeting …. rich teams win and the less financed teams get nothing.

    As to the re-start. Crazy and if they must do it ,then I hope it means the cars .. stop and then go with just the cars on the grid and they then continue on the tyers they were on.

    If the stop is going to have all the team people and gear, change all tyres before the restart …. then it has become a big freak. …. its heading that way anyway.

    Let get back to man and machine …….

  47. kenneth chapman says:

    i am rather surprised that the WDC has even made it this far. consider this……every driver takes directions from the pit wall. they are no longer decision makers or decision takers. even at the last race i think that is was hulkenberg who asked his pit wall a ‘button’ style question!!! ‘who am i racing?’

    i mean really, on top of all the nonsensical, farcical, foolish additions/restrictions we now have a field of drivers who are nothing more than ‘monkeys on top of the organ’ dancing to someone elses tune.

    we have seen one of the F1 geniuses, newey, abandon ship because of the suffocating environment he is forced to live within. it is all flim flam with about the same level of substance as fistful of candy floss. to make matters worse…it is all unnecessary. get rid of the backmarkers and let the teams race third cars or at least supply the bottom feeders with a suitable set of wheels. that would take care of their monetary shortfall.

    as for all the rest of the R & R just let the teams race by giving them freedom of engineering expression. there would be no need for ‘theatrical embellishments’ as a result.

    personally, i feel as though i am being dudded. what has been a lifelong passion has deteriorated into a motoring version of ‘my kitchen rules and big brother’. a fatuous, gratuitous melange of cheap and nasty entertainment aimed at the lowest common denominator.

  48. Joe B says:

    There is a silver lining to the standing restarts – Monaco is now all but guaranteed more than one exciting lap per year!

  49. Lord Horn says:

    And while we are at this, how about ANOTHER exciting rule? This one is sure to benefit the drivers AND the audiences.

    The Mid-Race LOO break!

    Yes, every 50% race round completion, the teams stop and the drivers run to their respective garages for a Loo break.

    Imagine the excitement! Thousands of fans cheering!! Struggles at getting the zippers and even entire suits off!!! Live telecast from all bathrooms!!!!

    This alone should shoot up viewership by 150% guaranteed!

    I mean, every time people here talk about cars this and cars that. Why are drivers not shown any love, eh? This will help the drivers focus on their task after a loo break and make races more exciting! It’s the secret F1 fans have been looking out for decades!! Someone call Todt right now!

    On a minor scale, since most people complain about engine noises going down, why not fit cars with super-loud horns? I mean, don’t drivers complain ‘I didn’t see him in my rear view’ when there is a crash? This will increase safety 200%! Imagine all the honking and excitement at the start of every race!

    Todt, please, if you’re reading this, please take these as 2015 recommendations from all F1 fans over the world!

    1. glen says:

      What a great idea! Although obviously I would like to tinker and change your idea around a bit.

      When the drivers are running to the toilet and get within two metres of the driver in front, allow that driver to jump on a slide, to make the pass easier. Also if a driver can hit a moving target while at the loo from four metres then that driver should be awarded an additional 100points.

      At the end of the race the top three drivers should be made to do a bush tucker trail and the public vote for their favorite personality, and who ever gets the most votes, wins the race.

    2. manonwheels says:

      Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

  50. aveli says:

    standing start is good for f1, all the teams and drivers will be in the same position to deal with another challenge, nothing wrong with that.
    as far as cost cutting is concerned, the teams should share the money equally at the end of each season and let them spend as much as they want.

  51. Sergio says:

    We are exaggerating about standing starts in my opinion.

    It is like saying that nobody can change tyres while in SC bcs several strategies could be benefited more than others…

    The impact exists and safety is not an option, so it is just about to manage maximizing the show.
    Same luck for everyone in any case. Cannot imagine how boring will it be to give any driver the same time advantage managing each one restarting from pit lane with a scaling timetable.

    So nerdy, don’t u think?.

  52. chris green says:

    this topic always generates a lot of hand wringing.

    the reality is that the sport we all love evolved from a pretty simple concept. Karting- formula junior / formula ford – formula 3 – f1. In the less wealthy 50′s, 60.s, 70′s, 80′s and 90′s all these sports thrived.

    f1 needs to take a close look at the nascar business model if it really wants to become a financially sustainable race series.
    of course that isn’t going to happen.

    the only solution is for the the fia to walk away from the sport. let the greedy businessmen take the sport and sit back while they grind it into the ground.
    it will consist of Rb + Mercedes + Ferrari + Mclaren +2 customer teams each painted in different colours so it looks like there’s some competition happening.
    it will be boring as hell and will collapse.

    only then can the fia relaunch a premier open wheel formula that emulates what made formula 1 great in the first place. it doesn’t have to be the biggest sport in the world. leave that to soccer. f1 needs to get back to basics and rediscover its roots.
    That means getting rid of races in the desert and all the tilke domes. bring back some of the old circuits and the atmosphere that goes with it. bring back the french gp. bring back wide slicks, a choice of compounds and some decent grip. bring back steel brakes which will open up the braking zones and produce proper passing. get rid of car radios, driver coaches and 2 way telemetry. get rid of the celebrities.

    it’s not rocket science – we know how to fix the problem. the suits just won’t allow it.
    the wec is looking better all the time.

    1. Joe B says:

      @ Chris Green – Spot on. Heritage is worth nothing when the product is no longer fit for purpose; in this case the sport itself. Were this to happen (and it seems more likely that the series will instead be drained into irrelevance), then we’d have to hope that the FIA learns from its failures here.

    2. finster says:

      @Chris G. The reason why nascars business model works is because its family owned. What France says goes. No discussions, no drama. Don’t like it then don’t come back next weekend. With F1 being corporate controlled its now in the hands of people that could care less about history or heritage, or what it costs the average fan to attend a race. Now I pay twice what I had been paying a few years back for shoddy race coverage by NBCsp. What I get now is FP2 aired three times instead of all practice sessions. It isn’t live, as advertised. And sometimes NBC moves it to CNBC, or delays a live broadcast to make room for something else. I myt case I set the dvr for 4 am for races in Australia, Malaysia, etc. Sometimes I get a couple hours of magic sealing sprays or Brazil Butt Lift infomercials.

  53. Spyros says:

    Aside from the obvious and rather unsettling impending doom, I have a practical question:

    Can F1 cars and their power units actually stand an extra 1-2 starts per race?

    We saw that heat was a problem in Canada, just because the cars stood still for 3 seconds in a pit stop! How about 40 seconds, for those in the first row, waiting for the other 20 cars to form up behind them?

    1. Random 79 says:

      I am 100% confident that the FIA would have not only anticipated that but would also have carefully considered it before implementing the rule change.

      1. Robb says:

        Yes, they carefully considered it, realized it would be a problem, and did it anyway. As usual.

      2. Random 79 says:

        Exactly right :)

      3. Spyros says:

        Phew! I thought you were being serious for a while there..!

      4. Random 79 says:

        Me? Serious? Never!

  54. DMyers says:

    F1 has now seriously lost its way. It’s becoming a parody rather than a sporting spectacle. The new engine regs are great, but they haven’t been explained properly, never mind promoted. But from double points to THIS? No more.

  55. Mark P says:

    Cost cutting – forget qualifying, race, etc.

    Just pull the names out of a hat. They could still use some of Bernie’s ideas – like; turn on the sprinklers sometimes during the presentation; have DRS like flaps on the top of the hat that occasionally trap the person’s hand in the hat. The hat would, of course, have to fall to pieces throughout the presentation and have to be changed.

    Maybe, to simulate the excitement of a start, you get the team principles from all of the teams piling in at the same time to see who can get the first name out?

    All this will lead to excitement I’m sure and be far cheaper.

  56. Crom says:

    Is this some bizarre way of penalising efficiency runs..?

    ie,
    - drivers less likely to go long in case standing starts kill temps on worn tyres
    - the extra fuel saving enabling drivers to race harder for longer

    (clutching at straws to find some logic to this decision)

  57. Olivier says:

    What about bringing the active suspension back and dropping the aero altogether? That will save a lot of money?

    Instead they could spend the money in finding clever ways to harvest energy.

    Also, allow manufacturers to further develop their power units. Right now it is just ridiculous … no one (from the non Mercedes teams) will be able to bounce back with a few software tweaks here and there.

    Can someone tell me how much the manufacturers are allowed to change their powerunit for next year? It’s nice to see Rosberg and Hamilton toying in front, but I’d like to see a Ferrari and Renault in the mix as well.

  58. Kieran Donnelly says:

    Ubersigh! Standing restarts? Really?

    Will all the pundits be doing second grid-walks for these too?

    “Ooh Hammy, that first start went well for you but what have you got planned for the third start?”

    Not really sure what gains the parc fermé rules have for anyone – maybe someone can explain? I don’t see why we wouldn’t want people tweaking the car up to the last minute.

    Back to the main issue though – As someone above pointed out, there’s a massively increased chance of a crash from a standing start (due to colder tyres, colder brakes, greater speed differentials, etc.) so this is going to cost teams more money and to gain what exactly? Some changes in position?

    F1 fans want to see changes in position take place when RACING is taking place. Sure, the F1 surveys pose the question “do you want to see more overtaking?” and everyone, of course and rightfully, answers “yes”. Then we are given DRS. “Here’s more overtaking for you – this is what you wanted!”, they say. Well, no – it’s not really what we wanted at all. DRS and, now, and standing restarts are answers to the wrong question.

    So, plain an simple, “Do you want to see more racing where cars can follow each other closely in corners so that overtaking is possible on all tracks?” – YES

    “Do you want to see a formula where a driver can push like hell on every lap on whatever tyres he has on the car and still be in with a chance of finishing the race in a reasonable number of stops?” – YES

    “Are you inclined to pay money to some people/organisations who are already incredibly rich in order to watch a sport on TV thats twitching its way in some sort of fit of desperate catharsis towards an unnecessarily early grave?” – NO

    “Are you inclined to travel to a race and pay high ticket prices to see a race where drivers slide gently by each other on straights?” – NO

    “Will better Facebook and Twitter updates/interactions make you watch and enjoy the races more than you do now?” – NO

    I would certainly count myself among those who was willing to give F1 2014 a good chance. Would the quieter engines and ugly noses be such a big deal if the racing was closer? Probably not. WOuld people be more charitable towards the situation if the balance of power in F1 wasn’t so utterly rigged to those already with the money and success? Probably yes.

    This is just the latest in a string of hopelessy awful decisions which do nothing to please the current fans and don’t seem to be doing anything to win new fans either. Having to put in more of an effort to either see some races live or avoid sports news until the highlights are broadcast is an enormous pain in the asp. Been a fan since early/mid-1990s and have questioned why I watch F1 before but now I’m really starting to wonder. I get so many more kicks out of a 45 minute MotoGP race watched a day later than I do out of watching a live F1 race – what does that say for the so-called pinnacle of motorsport? TOCA, GP2 and even local club formulae have better racing and are more exciting than F1? So why watch it? For the occasional moment of genius and the potential for accidents? Due to the restrictions placed on racers these days just to get to the end of the race, both of those reasons are becoming fewer and further between – just like F1 fans!

  59. Seifenkistler says:

    Are cars allowed to box at a standing start while a savety car phase? Mixing fresh and nearly worn out tyres at a standing start may even cause more crashes than a normal start.

  60. Mark says:

    I have been watching F1 for 35 years and it is easy to be critical of the current rules and regulations but lets not forget the history of F1 including many races which were just a precession with no overtaking. The problem F1 has is that it does not have any serious completion.
    What we all want is wheel to wheel racing and excitement for 70 laps and standing start re starts after a safety car are an artificial attempt to retain the audience.
    Many wont agree with this and I am not even sure about it myself but what if weight handicaps were introduced, we would get closer to the driver being able to make the most out of what he has to influence a race result.

  61. JohnBt says:

    F1 should start a 30 mins sitcom as from next year. They can call it ‘Faulty Powers’. It can be healthy for a change.

  62. Scott D says:

    The standing restart rule is bonkers as it introduces unnecessary delays into restarts and too much “randomness” (i.e if someone has just put on fresh tyres for example). I would even go as far as saying that it is likely to be dangerous having cars in differing states of mechanical condition and tyre wear at a stationary restart. I will wait to inspect the detail of this rule but it doesn’t look promising.

    Ill thought through and a total gimmick. What is going on in this sport…?

  63. I’m not sure F1 whether F1needs to alienate its current fanbase to attract a new ones.

    Double points, low noise power units and now standing restarts… Trumpet exhausts and titanium skid plates next? This just gives DRS and Pirelli detractors even more ammunition!

    To attract more spectators, F1 needs to focus on its core strengths and simplify the show rather than adding more artifices.

    Seriously, how much time are we going to have to wait for restarts? Let the backmarkers unlap them selves first, then everyone on the grid gets to put on fresh rubber (a standing restart on old and cold tyres is probably going to be deemed to dangerous). So we end up with a bunch of mechanics on the grid for at least five minutes fiddling with tyre blankets, cooling fans, etc. More car incidents can also be predicted, so how does this fit in with reducing costs for the smaller teams?

    No such gimmicks in the WEC, which will be gaining more fans I feel.

  64. Frankie says:

    I re-watched the 2002 Melbourne grand Prix last night. It was the first race I ever attended and it was where my F1 “awareness” began (I had loosely watched the odd race on TV but was not properly engaged).
    The racing was quite awesome (super high attrition rate but fierce battles) and there was, even though it’s not that far in the past, a world of difference in the style of racing. Schumacher, Montoya, Raikkonen etc were animals in that race and it was exciting! I wonder if that level of excitement will ever be achievable again? I think the first point to start at for the root of all of it (cost cutting, close racing, natural racing) is to start with cutting down the aero. Aero in F1 today is like an addictive drug, it works great at first but then you need more and more and more…. before you know it you are broke and a ruin.

  65. Andrew says:

    Personally, I thought the release of the fire-truck into the path of the F1 cars in Korea was the highlight of the season last year.

  66. Neil Jenney says:

    ***speechless***

  67. Vernier Caliper says:

    None of this makes any sense to me. We all know that the Lion’s share of the money from tv etc. goes to Ferrari. This has been the case for a number of years. To encourage and allow the other teams to be sustainable the money should be distributed equally. The only differentiator should be prize money for points earned over a season.

    Ferrari has always felt that it is F1 and because of the support of that status by the Governing bodies the entire future of F1 is doomed. I am sure that without Ferrari the sport could thrive again and be better than before.

  68. Jeff says:

    Question: some have mentioned using the clutch on the standing restarts. Considering a clutch in an F1 car is a very fragile thing, only good for a start and a few pits, how do you expect this to affect attrition rates?

    And we haven’t even discussed overheating issues related to standing restarts. Will these cause serious reliability problems?

    My concern is that this could look like, to some, an attempt to mix things up artificially.

  69. Adam Lucas says:

    After the first comment and it’s replies this comment section was reduced to whining about inconsquential decisions that will have little or no effect on the F1. To you James and all your readers who rattle on about the state of F1, noise or no noise, ERS, brakes, hybrids, enviromental friendly future racing, standing restarts etc., etc. You’ve all lost the basic concept. F1 was and is meant to be about the latest and greatest racing cars on the planet. It stopped being that years ago when everybody got concerned with how much money was spent. The more you cut back the budget the more the fans will complain the racing isn’t racing. The more the fans say they’ll quit watching the more the sport trys to bring them back with all these gimmics like DRS. ERS, Hybrids, standing restarts etc. MotoGP is doing the same thing to motorcycle racing.
    But you say the racing is so close now. Sure it is because the cars and bikes are vitually the same. That’s the problem. F1 and MotoGP are supposed to be about who builds and drives or rides the best possible vehicle on the planet. Not who can save money, build fuel efficient bikes and cars and put on a show. It’s about who can build the fastest vehicle and get the best human to drive it. If one team runs away with every race then tough luck! The rest of you guys need to spend more money and get to work. Stop whining!
    Go ahead, let the bashing begin if James even has the balls to publish this…

    1. D Vega says:

      I agree. I would rather see 4 – 5 three car teams in an all out spending war than 11 two car teams strangled by the regs.

    2. Voodoopunk says:

      “Go ahead, let the bashing begin if James even has the balls to publish this…”

      Why wouldn’t it be published, it’s hardly vitriolic is it?

  70. Kenneth M'Boy says:

    I think it’s not just about reducing costs but also should be about increasing revenue. Okay, reduce costs, reduce the calendar.

    Increase revenue by: having more street circuits in major cities. Give more access to fans as happy fans buy more merchandise. Get more interesting sponsors, how good is the Martini Wiiliams? Make the cars more attractive, improve the sound of the cars, educate the fans on how the new technology works on the car by having an official Fia YouTube formula one channel. Have better graphics demonstrating the technology being used during the race. Improve the podium, bring back real flags, wreaths, and a better song when the trophies are being handed out, its supposed to be a celebration of triumph, the current one is drab and depressing. One last thing, have an age limit on drivers, stop giving us teenagers. I want to see real men race real cars.

    1. Olivier says:

      +1 for decreasing the number of races.

      +1 for having an official Fia Youtube F1 channel with three minute (max) snippets of the race. This would make F1 more shareable on social media (read: to have conversations with your friends, your friends friends …).

      +1 for wreaths. Wreaths are awesome! They do this in Le Mans as well.

  71. Jodum5 says:

    Hi James, what’s the reasoning behind the standing restarts?

    1. James Allen says:

      They are exciting! More drama

      1. Anne says:

        What if during that restart there is a crash and the SF needs to come out again? Are we going to have another restart? I won´t find it exciting. Besides the races could last like 3 hours

      2. kenneth chapman says:

        so james, do i take it that you support this latest gimmick?

    2. Sebee says:

      Reasoning is, mid field teams will be crashed out of existance by the additional collision bill and lost points as they fight mid field by having an additional 10 standing starts each year.

      Then finally the big teams can field 3 cars and achieve their goal of having more paddock space to themselves.

      Seriously, I’m finding it hard to be positive about F1 lately, and I’m just a party pooper adding nothing but my nagging complaints and negative views. It’s better I leave. I don’t need the irritation and you don’t need to read my pissiness.

      For anyone who has kids, and sees how they love to make up new rules as they go along in a game or a sport…that’s what F1 looks like to me – a bunch of 5 year olds making the rules.

      Funny how what DC communicated about the drivers views of the new cars and what Alonso has said is not being taken seriously and brushed aside. If the drivers think this F1 is crap, how can they sell it? You can see they are not passionate about it. It’s like a crap product…you need one heck of a good liar to sell you on it. And only the suckers will buy it.

      I don’t buy it anymore. Shoot me an email when F1 is real again. When the cars look and sound good, and when these drivers are racing for real on the limit for the entire sprint.

  72. Paul Rodríguez says:

    And while we are at it, why not make all drivers stop mid-race for a cup of tea? he who finishes first can go and take Lewis’ Merc, or a Red bull if he pleases…

    This is getting really crazy, I wonder how long it will take for me to stop following f1 for the first time in 35 years.

  73. goonerf1 says:

    So in summary, F1 is failing to attract new fans, and succeeding in alienating the old ones.

    This is only going to end up one way.

  74. Richard says:

    Should have stayed in the Middle-East for pre-season testing, whats the point of testing at 15 degrees Celcius when we don’t do Grand Prix at those tempratures…

    This sport is expensive, always has been, always will be. if you want a cheap sport, buy a bag of golf sticks and two balls, dig eighteen holes and you are set.

    1. Spyros says:

      Thank you, exactly!

      Pirelli’s tyres are quite good this year, despite the increase in torque and everything else… and it so happens that the teams tested twice in the desert before the season got going. Nobody made THAT connection, did they?

      And yes I do realize the compounds were finalized before these tests, but the tyre allocations for the first races weren’t.

      I’m already bracing for the start of 2015 becoming all about tyres again.

  75. Jeff McGhie says:

    James, Can you clarify if the restart post safety car is almost immediate i.e. safety car peels into pits, cars lines up then go or is it a full restart with tyre blankets, up on jacks etc.

    Just wondering if this is purely to allow Sky et al to get ad break mid race?

    1. James Allen says:

      I imagine it would be like a standing restart from a red flag like we had in Monaco a few years ago

      1. kenneth chapman says:

        so does this mean that repairs can be carried out on the grid and also teams can change tyres as per monaco a few years back?

  76. Justin says:

    I’m 28, have been a fan for 10 years. Each year more and more silly counterproductive, meaningless measures are implemented that make me less interested in this sport:
    The refueling ban, cars are always running slower than they were in the past, less strategic options to influence the race.
    Constant bickering over cost caps, other sports have a salary cap for the very reason F1 needs a cost cap, pull your head out of the sand and see what’s going on.
    Teams being so short sited about winning this weekend instead of for the next 10 years: refusing to cost cap because they have managed to negotiate an unfair advantage for themselves in the decision making process
    PPV TV licenses is most countries, & FOM/FIA’s resulting surprise that viewership numbers declined after moving to this system, you made it harder and more expensive to access, OF COURSE fewer peopl watched. I can’t watch the sport any more without forking out $150+/month to get the channels required. Guess who has to find “alternative methods” to watch the races.
    No Internet Streaming subscription available. It’s 2014 i should be able to stream the races online.
    Double points in final race, the dumbest of all ideas.
    Terrible new tracks in useless locations: Korea, Russia, Azerbaijan (?!), Bahrain, Abu Dhabi, while classic, exciting tracks with real heritage are constantly under threat of losing/have lost their GPs, Magny Cours, Silverstone, Montreal, Nurburgring, Melbourne, Fuji, Interlagos, Spa etc You give these people races where F1 has never really been popular, don’t help them promote or advertise them at all, and then are surprised when the grandstand is half empty.
    The ever escalating ticket prices for less exciting racing.
    DRS, so counter intuitive to racing.
    Band-aid solutions to large problems that don’t actually do anything substantive and may actually exacerbate problems & the accompanying self-important press releases which do nothing but puff up the FIA/FOM and spout nonsense about how these meaningless changes will have a “positive influence”.
    Counter intuitive logic/decision making: we’ve made the cars waaayyy safer than even 10 years ago yet we still have the ridiculous chicane at the end of Barcelona, some how Monaco is perfectly safe, but it is too dangerous to go around that corner?? We need to make things less expensive yet we’re going to ship more freight to more places farther away from team bases more often. Legislating more efficient engines and then being surprised they are quieter: noise is wasted energy! Having the most technologically advanced series but not understanding basic principles of physics while making the rules. Lowering costs then adding in standing restarts after cautions leading to more expensive accidents! can’t wait to see 3 consecutive cautions at Monaco next year.
    Bernie, just, Bernie.
    Wanting new teams to join the grid, picking the most ill-suited ones, not giving them any of the prize or tv money, then being surprised that they don’t improve or have to drop out because they don’t have enough money.
    CGI advertisements added to the broadcast: the Fly Emerates logos in Canada and Austria, the Rolex ones in Spain, Canada, and Austria, the Pirelli one in the gravel at the last corner in Spain. These are all so annoying and distracting when i’m watching the race. i spend more time trying to figure out what is actually there and what has been digitally added than i do watching the actual race. there are probably actually 5000 banners at some of these tracks, do we really need these too?
    The continued out-of-touch-ness of the FIA & FOM, it would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad.

  77. alexander says:

    it really does make me wonder. do these people at the fia actualy go on the internet and see what fans think e.g autsport forums,f1 fanatic or even this website. it would be good if fans could in someway tell the fia what they want like via e.g email or facebook,twitter etc. the main issue is the move to ppv tv i know so many casual fans who watched pre 2012 but dont now because its not all live on fta.

  78. Pat Palozzi says:

    Reading the new f1 brain cramps,where do these people in f1 come up with all these brain cramps,like re start after the safety car,this is totally dum.This is why after this year I will not renew my tickets for Montreal after 20or so year they will rum the Canadian GP without me,I have a better place to spend $2,400 for a weekend ,F1 has gone to the dogs.

  79. warley says:

    The FIA is a very successful bureaucracy which like other successful bureaucracies has expanded it’s remit to the point where it is all powerful and all pervasive. Unless of course you are NASCAR. NASCAR is successful because it runs itself and is not strangled by FIA rules and regulations. Yes it does have strict rules but they operate in the interests of NASCAR teams and of the fans not in the interest of the governing body or the commercial rights holders. What is therefore needed is an premier open wheel racing series not controlled by the FIA. However that is precisely what we cannot have since the all powerful FIA will not allow it as they would refuse to sanction any of the other braches of motorsport that their tentacles are wrapped around and the circuits would thus decline to hold a ‘breakaway’ series as they would soon go broke. So we have arrived at a situation where you cannot have motor racing without the say so of the FIA. Motor racing started when a few people got together to race each other and any ‘rules’ were a gentlemen’s agreement between themselves. Form, stucture, organisation and regulation have developed over the years and the sport itself at F1 level is suffocating as a result. However there is little prospect of changing the system so we are stuck with what we have where the rules are changed to micro-manage whatever anomolies present themselves. Then when untended consequences appear the cycle of change continues. As long as the big boys get their money and the fat cats keep their jobs, and perhaps create few more jobs for their pals along the way that’s the way things will stay. Vive la revolution? Not bloody likely!

    Sorry for the rant, having a bad day!

  80. Rich C says:

    All these ‘important’ decisions they *can make are still just putting lipstick on a pig.

    If they’d spend these vast amounts on something meaningful each of their pathetic countries could have its own nuclear submarine fleet by now.

    I can’t imagine what Gene Haas was thinking and hopefully he reconsiders.

    All the ‘little guys’ will be gone shortly.

  81. Jarv027 says:

    Wonder if we will see more fixed races if there are re-starts on the grid.

    “Ok number 2 driver park your car in a bad place so we can get a re-start for your teammate so he gets another chance for a win”

  82. Olivier says:

    Skimming through the posts I am surprised how much aggression there is on something trivial like “standing re-starts”. Actually it is going to make races like Monaco more interesting as someone rightfully observed over here.

    Could it be that the frustration of “the fans” lies somewhere else?

  83. Kit says:

    F1 is concerned about diminishing viewership?
    Well just reading about it makes me uneasy. Double points and now, standing restarts.

    A 1.5 hours,50 lap race may well turn out to be just a 6 lap, 9 minutes race after all.

  84. erik says:

    Take 5% profit from CVC and spread it to the teams each year. It will help to cover some costs and maybe prevents even from making some stupid rules to cut costs.

    Now Renault raises his hands they can not compete this year- 3rd of a field surrenders officially even before a half way to the season? Ferrari are moaning since the start of a season.

    New engine and no development. You are handicapped and if you invest to car in other areas- it is wasting your resources. Not cost cutting!

    Anyway, i want to be entertained and watching how people trying to make money not thinking about tomorrow, keeps me on the edge of a seat.

    I don`t understand why to keep showing up every race weekend if you already now your finishing position. Drivers and stuff i understand – they get paid; but why companies waste money? It is not even for publicity, because i feel sorry for losers there and if you can not show strength – i am sorry, you are not getting my money.

    Most of all- this is insulting.

  85. kenneth chapman says:

    @ olivier….i think that you’ll find the ‘aggression’ is due simply because there seems no end of the ‘phony’ intervention into a motor race or what is left of it.

    what i don’t fully comprehend is the teams acquiesence regarding this issue. apparently they were unanimous in acceptance. what that says is that they don’t give a ratsass about the followers/fans either.

    there apparently seems to be no end to these gimmicks that are the hallmark of cheap theatricality being rammed through. if ever there was a time to simply do away with all of these impositions it was now…. but no, nothing remotely sensible.

  86. goonerf1 says:

    time for a breakaway series I think.

  87. Jarv027 says:

    James, Any chance of you highlighting your comments??
    I do scroll down and look for them

  88. Will the medical car be involved with all the restarts ?

    1. Rich C says:

      I hope so because it has the best sound out there!

  89. Allan says:

    The ONLY time a standing Start would make sense, IMHO, is an accident in the first 2 or 3 laps, where it was going to take several laps to clear the track.

    Get all cars back to the grid, let the track staff work on clearing the debris, safely, with no cars running round. This would be faster than jumping out of the way each lap and the race could in theory re-start sooner that cruising round behind the Safety Car.

  90. Peter W says:

    I think if you step back and look at the transition of F1 from a distance, I think it’s pretty plain that the end goal is to turn F1 into a reality TV show. You only have to look at any TV guide to see this is where the big dollars are ratings wise.

    So I think to save we long suffering fans the trauma of the next 5 years or so, Bernie and Co should just get on with it and introduce the TV show they want next year. They could call it “The F1 Factor” or something similarly stupid. Then you could have a bunch of pretty boys and girls facing “challenges” in order to make it through to the last half of the TV ratings season, where there will be some races…this will be like The Finals of the series. Then in the races, there will be more challenges that each contestant can describe in excruciating detail….bizarre challenges like double points, standing restarts, being showered with sparks etc, etc….

    Sorry to be so negative, but I’ve loved F1 and it’s now getting to that point of the relationship where you wake up, look across the bed, and realise you are married to a complete moron!

  91. albert says:

    the money saving is getting me down , how much would it be to produce a few more engine blocks , the cost is in the design and testing etc.
    teams spend millions on one tenth of a second while caterham etc. don’t get within 5 seconds after YEARS in F1 ! they need to take the time difference off the ” big ” teams by simplifying for example the winglets on the front wing and other aero
    really the rules are too strict in other areas of the design of the cars and don’t give the small teams the freedom of some clever design.

    F1is still the pinnacle of motorsport , and I hope common sense will return.

    1. Rich C says:

      “F1is still the pinnacle of motorsport ”

      Sorry, not true. That would be LMP1 & 2.

      F1 is the pinnacle of insane spending on tiny bits of nonsense. And of political BS instead of racing, of course.

      1. kenneth chapman says:

        F1 is most definitely not the ‘pinnacle’ of motorsport. as the previous poster said….LMP1 & 2 hold that distinction.

      2. Olivier says:

        +1

  92. Olivier says:

    Flat Out Racing & Energy Efficiency.

    It is possible (in Le Mans).

    Here’s Webber’s interview with Martin Brundle.

    http://youtu.be/n2-Yly_BX_U

  93. Anthony says:

    bring back fags ( smaller teams would benifit ! ) bring back any testing you like – let others catch the front. get rid of Nrg saving devicies and give fuel :-) its meant to be a bloody race after all.

    1. kenneth chapman says:

      having watched this interview and also a race edit i can see the attraction LMP1 has for webber. he was, and still is, an out and out racer who enjoys taking it to the ‘max’.

      WEC racing is loud and noisy, full of great racing. this is what we all want to see. if anyone thinks that there is no excitement then they haven’t watched the all out rivalry and edge of seat moments when these guys get down and mix it.

      F1 should be ashamed to dish up the current ‘mediocrity’ that masquerades as the ‘pinnacle’ of motorsport when the LMP1 & 2 cars currently and rightly assume this mantle. they are streets ahead when it come to innovation.

  94. Olivier says:

    Here’s a petition from Motorsport to call for a Sustainable F1:

    http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/a-formula-1-revolution/

    I signed it. I like the – Le Mans* inspired – free engine formula. They also want to bring the human racing back, with no driving instructions from the pit wall.

    (*) What makes Le Mans exciting again is the return to its roots: manufacturers experimenting with new technologies they do not fully master/comprehend. It is one big adventure again.

LEAVE A COMMENT

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Top Tags
SEARCH News
JA ON F1 In association with...
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer