FOTA has reacted to the FIA World Council’s tough new measures to force cost cuts in Formula 1. The governing body has rejected FOTA’s proposal of the 12-9-7-5-4-3-2-1 points system in favour of awarding medals for race wins to ensure the driver who wins the most races becomes World Champion.
The FIA has also announced plans for a two-tier system in 2010 where the teams can choose to run to a budget cap of £30m and a more open rule book or choose to spend more and run to the current regulations. Unsurprisingly FOTA has responded coolly to the World Council’s ruling. Chairman Luca Di Montezemolo said:
“With regard to the decisions taken today by the FIA World Council, FOTA would like to express its disappointment and concern at the fact that these have been taken in a unilateral manner. The framework of the regulations as defined by the FIA, to be applicable as from 2010, runs the risk of turning on its head the very essence of Formula 1 and the principles that make it one of the most popular and appealing sports.
“Given the timeframe and the way in which these modifications were decided upon, we feel it is necessary to study closely the new situation and to do everything, especially in these difficult times, to maintain a stable framework for the regulations without continuous upheaval, that can be perplexing and confusing for car manufacturers, teams, the public and sponsors.”
It appears the gloves are off between FOTA and the FIA.
All I can say is…”I told you so”.
This is war. Again.
Let’s hope it does not spoil what looks like being a good season.
I fear this has only just begun.
Let us hope, too, that common sense prevails……….
RW
Can Ecclestone and Mosley put on races without cars? Do FOTA have these cars? It seems a no-brainer, so, what’s the problem? Why be dictated to by the pair of them? No point in FOTA otherwise. I rest my case.
I actually agree with the system. Most wins gives you the championship, with points sorting out the tie-ups and remaining positions. Looks fair. Just keep out the medals.
As for the CRH/FOM-FIA-FOTA threesome, it’s sad but we had it coming. I’m just overly excited about Melbourne. This is beginning to look like ’82.
Rob, common what?
It is concerning with all the return of 1980 – 1982 style politics at the start of what should be a great season (what with the return of BBC coverage, a reigning British champion and the impact of the Brawn)
Re the points – I understand that Bernie wanted to change the points system becuase he didn’t like the way that Hamilton / Mclaren approached the Brazilian GP last year.
I find it ironic that under the new system, Nelson Piquet would have lost the 1983 championship – and that in the final GP of the year, the Brabham driver gave up a certain win at Kyalami to be sure of the championship with 3rd place.
Then again I am sure that Nelson’s boss was happy with the outcome at the time – remind me what was his name ?
Rosberg would have also lost the 1982 title…I think Watson would have won it with 2 wins and 2 seconds…its ridiculous. Hypothetically a season could pass where there are say 10 winners, where one driver wins 1 GP but finishes 2nd and 3rd in every other race, where one driver (and only one) could win 2 GP’s and these be his only finishes all season and take the title.
What now happens to the points over the last 58 years? How will we compare drivers in the future to drivers in the past based on total points scored?
WRC…here I come.
Pironi would have been the 1982 champion – he had 2 wins, 2 second places and 2 thirds before his accident, whereas Watson had 2 wins, 2 seconds and 1 third……
Hair splitting I know, but I guess it illustrates how a repetition of the ’82 season (many winners, no one achieving more than 2 wins) could lead to the chaotic situation that Robin describes !
After reviewing how past championships would have changed using this new system I am convinced that it is a good thing. In every instance a more worthy champion would have won. See if you don’t agree.
Is it not the racers philosophy that second place is the 1st of the losers? The ‘world championship,’ especially today with so many GPs, has come to diminish the value of victory in a Grand Prix, which is the best thing a driver can achieve. Do you suppose any Grand Prix winner would trade his victory for four fourth places? Who cares when the ‘world championship is decided.
The next Grand Prix is always the one to win, isn’t that why we are all excited to see and experience this sport?
Well, if I understand this correctly now the driver with most wins will be the Champion but points would be used for tie-breaking…not number of second places and so forth. So in 1982 Pironi and Watson both with two wins and 39 points would have to be co-Champions? This is the beginning of an end to Formula 1 as we know it.
I think as Andrew said Pironi would have been World Champion…based on podium finishes. Incidentally Prost won 2 GPs that year too.
In 1958 Hawthorn won 1GP to Moss’s 5! he finished 2nd 5 times…at the end of the day its the driver with the most points at the end of the season…ie consistency. Hawthorn was more consistent that year and 50 years on Hamilton was the most consistant last year…without winning the most GP’s.
aw….cmon now everybody. nothing on earth could be more difficult to deal with than the NASCAR points system. I went back 40 years with their results and if we use the most wins scenario there, we have 38 different/new champions!
Bernie and Max are just emotionally distraught upon seeing the teary-eyed Massa last year after the Brazilian GP. It was troubling for all of us.
So what will happen when some bloke wins nine of the first 12, we will then have five races with little or no purpose at all. Isn’t that what they tried to eliminate a few years ago when Schu was dominating?
Hats off to all the guys who won the title when they shouldn’t have! And to Stirling Moss, the greatest ever NOT to win it!
There will not be any damn medals. Read the FIA decision.
I hope the medal system doesn’t go through; I also agree with Flavio Briatore that the 2 sets of rules($30M budget cap or tech limitations) is rubbish. What really bothers me is that they conducted a survey among the fans and the fans told them they wanted to see a different point scheme. What did the FIA do? Ignore the fan’s opinion and state their own view. Such a lack of respect will not go unpunished.
Aside from these points, and their implications, I personally do favour the “Most wins = championship” approach. Good, consistent drivers will still win when they shouldn’t have.
How about this one. You are a Championship contender, but it’s not your day and you are stuck in third place with no realistic chance to catch the leaders. Even if one of them breaks down (not so likely these days) you are not winning. There are 30 laps to go…why not pull in and save the engine for another day? You can always blame driver fatigue or some unspecified hydraulics problem if needed.
If ever there was time for a breakaway championship, it is now – although appreciate, as does the FIA, that this will never happen. While I agree that autocracy has at times been good for F1, when this autocracy loses its marbles, it’s pretty ugly. The medals system is wrong for a whole heap of reasons, many mentioned in earlier posts. FOTA’s/the fans’ suggestions were so much more sensible, ticking every box. However, the 2 sets of rules are utterly bonkers – does this 30 million whatever include Kimi’s 30 million retainer..? More than any of this, while the FIA may have default-setting contempt for the teams that take part in its championship, as well as for the drivers – as evidenced by the “they can go and race somewhere else if they want to” response to the latest dictat on the superlicense, the utter contempt for followers of the sport is sad. The fans have no vested interest other than to enjoy the show but even this – and their views – are utterly without value to the FIA. I remember when Max replaced the ever confrontational JM Balestre, we all sighed with relief. However, the zero tolerance confrontational nature and unilateralist implementation of any idea that Max comes up with, makes JMB seem rather cuddly in retrospect. Is there not anyone out there that can run the sport effectively, respecting all parties without it having to be like this? For a long time, I felt Max would do this. Will history recall an increasingly unpopular, remarkably clever, stupid man, who did a great deal for the safety of the sport (which many other people would have been quite capable of doing) but who just simply couldn’t stop fiddling with the bits that were OK, or have any faith in anyone’s opinion other than his own as to the future of the sport?
Ales, that would depend on how many wins do the guys in front have.
This discussion is a dead-end. Dave is right, the current point system was introduced because there was one guy who was extremely dominant. In those conditions, the current system is good for the show.
If what we have is a situation where nobody is extremely dominant, as was the case last year, then the ‘most-victories-gives-you-the-title’ system is better.
The only problem I see in this is change itself. It makes comparisons between different years even more futile than they already are. (Although the point system has changed during the years…)
10 days to Q1!
In 2003, because of the point system, Kimi almost made it. But would he be worthy of the championship then? (1 win against Shumacher’s 6?)
Looking at other pastures: Emilio Alzamora, in Moto 125 in 1999: no wins, 3 podiums, champion. Masao Azuma had 5 wins and was second.
Ah, and it’s 11 days to Q1. I don’t know if I can make it. Can’t we move it forward a bit?
Hamish, there is nobody who could possibly replace Max Mosley, as he himself reminded us ever so subtly several weeks ago. He simply would have to sacrify himself and carry on…
Narcissism at its’ ugly best. Max should have been shown the door a year ago….
Well, the manufacturers called on him to step down…now it’s payback time.
These guys are racers and they will race as best they can regardless of how the championship is decided. No system is going to make them any more or less able to pass the guy in front than they actually are. Oh wait, I need to pass him so I’ll just ‘magic’ my car into going faster! If you can pass, you do. If you can’t, you don’t!
Only in the last race of the season was this not the case. LH needed 5th and aimed for it. No driver or team would have done any different.
Here we have a recipe for disaster and I predict reckless lunges down the inside safe in the knowledge that if you take out both yourself and your championship rival it doesn’t matter as you were only second anyway and have nothing to lose. The stewards will have to work overtime of course and they are very good at that aren’t they!
Here’s to someone on 60 points being champion over someone on 120 points.
I think F1 in 2009 will be reckless but certainly not wreckless!
I predict that…….as long as he lives and breathes, Mr Ecclestone will decide what happens in Grand Prix racing. On and off the circuit. Right now, he is intent on limiting the power of the new FOTA organisation. There are financial implications here. He, more than anyone, wants good racing. Good racing means good ratings. And, to be fair, he is a passionate fan of Grand Prix racing.
Let’s just hope that one team does not dominate the first few races. Or we could have a world champion by mid-summer…….
“F1″ might have its problems but it is NOT boring. This year will be packed with drama. On, and off, the circuit.
Wonder what Jean Todt plans to do, now he has left the board of Ferrari. Todt GP versus Brawn GP. Now that would be something to savour……
RW
How soon we forget. Bernie wanted Massa to win the Championship as he had 6 wins to Hamilton’s 5. But that was due to the steward’s crazy decision at Spa to gift Massa points at a race where he wasn’t in the hunt. Had they not done so the numbers would be reversed so will the stewards decide who wins and loses this year? Very dodgy.
Another thing this does, among others, is effectively promoting a one-man team orders. If any team wants to win the driver Championship, they would have to prevent their drivers from taking wins off one another. How is this going to play out at Ferrari, or BMW-Sauber and Brawn for that matter? Andvantage Hamilton, perhaps? I am just affraid that we inevitably will see some win-at-all cost or even prevent-a-win-at-all-cost strategies played out. The drivers are professionals of course, but they all want to win the title and this just puts them in an impossibly unfair situation.
well, as of Friday night (ESDT)it looks as if some sort of common sense has prevailed. we get a points only championship this year, but next year the FIA will be looking to make a mess of it again.
In the meantime, we have a race in a week and I can’t wait. Same feeling I’ve had since about 1967 or so. It’ll be on in the middle of the night for us, but worth staying up for just to hear Hobbs’ commentary alone.