When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Right. So the teams all agreed (supposedly) to go back to the old rules. The FIA presented no such option, so RBR and McLaren held firm. They would not be forced to agree to something they did not agree too.
"It is a fine game to play, the game of politics, and it is well worth a good hand before really plunging." – Winston Churchill, 1895.
He sat at the back of the room, quiet and unnoticed. With everyone's focus on the Race Director and his open media call in Melbourne, very few saw the tall Austrian in the back row listening intently to every word, every question, every answer. He has always played his role silently. His approach has always been measured.
Two days later, Alex Wurz (ABOVE) chaired a meeting of his union members at which the decision was taken to be silent no longer. A letter was drafted. Its sentiments agreed. Its impact assured.
On Wednesday, March 23rd, the Grand Prix Drivers' Association made its feelings on the current state of Formula 1 public. In so doing it took an irreversible step that will change the face and purpose of the body forever. It crossed the Rubicon.
But why now?
The political landscape of Formula 1 is in one of the most volatile positions I can imagine. Dissatisfaction exists at all levels of governance and influence, while the sport itself stumbles seemingly aimlessly from crisis to calamity amidst a sea of political brinksmanship and power games.
The problems with the sport's governance structure (and there are many) have been brought into the starkest of focus by the recent qualifying controversy. Charged in early 2016 with formulating a long term plan around 2017 Technical Regulations, the Strategy Group instead altered qualifying.
Sadly, there is an inherent pessimism in the sport. I have always tried to be as positive as possible, particularly when new ideas are mooted, but I understand the frustrations felt by so many (myself included) when the sport is needlessly bastardized by regulations that apparently lack any firm direction. In this case, amending something that worked fine as it was seemed beyond unnecessary. And the system that replaced it caused consternation.
The teams were unhappy, the drivers were unhappy. Crucially, Bernie Ecclestone (RIGHT) was unhappy, too. Changes to the basic premise had been discussed and agreed at testing, but then turned away by FIA President Jean Todt. And so when we arrived in Melbourne, we did so to an overwhelming wave of discord. If you spoke to any leading figure in the paddock, they all told you that qualifying was going to fail. The fact that it did should thus have come as little shock. Neither should the fact that nobody ran in the final minutes of Q3.
But the fact there was such an air of "I told you so" in the immediate aftermath, stuck in my craw.
Nobody had wanted it to work. It was doomed to fail before it had even started.
The qualifying debacle in Melbourne was, to my mind, a political statement. It forced the hand of the rulers of the sport by embarrassing them on one of the biggest occasions of the year. While the system itself is imperfect and overly complicated, it does have merits. But none were explored or exploited.
So we got a crisis meeting on Sunday morning. We got a public statement that things will return to how they were. And the teams looked like heroes. The same teams that voted the system through in the first place. The same teams now expecting the wider world to trust them to rectify a situation they had made themselves.
But for all the bluster and bombastic sentiment, Thursday's meeting of the Strategy Group saw the promised return to 2015 regulations fail. A mooted fudge, such as the one Todt denied in pre-season, was also a flop. And so the system stays for (at least) one more race. The unanimity allegedly present that Sunday morning in Australia was nowhere to be seen.
Qualifying as it stands does not need to be a failure, but there are simple issues with the theory stopping it from working in practice. For one, there is no quick means of refuelling cars in the pits between runs, thus creating an almost impossible turnaround for two runs before the countdown clock starts ticking. And second, the drivers do not have enough tires to allow them to make multiple runs. The latter issue is easily solved. The former is somewhat tougher.
The failure to pass something supposedly already agreed, and something demanded in the interests of the sport, is nothing new. Indeed, it is a key feature of the sport's current system of governance.
Nothing gets agreed because in this system of brinksmanship and power games, everyone has vested interests. Whether sporting or financial, nobody will give an inch. Be it Todt, Ecclestone or the teams, nobody can claim impartiality. Nobody can or will act solely in "the interests of the sport."
It is against this backdrop that the GPDA statement was released. A body established to promote safety and to speak on behalf of the drivers has waded into a discussion with which it has never before concerned itself. The statement has moved the body away from being a simple interest group and a politically-passive Trade Union. In swapping its focus from sporting matters to questioning the business structure of Formula 1, and by demanding a change to the manner in which the sport is governed, it has become irreversibly politicized.
Many will argue it is simply making the feelings of the drivers known as the only body that can truly act in the best interests of the sport. Moreover, given its recent survey, the body can claim to speak not just for its own members, but for the sport's fanbase. And yet while it searches to have its voice heard, and to be included in F1's increasingly democratised decision-making processes, it could easily be argued that it is the same democratisation of the sport's governance that has led us to this position.
Under Todt's regime, and in a move designed to assuage the desires of the big manufacturers, the sport has been forced to accept the teams into the legislative process. Max Mosley always argued against such a move as he maintained the big manufacturers would never uphold the needs of the independent teams. Furthermore, he believed that the big names would simply depart when the going got tough as because unlike the independents, Formula 1 was not the manufacturers' life blood. When BMW, Toyota and Honda withdrew, his fears were proven correct.
Ecclestone, too, has never seen a place for democracy in sports governance.
Time was, if someone didn't like the way the sport was run, they could point the finger at Ecclestone or Mosley. Today that isn't possible, so twisted a web has been created by the pseudo-democratic legislative process. But the underlying problem with it all, is that current Formula 1's politics exist on proving who runs the show, rather than legislating on what is best for the show.
So can the GPDA actually do anything?
Make no mistake, the politicization of the GPDA is a huge step. It is a brave body indeed that steps willingly into the Piranha Club. Yet while their intentions may be noble, are the drivers not also naïve to believe that the (in)decisions with which they are unhappy have anything to do with sport? Politics on any stage is about power and money. To assume otherwise is childishly trusting. How willing or able will the drivers be to press for change when they come to the realization that some of the very roadblocks they wish to eradicate are created by their own employers?
And what will the GPDA do if its demands are not heeded? Does it really have the grip on its members to force a strike? Such a move is the only real power the body would have in political terms. If not striking over safety, would its members then fall foul of their contracts? And with not every member of the Formula 1 drivers fraternity being a member of the union, how long would it take for unity to be broken and a scab to cross the picket line and take up his place on the grid?
All it took to break FOTA was for Ecclestone to broker a deal with one major player. His political savvy is as cunning as his business acumen. Don't think for a moment that a letter with some heavy wording would cause him to wobble. He's come up against far bigger opponents with far more to lose than a bunch of drivers who, he has long argued, could be replaced.
His response to the body on Thursday was little more than a pat on the head and a tweak of the cheek.
But Todt? That's a different story.
Perhaps the GPDA, or more to the point Wurz, knows exactly what he is doing. The FIA presidency is set for re-election in a year's time. The Austrian is recently retired. While always shying away from admitting any interest in the position, might recent events have changed his mind? Might the Chairman of the GPDA, emboldened by a fan-backed mandate of eliciting change to the sport, be a strong enough candidate to either topple Todt himself, or act as a running mate to someone who might? Someone who could then reverse the years of damage Todt has done to the sport, by appointing Wurz as the Commissioner Formula 1 was always promised and yet never delivered by its current President?
The political landscape of this sport has never been more troubled or tumultuous. It is into a battlefield of money and power that the drivers have stepped, armed only with best intentions and notions of sporting decency. I wish them well, but wonder aloud if they are truly aware of what they have embarked upon, and if they have the stomach for a fight.
The GPDA is now irreversibly positioned as a political body. Whether it is accepted into the governance structure as a fourth arm of influence, or rejected at the door, its role in the sport will never be the same again.
One hopes they're truly ready and willing to play their hand.
RACER's Formula 1 coverage is presented by Grand Prix Tours. Feel the power and the glory of Grand Prix racing now via Grand Prix Tours' Pick 8 competition.
It's hereditary for the most part. They are morphing in how they affect me, it used to be pretty simple to get rid of. But now they are sort of a vestibular migraine with huge visual triggers.
Stress doesn't help though, all the docs say to calm down. But I tell them to F off. Speaking of which I have 4 yards of a ground up stump to go move
Once my brain scan was clean, people stopped caring doe. Funny how that works. I go see doc in a few weeks to check in on things. These meds seem to rule. And they are only $1.48 a month.
Weeeeee
I had a bad migraine a few years ago while at a BJJ tournament. Almost couldn't drive. Then I had some of my Uncle Chody's Chode-B-Q (Chody is his nickname) and my migraine went away! The recipe is undetermined as he portions all the ingredients by taste and adds ingredients until it tastes right.
I tried to upload a pic but it says something about missing security token. Not sure if due to library's limited wireless bandwidth.
Re: The Official Formula 1 2016 Season Thread
