Paris: Stick-in-the-muds worked themselves into a lather over Formula One's planned reforms — proof, if nothing else, that even in the fast lane, tradition can still be a drag.
And finally, in a stark display of the power that F1 teams wield, they got the sport's bosses to back off.
The score: teams 1, bosses 0. It's a result that could bode ill for those — led by Max Mosley, head of F1's governing body — who want shock therapy to wean the sport off its high-spending habits so that it survives the global credit crunch.
Mosley's governing body, the FIA, said Friday it would freeze plans to shake up how F1's championship winner is chosen, retreating in the face of a chorus of disapproval and even hints of a boycott from teams and drivers.
The FIA said it would merely defer the planned rule-change until 2010. But after losing such face in this, the latest battle over F1's future, the feasibility of resurrecting the reform next year seems far from certain.
Under the FIA's plan, this season's champion would have been the driver with the most Grand Prix wins — which, for a sport all about reaching the checkered flag first, had a clean logic to it.
Only if drivers finished level on wins would the previous points system — 10 for a win, 8 for second place, etc — have been deployed to separate them at season's end.
The theory, championed by F1 commercial boss Bernie Ecclestone and approved this week by the FIA, was that drivers forced to get all-important wins would take more risks on the track, meaning more audacious overtaking maneuvers and racing strategies. More thrills and spills — who could fault that?
Well, as it turned out, just about everybody.
The 10 F1 teams, united in their Formula One Teams' Association, on Friday declared the change invalid, saying it was sprung on them too close to next weekend's start to the season without "the unanimous agreement of all the competitors."
The FIA's somewhat tepid response came in a statement shortly after: "If, for any reason, the Formula One teams do not now agree with the new system, its implementation will be deferred until 2010."
The apparent death of the reform, at least for now, is a shame, because it could have made racing better.
Admittedly, the 2008 championship — which was decided on points — was a nail-biter, decided on the last corner of the last lap of the last Grand Prix.
But that hasn't always been the case. Too often, fans have been tortured by the sorry sight of multimillion dollar cars parading around circuits with the dull regularity of London buses, nursed home for the second-best of points, not going all-out for the win. It can make one rue wasted hours in front of the TV.
The reform held out the hope of changing that, and providing more spectacle to keep eyes glued to screens, which is vital for a sport that needs television revenue and continued sponsorship in these tough times.
Critics expressed a range of fears about the reform. One was that a driver could secure the title by winning the first nine of the 17 races and then rest on his laurels, draining the suspense from the season's second half. But dominance to that degree would be a suspense-killer under the points system, too, as those who yawned at Michael Schumacher's supremacy will tell you.
Now retired, Schumacher joined those critical of the change, saying: "I cannot see how it makes sense to eventually have a world champion who has less points than the driver coming in second." Fernando Alonso, surprisingly given his racing talents, was also opposed.
But the Spaniard's argument that such reforms "only confuse fans even more" didn't really make sense. The principle of winner-take-all isn't rocket science. And F1 fans expect innovation, which is woven into the sport's DNA. Surely, if they are capable of grasping such technical complexities as why slick tires offer better grip than grooved ones, they could have understood that the guy who came first most was the champion?
Anyhow, after the FIA's retreat, this cause seems lost.
The fight over the points system is merely a warm-up for a bigger fight ahead over FIA plans for optional budget caps in 2010.
There's strong opposition. When Ferrari boss Luca di Montezemolo described the package of reforms as "absurd, severe and dangerous" it became clear that the FIA was heading for trouble.
Considering its U-turn on points, the chances of FIA now getting teams to swallow the bitter pill of budget caps look suddenly less rosy.
Comments
0 comment