Rules Two-Tier Scrapped

Daniel Pinnegar · 17 May 2009, 09:56 (Ref:2463843)

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75390

So does this mean that the two-tier system is now more, as is the budget cap??

**Peter Mallett** · 17 May 2009, 10:02 (Ref:2463849)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Pinnegar

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75390

So does this mean that the two-tier system is now more,

If that article is accurate es.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Pinnegar

as is the budget cap??

If that article is correct, no.

Daniel Pinnegar · 17 May 2009, 10:18 (Ref:2463858)

That just proves that I'm still half asleep if I can't understand it then! :P

**Peter Mallett** · 17 May 2009, 10:25 (Ref:2463860)

The first part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autosport

Bernie Ecclestone says that although Friday's crunch meeting between the teams and the FIA ended in stalemate over the budget cap, both parties did agree that the controversial two-tier system should not go ahead.

The second part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autosport

"I think everybody is more or less happy with the budget cap. Just how much. They'll go with it higher [than £40 million], maybe it'll be lower. It's a case of just sorting it out.

Marbot · 17 May 2009, 11:55 (Ref:2463897)

Perhaps an article that's been produced simply because other forums and blogs are still under the impression that nothing as changed!

This possibly because of the total lack of feedback from many of the team principles after the meeting on Friday with regard to press coverage.Only Ferrari's Domenicali said anything at all after the meeting.Again,the teams managed to shoot themselves in the foot since it seemed that only the FIA and FOM managed to get their view across.

ascarracinguk · 17 May 2009, 13:57 (Ref:2463961)

i still cant fathem out why teams when given a chance to spend less, dont want to. ok it may have been controvertial by mosley to introduce the 2 tear thing but i thought it was quite clever, meaning that teams could spend what they wanted but it would do them no good!.....still i have my concerns on how they would enforce it. im sure they have very VERY good accountants!

Flyin Ryan · 17 May 2009, 14:05 (Ref:2463965)

Quote:

He added that he had his own misgivings about the two-tier proposal. "I always thought that was a bit stupid," Ecclestone was quoted as saying by the Daily Mail. "It was important to get rid of it."

Marbot · 17 May 2009, 14:23 (Ref:2463981)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyin Ryan

Your sig reminds me of De Montezemolo.

jab · 17 May 2009, 22:00 (Ref:2464177)

It seems to me that the two-tier proposal has been dropped but not a two-tier proposal - Mosley was still talking about some other kind of assistance for new teams (which is an absolute must), possibly in the form of data from the big guns

The problem is I don't see the current teams settling for a £40m cap. I don't see them settling for a £400m cap. Because the cap isn't the issue here

Dead-Eye · 18 May 2009, 00:07 (Ref:2464239)

Now I'm thoroughly confused: How is a 2 tier-system any kind of assistance for new teams? I thought the FIA always wanted everyone to sign up to the cap, so the 40 million and less restricted tech rules weren't just meant for new teams.

Marbot · 18 May 2009, 00:14 (Ref:2464242)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jab

The problem is I don't see the current teams settling for a £40m cap. I don't see them settling for a £400m cap. Because the cap isn't the issue here

The "issue" seems to be one of governance.Not something that the teams would be particularly good at IMO.

Marbot · 18 May 2009, 00:35 (Ref:2464246)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dead-Eye

so the 40 million and less restricted tech rules weren't just meant for new teams.

No,anyone could come in under the cost cap and take advantage of really what would mean having a faster car than those that didn't.I reckon Mosley just wanted to see exactly who could,couldn't because of the two-tier system or wouldn't under any circumstances.

old man · 18 May 2009, 08:56 (Ref:2464385)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marbot

The "issue" seems to be one of governance.Not something that the teams would be particularly good at IMO.

That is very much the point and we now need to see how enforceable is the Ferrari veto.

Monaco coming up, deal making time with all the potential entries present no doubt.

duke_toaster · 18 May 2009, 16:20 (Ref:2464645)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jab

It seems to me that the two-tier proposal has been dropped but not a two-tier proposal - Mosley was still talking about some other kind of assistance for new teams (which is an absolute must), possibly in the form of data from the big guns

I think data would be useful. I'd like to see much more F1 data shared amongst the team and fans. One thing I'd like to see is a session after scrutineering where cars are put in an area where all teams and journos can take photos to their heart's content for 30 minutes and deploy their tape measures.

If aero is to remain so important, and it is difficult to constrain without making the cars Super Formula Ford, maybe make a lot of this data public. Publish how much downforce each car produces and its drag coefficient.

Telementary info would be less useful to rival teams, but if it were to be publicised it would be useful for fans. Maybe limit it to a spec data logger and sensors, with certain things being measured (the basics, tyre temperature, brake temperature and driver heart rate) - all data being piped to all the teams and the press centre.

Other cost cutting measures would be restrictions on materials, which would benefit road relevancy.

The other problem is Bernie's chokehold on the commercial rights, FOTA should buy the FOM and install their own commissioner, someone who understands sport promotion. At least the TV monies and collective sponsorship (which should be taken more seriously) should be revenue shared - all teams getting the same level of money, no performance bonuses, no prize money, no brown envelopes with cash under the table, no smoke filled rooms. The teams would be able to race at proper venues in proper countries not an Asian dictatorship where Bernie wants them to go due to the large cheque.

Manufacturers should be able to throw money at the sport at their leisure, but they should not be gaining a performance advantage. They should be able to have their large motorhomes - it doesn't impact on performance. Let them race their own gimmicky engines - give them a power limit, let them use their own pet technology. Just ensure that independant teams are able to buy those engines at a fixed price, or buy a Cosworth V10 or something.

No-one wants to have to explain movable rear wings to their friends, no-one wants to explain different rev limits. That would be silly.

Mekola · 18 May 2009, 17:11 (Ref:2464679)

BTW, FOCA still exists???

duke_toaster · 18 May 2009, 17:19 (Ref:2464682)

No, but FOTA (Formula One Teams Assn.) was formed last year. Luca Di Monezemelo is the chairman, but other big cheeses are Ross Brawn (technical regulations), Martin Whitmarsh (sporting regulations) and everyone's favourite muppet Flavio Briadore doing finances. I'm surprised why they even let him turn up.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
3rd tier series in V8 Supercars in Australia (NZV8's)	Pro Racer	Australasian Touring Cars.	20	26 Apr 2007 22:43
Reverse Grid to be scrapped?	Razor	Australasian Touring Cars.	56	15 Jun 2006 01:04
TOCA3/V8SC3 - Tier 32	JABWOA	Virtual Racers	6	14 Apr 2006 00:17
Should Reverse Grids Be Scrapped?	barney551	Australasian Touring Cars.	41	26 May 2005 05:58
Should they have scrapped the 500s ???	f2001	Bike Racing	14	17 Oct 2001 20:55