Results of todays FIA meeting

[racer69]

These new rules i feel are a bit of a joke.

The new points system is silly, there needs to be a much bigger gap between first and second. They should have left it the way it was, eigth place is nearly halfway down the grid, they don't deserve a point!

Testing rules don't bother me, either really does the new 'Hardies Heroes' style qualifying, though it's not really F1 is it.

Team orders, they say their gone but they said that after Melbourne in 1998 didn't they, they'll always be there in some form or another

[JohnSSC]

Wrex, thanks! I agree that the teams went with the "status quo" and that we really can't expect that 20 minutes after the season ends (figuratively speaking) that all parties would have a cogent proposal of changes to review, discuss and then vote on - especially not in just a 2 hour meeting! Perhaps more will come later on this month.

The ban on "Team Orders" is silly because: A) how can you prove it and B) Everybody does it to some degree or another. Whether it is a low budget team giving their #1 driver the latest doo-dads or Frank telling Schumi Lite & JPM to play nice, play hard but DON'T take each other out to the illogical extreme with Ferrari. Imho by the way, nobody forced Rubens to sign anything, so - so what if he did? If he doesn't like playing second fiddle at Ferrari he can take his nomex and go play somewhere else - but I digress.

Change is constant, but almost always incremental!

[JonesF1]

Originally posted by mr v
I bet that Rubens just knows that he's facing a few botched pitstops next year

Like Canada 2000? Oh, boy!

[f1manoz]

Considering that I thought nothing would change, I'm surprised they've done anything at all!!

Awarding points to 8 teams won't change much, but negates the history from now on. However, I guess it does reward those drivers who are constantly reward those drivers who come through the field only to be stuck in 7th...

Qualifying changes appear to add a bit of interest, and the one lap dash could provide a bit of excitement... I guess. Wait and see with that one.

Banning of team orders - Hooray!!!

Really, the FIA had to do something, but as quite a number have mentioned, will thise actually effect the QUALITY of the racing? No...

[alchemy]

What about the 107% rule?

If it still applies what happens if it starts raining mid session on the second day - could it be that TGF doesn’t qualify? I suppose that’s one way of beating him!

[Super Tourer]

If it's raining, cue Ferrari to have a 'problem' with Schumacher's car forcing him into the spare and missing his slot - only to appear last in the running order when changes have been made to the spare car, enabling him to secure pole on a dry track......just a thought.

[alchemy]

Good point Super Tourer

Maybe the 107% rule will be scrapped?

Another point. I wonder how the TV companies (Sky F1 digital apart) feel about the added day of coverage.

Something tells me this, like most other FIA quick fix’s, hasn’t been thought through. I bet they’ll be more FIA panic moves mid season.

[R]

The 107% rule surely must go out the window with this change - or alternatively, it can be based on Friday times (that is, if you're not within 107% on Friday, you won't be allowed to participate in Saturday qualifying). But to stop a driver from racing on Sunday just because he goes into the gravel on Saturday on his sole attempt to grab pole for the race would not be fair. Starting from the back of the grid (for not achieving a competitive time) will be "punishment" enough in that case.

I liked qualifying the way it was, and a lot of tradition is being broken with these new rules. However, it can't be denied that we will see a lot more diversity in the grid lineups with this new procedure, which will most probably also lead to more exciting races. If they had gone the other way - with qualifying positions being decided through the average times of two or even four sessions, the grids would have been even more predictable than with the one hour Saturday qualifying system which we've had for the past few years. So I'm glad they didn't go in that direction. This is an exciting change, which could well reward the safer approach to qualifying - after all, 5th on the grid is better than 20th. Let's wait and see what happens.

Another thing, in response to Super Tourer's post: If you're not able to take up your slot in qualifying, you should start from the back of the grid. This will prevent teams from speculating in having a constructed "problem" during qualifying in order to run later in the session when the track is undeniably quicker. And even if the problem is real, it is unfair if you gain an advantage from having a problem!

[Adam43]

Wrex you are right. The decision is made by the whole panel, not just Bernie or Max. The teams, sponsors, promoters all had a hand in this. So I suppose it is F1 as a whole's fault!

Additionally it would have been practically impossible to introduce anything more at that meeting. Only sporting changes for 2003 could be changed then. It takes much longer to change technical regs.

I would like to see a talk of what to do for 2004. Perhaps a reduction in downforce, banning driver aids, etc... This needs to be discussed NOW.

[Armco Bender]

Banning of team orders - Hooray!!!

Those guys have to be taking drugs if they think team orders are going to stop.I'll beleive that when Ruebens wins the WDC ahead of MS.

[Damon]

To be fair to them I'm quite impressed that they managed to agree on anything. I am disapppointed that the idea of standardised ecu's wasn't put through but as you say Adam, everyone will already have their systems in place for next year so changing now is not really plausible. I am excited about the new qualifying however as it will make every lap like the last run before the flag. Also before the seasons out someone from a top team is likely to ditch it and end up at the back, and it will be great to watch them climb through the field.

[Glen]

Wrex makes several excellent points...

Don't blame Max and Bernie - it's not up to them, the teams have the votes.

Didn't realise that the TV money was on Constructor's finishing position - still, the idea is there and would have rewarded Minardi in almost every other season (since they scored rather luckily (not taking anything away from Webber) in Melbourne).

To all those people who complain that this won't produce more overtaking - I think you are dead wrong. Principle reason for lack of overtaking is having all the cars in the right sequence on track. Slow car can't get past fast car. Put some of them in the wrong position at the start, by using a lottery system to pick start numbers for qualifying, and Bingo - quick car is stuck behind slow car to start with and must get past.

Edit: Forgot to mention that this is very much more to do with the track conditions getting quicker over the hour, rather than the chance of crashing on your one lap chance. The variation in lap speed due to a couple of degrees of extra track temperature, or the coming of some nice heavy-cloud "engine weather" or the the rubbering-in of the track is tremendous.

[Stephen Green]

You could be right but we have to make sure the Blue flag is then only used for lapping back markers and not for trying to overtake the car in front who is on the same lap!

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Wrex

The points are a mixed blessing, and not as good for Minardi as some think. If you look at the score for 02 with these numbers Minardi actually go backwards (although this is fairer I guess).

You could be right Wrex, however, what, allowing the top 8 finishers to score points does in Minardi's case is give that extra chance of points. OK, they are the slowest team out there, but how many times did we see the faster boys, Jags, Jordans and BARs (for example) retire due to this and that, dispite being faster. I'm sure that it's not going to make alot of change to Minardi's situation and where they will end up in the constructors table come the end of next year, however, it might (the new points system) reward the more reliable as opposed to the fastest.

[twig]

I think the fact that a change could make it different to watch, understand and follow, but, although it may give a few spots on the grid to different cars, i doubt it will actually change the result at the end of sunday. I mean, why do these changes make any other team any more powerful than the next, or in our case, Ferrari!?

The points system doesnt change what is going on, on the track, but only the numbers we look at when thinking about the Drivers championship, again, not changed.

With Ferrari's domination in 02, especially at the end, i think the point allocation system will not only make it easier for lower teams to get points, thus making it more accurate to gauge driver skill, it will only let Ferrari dominate even more in the points standings, if 1-2 finishes are commonplace.

Thats my 7 cents.

Tom.

[Mr V]

One thing these changes may do (at the beginning of the season at least) is, for all the people who have said that they won't be watching F1 in the future, (and quite a few people on this forum have said the same) it may just bring them back to watch, from an inquisitive point of view, just to see how it's going to work, or who's gonna get points for 7th and 8th.If it does bring these people back, then the changes have worked.

I, for one, can't wait until next March. (But then i couldn't anyway, changes or not )

[Liz]

I'll watch Qualifying for a few races to see how it goes, but I'm not watching the races until the cooties are off the grid.

If Rubens has been fast in practice, I envision TGF developing "problems" with his car and appropriating Rubens' car so he is unable to post a time and has to start from the back. Two or three of these and he'll get the point. Ferrari will claim to be puzzled at the sudden unreliability of TGF's perfect car and nobody else will fall for it for a New York Minute.

What if Jacques can't set a time on Friday because the BAR is a again in 2003? Does he get to set a time on Saturday if he can?

[Glen]

As far as I can tell a cock-up on Friday would simply mean going first on Saturday. Friday is just pre-qualifying to determine the sequence in which the qualifying proper is held. Most days, running first on Saturday would be a big disadvantage.

The most important thing for me is the recognition that there are problems with the Formula which need to be looked at. People will watch next year, if only to see the effect of these minor changes - hopefully some technical changes to improve the racing will happen eventually, but there will still be quick cars and slow cars which clouds the issue of who is the best racing driver.

Can someone tell me where the excitement is if a red car starts at the back and overtakes the rest of the field ? It has little to do with the talent of the driver so why is it interesting ?

[Glen]

Originally posted by TTT
Can someone tell me where the excitement is if a red car starts at the back and overtakes the rest of the field ? It has little to do with the talent of the driver so why is it interesting ?

Well, if the problem with overtaking is technical, and there is indeed a problem with being able to get past even if the car in front is slower, then there will be excitement in seeing the red cars getting past. Overtaking is either possible or it isn't.

OK, so there is a degree of interest in this due to the aero problem, but IMHO the word "exciting" does not apply.

[Glen]

Sorry, TTT, but if the prospect of seeing a racing driver haul his car through the field, passing cars that are supposedly impossible to pass, doesn't strike you as exciting then what exactly would be exciting?

My whole point is that, in the "red car starts at the back" scenario, it is NOT the racing driver doing the hauling through the field - the car does that. This bores me. I don't think the word "impossible" applies to overtaking when the guy doing it has extra horsepower and grip.

What would be exciting? A level playing field. I know that this would work because I have raced in a championship where there is only 1 team who supply the equipment for several seasons. There is nowhere to hide - the driver makes the difference. What's more - there is lots of genuine (driver skill) overtaking and the championship is always very close. Unfortunately rich kids who have been used to getting the best equipment don't like this much and run scared to somewhere that their chequebook can help them look better than they are. Racing drivers racing each other in an environment where they make the difference is what people want to see and what the sport is all about for me, and I am not the only one.

[Glen]

Be realistic - F1 is a constructor's formula as well as a drivers one. Unless the cars were exactly the same comments like "the car does that" will always apply.

If the driver didn't make any difference we would see almost no difference between team-mates, but we do.

[Red]

It will be another meeting in December, basically meant to discuss the electronics.
--------------
About the money. Actually only half of the money are awarded based on previous season's results (actually only a quarter). The other half is equally divided among all teams.
--------------
The idea of putting the cars in a wrong position on grid, altough stupid, might produce some overtakings. But I doubt it. Unless that grid order is really wrong, something like Minardi on first row and Ferrari on last row. That new point system simply encourages a "better safe than sorry" approach I believe. That system might delay the championship end, for a while, but the drawback is that certainly does not encourage the cars to overtake (and risk an off or a collision) just for a point. Make it something like 16 - 10 - 7 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 or something like that and watch Ralf in second charging on a leading Rubens. For a 10 - 8 points? Watch Montoya safely cruising behind Kimi.