F1 links: FIA and FOTA reach deal – report

Posted on Author Keith Collantine

According to BBC Sport on Twitter FOTA has agreed to remove its opposition to the 2010 regulations and submit entries for next year pending further negotiations with the FIA over the rules. I’ll post any further updates on this here if they emerge this evening.

Here’s more of my bookmarks from today – as ever, please share anything interesting you’ve come across in the comments below:

Black flag at the ready for Max and Bernie’s gravy train

"Those who watched the Turkish grand prix on television might be interested to learn that the people in charge of the transmission were instructed to focus their cameras tightly on the cars in order to disguise the paltry attendance."

Design Nick Heidfeld’s helmet

Competition to create a helmet for Nick Heidfeld.

Surviving Silverstone

"Head for this corner [Maggotts] at some point during the course of the weekend. Admittedly there are better places to watch the race, but the outside of Maggotts is where you will see and hear F1 cars pushed to the limit – and you don’t need to buy an expensive grandstand ticket to see it either." Hear, hear!

Michael Schumacher interview at Fiorano (Video)

Ferrari's propaganda effort continues – here's Michael Schumacher on why F1 needs the car manufacturers.

Q & A with Ross Brawn

Ross Brawn on whether the team will back one driver: "I think there's phases early in the season where you can't identify one driver one way or the other, and I think you should let the season run. Undoubtedly you may reach a phase towards the end where you have to make decisions, and we'll make those decisions if we have to. But at this stage there's no need and no wish to make those decisions."

These are links I’ve bookmarked using Delicious. You can see my Delicious profile here.

30 comments on “F1 links: FIA and FOTA reach deal – report”

  1. Good going Ferrari. One chance of having a great set of loose regulations regarding KERS, Bodywork, Wings, Engines and you’ve blown it. Now we’re going to be stuck with a budget cap and even stricter regulations.

    1. At no point have the FIA suggested they would loosen regulations strongly enough to put them down as a potential ruleset, let alone an actual one…

      1. I guess you missed all the hooha about the new regulations for budget capped teams that the manufacturers claimed would create a 2 tier system?

  2. Whatever Mosley may say, his objective appears not to be making formula one cheaper, greener or more competitive. It is to retain control of the sport first by dividing and ruling the existing competitors and second by threatening the introduction of a bunch of new teams whose loyalty to him and to Ecclestone has been bought by the rewriting of technical regulations and by the promise of financial assistance.

    Finally, the mainstream press realise what the rest of us have been saying for years is true !

    1. That’s from the Richard Williams piece in The Guardian – he’s usually pretty hot on this sort of thing.

    2. No kidding! An extremely well written article.

  3. More details coming to light on the FIA-FOTA situaton:

    FOTA has been keen not to adopt an aggressive strategy with the governing body over the matter, and believes that the cost cut proposals it has put forward are exactly what is needed to help secure the sport’s future.

    However, the bigger issue for the teams remains governance of the sport. That is why the signing of a new Concorde Agreement to unify the teams, the FIA and the sport’s commercial rights holder is so important.

    1. Nobody else seems to have picked up on the BBC`s line.
      Several other sources are carrying articles on FOTA having responded to Max & an FIA spokesman saying “The FIA has received a letter and various attachments from FOTA, the contents of which are not entirely negative, and we are currently examining the details.”
      So it looks like another leak from the FIA to me.
      If the Beeb have jumped the gun on this they’re going to look very silly.
      Back to wait & see, I guess.

    2. Should have added that there`s meant to be another FOTA meeting tomorrow.

      1. Darn it why isn`t there an “edit”?
        I would also invite posters to suggest what exactly the “various attachments” may be.
        Whip & IED are the current favourites. ;)
        What would you suggest, Keith?

  4. I Just can´t believe that Anthony Davidson writes like that. He writes one of the best post race summaries that I have been reading in the last races. Fantastic job:


    Hey, Clive, great icon :)

    1. Wet weather and a colder air temperature may help Ferrari, too. For whatever reason – and perhaps it’s somehow connected to their KERS system

      Davidson, you too!

  5. Robert McKay
    9th June 2009, 21:15

    not entirely negative

    does not quite sound like “the war is over” yet, though.

    1. lol – Keith. Have you noticed that they`ve edited the story on BBC Sport.
      Things are now “at a delicate stage”.
      Beeb b*lls up? :)

    2. It sounds like someone trying to claim victory apropos of nothing.

  6. from the Guardian article

    “How much better the world would seem if formula one returned to Silverstone next year and Mosley and Ecclestone did not.”

    That is the best thing I have read in a long time. wouldnt that be fantastic.

  7. Oh, right, I was going to say ‘here we go again’, but in the light of the various comments, it looks like the BBC have caught a whiff of magic-dust and everything depends on how long Max takes to read the FOTA letter and the attachments.
    I still think Max is going to be sunk by his own greediness and need to control things.
    He has asked all these possible new teams (over 10 at the last count) to enter under ‘new’ rules, and many of them appear to have the impression that they will be racing next year, even though they haven’t heard the rules yet, or had to pay out for Superlicences and Entry Fees, or cars for that matter.
    At the same time he is trying to convince the existing teams that they will be welcome, as long as they play by his new rules, and not their own suggestions.
    So as far as I can see, any choice of teams he picks for next year’s racing will upset one side or the other of the motor racing fraternity, as he only wants 13 teams next year, and not 20 plus…….
    Also, if he does allow any of the FOTA teams back, what message does that give about his wanting to cut costs, since they won’t be.

  8. I’m very much now in a wait and see stance, I’ve lost interest in this situation now and await the result, good or bad.

    Here is something from Hans Stuck that I do agree with however

    The Manufacturers should just supply engines, period.

  9. Wet weather and a colder air temperature may help Ferrari, too. For whatever reason – and perhaps it’s somehow connected to their KERS system
    Davidson, you too!
    Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!

  10. How would you class Ferrari, Dougie. Manufacturer or not?
    A racing team first & foremost which later produced cars to fund that racing. (Unlike the other manufacturers who sold cars & then later took up racing.)
    Ferrari is also the only team that has always manufactured its’ own engine. This was behind one of the payments so many took exception too. Ferrari had to fund R&D & production themselves while other teams went out & bought engines.
    Nothing in F1 is straightforward, sadly.
    Which side of the bar would you place Ferrari on?

    1. But Ferrari could make cars and engines and sell the whole lot onto an independant ‘team’ or two, and sell just engines or just chassis to others. One team could even be branded ‘Works Ferrari’, in a similar way to how the old ‘works’ Alfa Romeo Touring Car team was actually independant of Alfa the factory.
      Also, there are lots of Ferraris racing in GT series around the world. They all come from the same factory, they are all ‘Ferraris’, but run by different teams.
      I think Ferrari have more History than common sense at the moment…

      1. Sorry, I don`t follow, DGR-F1.
        Yes, they could do all the things you suggest but I think they prefer to race which is their core DNA.
        I don`t understand your point as you start with a “but”. Maybe my brain isn`t switched on today. Can you clarify, please.

        1. OK, I will try and clarify my thinking for you.
          Yes, I agree Ferrari exist to race, and have always built cars for their own works team to race.
          But if you extend the thinking which has them building all the cars that race in A1GP, and many GTR-spec cars which race in GT series around the world, there is nothing to stop the ‘factory’ from building F1-spec cars and engines for other teams to race.
          This will keep the factory employed, keep the Ferrari name in F1, and still allow them to pursue other avenues.
          I also think Mclaren could do the same thing. Unless there are going to be very silly and strict rules next year to stop it, of course.

  11. Well, that is a good question, and here is how I see it.

    If Williams, for example, decided to design and develop their own engine, would you allow it? Yes, of course you would. What then if Williams (like McLaren) decided to branch into manufacturing of road cars. Would you still allow it, Yes, of course you would.

    That is how I see Ferrari, the fact that all that happened before I was born doesn’t matter.

    What I was saying, and agreeing with Hans Stuck on, is that Manufacturers should just supply the engines. I’m not saying there is a hard and fast rule, or that nobody else can supply engines. Just that for a manufacturer in this sport it makes more sense all round IMO for them just to supply engines.

    Engines is a grey area when it comes to budget caps. If the manufacturer supplies the engine, where are the costs for that. What prevents one manufacturer spending way more than the other, or Cosworth even. Kind of explains why the engine has been “sealed” before the budget-cap was announced… and hence are excluded from the cap.

    1. I can see what you are meaning.
      I asked because I couldn`t tell if you considered Ferrari a manufacturer (& therefore, should just supply engines) or a racing team allowed to use its` own engines.
      Whichever way one thinks on that there will always be others who disagree &, if you make Ferrari a special case we get back to the screams of “unfair” from those who don`t follow the same line of thought.

      1. The fact of life is that Ferrari is a special case no matter how you slice it.

        …Unless of course you slice up Ferrari.

  12. Bartholomew
    10th June 2009, 14:32

    This is not about Mosley. All this mess is about the greed of Bernie´s company CVC.
    I support Mosley and the FIA, the teams ( old and new ) and historic racetracks. Without Bernie and CVC, things can be sorted out between reasonable people.
    It does not matter, imo, what the end result is finally named.
    cheers !

  13. http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=46100

    Just read this and thought of others might find it interesting.

  14. I guess with Michael on the payroll it was a matter of time before they wheeled him out…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.