F1 directors ‘prefer Horner to follow Ecclestone’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Christian Horner, Bernie Ecclestone, Bahrain, 2013In the round-up: Christian Horner is preferred as a choice of successor to Bernie Eccletone.

Links

Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Christian Horner primed for Formula One driving seat (The Times, subscription required)

Unnamed Delta Topco board member: “The fact that Bernie would train Christian up, in effect, looks like a solution to many of the directors.”

Gossage upset with Formula One scheduling (Washington Times)

Texas Motor Speedway president Eddie Gossage: “I can’t say I was surprised because Bernie Ecclestone does a lot of foolish things. The thing he unfortunately doesn’t recognise is there is an 800-pound gorilla when it comes to major American motor sports. The 800-pound gorilla is NASCAR.”

F1 chief dismisses NASCAR objection (BT Sport)

“At the end of the day they run a domestic series in America – we run a world championship.”

Texas Motor Speedway president still calls Formula One-NASCAR overlap ‘foolish’ (Austin-American Statesman)

Circuit of the Americas chairman Bobby Epstein: “I’d think (Gossage) would worry more about a [Dallas] Cowboys game, as that probably costs him several thousand tickets, rather than worry about what happens in Central Texas.”

‘FW36 running like a dream’ (Sky)

“We totally lost a day at the beginning through this wiring problem which was part of the fuel system electronics, but after that the car has run like a dream.”

Renault says it will be ready for Oz (Autosport)

Renault head of track operations Remi Taffin: “I think we will be ready to run [at the Australian GP], but it depends what performance we will get there.”

Mercedes F1 W05 – cooling and diffuser developments (F1)

“Not only did Mercedes finish the first Bahrain test with the fastest times of the week, they also trialed several updates, including different cooling configurations.”

Why I fear Susie Wolff is fuel for Formula One’s PR machine (The Telegraph)

Former ITV F1 pit lane reporter Beverley Turner: “F1 needs to grow up. It’s losing female and younger fans. A woman in a competitive car would re-energise the sport and attract a new fan base. We can only hope Wolff turns out to be more than a publicity pawn.”

Senna’s MP4/4 returns to Imola (McLaren)

“This year, [Imola] will see a return of Formula One – of sorts – after announcing a four-day event at which Ayrton’s most famous car, the McLaren MP4/4, will be the centrepiece to a festival that carries official support from the Instituto Ayrton Senna, and which will showcase a series of films, unpublished photographs and exhibits that celebrate Ayrton’s life.”

Time for a Formula One Revolution (MotorSport)

“As the striking cover of the April issue states so clearly, we believe it is ‘Time for a Formula One Revolution’.”

Tweets

Comment of the day

F1 cars were within a second of last year’s pole position time (1’32.330) in the first test at Bahrain. But is 2013 a worthwhile reference for car performance?

I find it slightly annoying that they keep referring to 2013 lap times when talking about performance. 2013 levels of performance were not staggering. The course record at Bahrain is a 1:29 or something.

Besides, the biggest area for concern (for me) is the race performance. It would be interesting to see how fast the GP2 cars are in the first few laps of a race (when much of the action takes place) compared to 2013/2014 F1.
TMAC

Site updates

The forum index has had a reorganise to put its contents in a more coherent order. Some similar forums, such as the ‘Going to a Grand Prix’ discussion areas, are now categorised beneath a single heading. Explore them all here:

There are more changes in the forum to come including quite a few fixes and improvement to the layout and style.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Hedgey, Kolon, Verstappen and Andae23!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

1994 F1 seasonA major seven-day pre-season test at the Circuit de Catalunya ended 20 years ago today with Mika Hakkinen fastest for McLaren. He set a best time of 1’17.99 in the Peugeot-engined MP4-9.

However McLaren were still yet to decide on his team mate for the 1994 season.

Image © Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free

90 comments on F1 directors ‘prefer Horner to follow Ecclestone’

  1. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 27th February 2014, 0:22

    Bernie would train Christian up

    Bernie training 101:
    – Never stay at a race long enough to see the end of it.
    – Say as many outrageous things as possible. The more outrageous, the better.
    – Always get the better end of a deal. Even if it’s a shady deal… In fact, the shady deals are better.
    – Push to introduce ridiculous regulations to try and jazz up the sport, even if it doesn’t need it.
    – If ever you find yourself in hot water about something, just claim that you don’t remember.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 0:28

      And dont forget, – whenever you introduce a new rule to make things better, always introduce another rule that will negate the first, like DRS so a following car can pass, then make the tyres fall apart if a car follows close enough to use DRS.

      • petebaldwin (@petebaldwin) said on 27th February 2014, 8:44

        Also – remember when bringing in a terrible rule change, to then suggest an even worse one shortly after to ensure as much discussion as possible gets diverted from your original call.

        ie – bring in double points and then propose it be extended to 3 races. When that doesn’t happen, you can say you compromised!

    • WilliamB (@william-brierty) said on 27th February 2014, 9:46

      @tophercheese21 – I think you missed a few points out there…

      – Always make sure you give a country a grand prix if its mired in political controversy. Maybe Syria…?
      – Establish your favouritism of F1’s golden kid early on.
      – Sabotage Silverstone.
      – Try to circulate the CVC revenue in a way that at least one team find itself on the financial brink each year.
      – Make outlandish statements with absolutely no factual basis whatsoever.
      – Avoid revolving doors.

  2. Sir Teukka (@merioksa) said on 27th February 2014, 0:22

    I thought they compared the times to last year, because this year’s cars were supposed to be 5 seconds slower (and apparently they’re not)?

    • Frostback said on 27th February 2014, 2:48

      Yeah, they were “supposed” to. I figured from the start of the speculations of this seasons powertrains that they were going to be negative and ultimately wrong. Everyone said “slower”, “quieter”(although this is true), “ugly noises”. Turns out they are near the same speeds and make pretty decent noises for 1.6L V6.
      Its like every speculator forgot this is Formula 1. I know that the sport has taken a hit in the sport-competition category, but the technology-competition never dies.
      The fact that the Mercs are under a second from last years pole position time is a flag that these cars may be faster than the V8s by the end of the season. Reliability will especially pickup and speed will come soon. Also not to forget, many teams have not even made performance runs during testing.

      • Robbie (@robbie) said on 27th February 2014, 14:34

        I think I’ll wait to see them race in anger while having to monitor power unit temps and fuel consumption, to see just how fast these cars are on race day when it counts.

        Meantime what I will be watching for moreso than their speed, is how the racing is. That is a far bigger concern for me than their speed. If there isn’t close racing, and rather it is about processions, or half the field not even finishing, or about inability to race because the pits tell the drivers they can’t because if they do they won’t make it to the end, then speeds relative to GP2 or last year or whatever won’t be the overwhelming discussion.

  3. HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 0:24

    “TO THE BARRICADES”,must remember to pick up a copy of Motorsport to read while I man the barricades!

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 0:30

      Oh yes, I almost forgot “VIVA LA REVOLUCION”

    • matt90 (@matt90) said on 27th February 2014, 1:39

      I like the spirit of it, but actually found myself disliking a lot of the proposals.

      A reduced, 15-round F1 calendar with Grands Prix only staged in countries with a strong F1 fan base
      The re-introduction of a tyre war to generate more unpredictability
      The end of codified driver penalties to encourage real racing
      The removal of all pits-to-driver communications

      Throughout most of the last 40 years, 16 or so races were common. Personally I like 18-20.
      I don’t see a tyre war doing a whole lot of good considering how it got last time. Perhaps if their were strict rules somehow preventing favouritism. We might well find this year that our tyre complaints are largely reduced, in which case a single supplier seems like enough.
      I would rather see drivers getting penalties than cheating being ignored. There just needs to be more consistency.
      Radio communications can be insightful, entertaining, and offer important safety information to the drivers.

      • matt90 (@matt90) said on 27th February 2014, 1:40

        *incorrect form of their/there

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 4:09

        I tend to agree but no-body gets the revolution they thought they were fighting for, the important thing is to change the power structure so ideas can be thought through and once agreed upon acted on.

        • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 27th February 2014, 18:58

          @hohum
          As a Tunisian i can only wish good luck for you, your people and your country, we experienced this 3 years ago and it was a fantastic lifetime experience, it is true that revolutions in general are made by the braves and exploited by the cowards but the most important thing is to keep fighting for what you believe

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 20:52

            @tifoso1989, let me wish you, your country and it’s people good luck, true democracy takes time and there are many along the way who would exploit weaknesses in order to enrich themselves .As an Australian I only have to suffer petty corruption and Parliamentarians more concerned about being re-elected than they are concerned about the wellbeing of the public.
            While sympathetic to people trying to otherthrow dictators and corrupt administrations, my only revolution is the revolution of F1 fans against the dictator who has robbed them blind.

      • MemorableC (@memorablec) said on 27th February 2014, 13:36

        So they want to go back in time, what else is new.

        • anon said on 1st March 2014, 9:14

          I’d agree that, whilst the authors of the piece claim that they want to move the sport forward, most of the measures they propose are trying to force the sport to return to some sort of mythical past.

          There are complaints about excessive levels of telemetry when telemetry has been in use in F1 since the late 1970’s (whilst other forms of motorsport, such as IndyCar, were using telemetry in the early 1960’s) – do we criticise Peterson, for example, for utilising telemetry data because he was, by his own admission, relatively poor at setting up a car?
          And why should we ban pit to car radios when that technology, again, has been used since the 1970’s? Do we think any less of the heroics of Gilles Villeneuve because he had a radio in his car?

          As for reintroducing tyre wars, it is worth noting that the smaller teams are against the idea because, all too often, they are intentionally neglected by tyre manufacturers in favour of one or two major teams.
          It’s a very long running trend – Scheckter recouted a tale from 1979 where, in one test session, Michelin would not tell Ferrari what tyres they were putting on the car, nor provide them with any telemetry data, because they would normally only pass that level of information to Renault and didn’t want their favoured customer to complain.
          The 1980’s saw routine instances where manufacturers like Goodyear would intentionally restrict their best quality tyres to a select handful of customers, and even when they did start expanding access to their tyres in the 1990’s, they would still be rather obstructive at times. A former senior engineer at Tyrrell, for example, recounted how he once asked Goodyear for a specific tyre parameter (relating to the stiffness of the tyre sidewall) and was told “Only Category A teams get that information”.
          Most of the 2000’s, meanwhile, was riven by complaints that Michelin was basically producing custom tyres for Renault whilst Bridgestone produced custom tyres for Ferrari – Newey was one rather bitter critic as he felt that his cars were being hindered by Michelin because of such open biases.
          Why, therefore, would the bulk of the teams vote for a measure like a tyre war that would see them probably end up being worse off?

          As for the proposal for the race calendar to be restricted to “countries with a strong F1 fan base”, how is that supposed to broaden the appeal of the sport? If you are intentionally cutting out large chunks of the world (let us be honest, that comment is a thinly disguised jab at the Asian and Middle East nations that have recently joined the calendar) and, instead of actively encouragin any sort of local participation, shut people out because they are not “passionate enough”, then of course you will never develop a strong fan base. Pandering to an existing audience, which is what that MotorSport article is really calling for, is not going to help the sport develop in the long run.

  4. montreal95 (@montreal95) said on 27th February 2014, 1:14

    Re: COTD

    I find it more than slightly annoying when I see comments that move the moaning up a level. It was bad enough seeing comments like “oh no they’re 8 sec slower than 2013″, even though it was only at the first test after biggest reg change in history of the sport. Then at the second test they get within a second of last year’s pole time and still some aren’t satisfied.

    Yes, the fastest time was a 1:29.8 in bahrain Q1 in 2005. Actually, the record would be a low 1:29 from 2004, but because the 2004 was the first year of Bahrain the track was slippery as hell. Most records in F1 are from 2004, widely considered to be one of the worst seasons in history of F1. So 2013 cars were 3 seconds/lap slower than 2004. These cars will be roughly the same. I’ll take that over 2004 any day. Really the fears were that F1 would be slower than GP2 which, for a pinnacle of motorsport, would be unacceptable. Now that’s clearly will not be the case, suddenly that doesn’t matter but the comparison to the awful 2004 does

    Aren’t there enough things to moan about? Like the worst ever rule in F1 in double points, or Bernie’s mentally ill comments or a million of other things that are wrong in F1 today…

  5. Breno (@austus) said on 27th February 2014, 1:34

    I would prefer Horner to follow Bernie… out of F1.

    • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 27th February 2014, 2:31

      @austus yeah right. A team principal who transformed nowhere-Jaguar into a 4WDC and 4WCC winner, deserves to be out of F1.
      Why? because he is more succesful than us?

      • obviously said on 27th February 2014, 2:43

        Where did that came from?
        I’d also like to see Horner follow Bernie out of F1. He’s one of the most despicable characters I’ve ever seen in F1 for over two decades. I just can’t stomach his slimy smiles and his lack of sportsmanship that was there for all to see too many times.

        Could really do without someone who likes hanging out with Bernie.

        • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 27th February 2014, 12:51

          “obviously”, I recommend you to support your opinion with facts, not only with hits, kicks and strikes.
          And once and for all, it would be great to see you create a user, so we can read how sensible your comments are, week after week.

        • Albrecht said on 27th February 2014, 12:54

          “Lack of sportmanship” In comparison to which team principal, exactly? Ron Dennis, the under whom the team stole a rival team’s information? Briatore, under whom a driver intentionally caused an accident? Jean Todt, under who the rules were forced to satisfy Ferrari for years?

          Seriously, take a look at F1’s history and you’ll see Horner nowhere close to be “despicable”.

      • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 27th February 2014, 4:02

        Horner should stay in F1, right where he is.

        If it is so easy to install someone to a position of authority, to replace Bernie, why not install somebody who is most likely to serve the sport? For example, why not Ross Brawn or Sir Jackie Stewart?

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 4:18

          Because, unfortunately, that little deal Bernie and Max cooked up keeps getting sold-on for more and more money and the people buying that deal are expecting enormous profits and wont let go without a fight.

          • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 27th February 2014, 4:28

            And, unfortunately Bernie still wields influence with those people and they will go along with whatever he says. Pretty much whomever Bernie picks as a successor will just be a Bernie puppet.

        • Albrecht said on 27th February 2014, 13:56

          @bullmello

          why not install somebody who is most likely to serve the sport?

          Because owners of huge industries (in this case, CVC) don’t make decisions based on internet fans’ perceptions of people they don’t know.

          Brawn and Steward may be wonderfully nice guys on camera, but that’s hardly an indicative they’ll be good or bad. I understand liking them, or thinking they’ll do a good job, but seriously expecting them to be considered based on how little we know them is not reasonable.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 27th February 2014, 18:13

        The difference is, when running Red Bull he was allowed to SPEND endless amounts to get the results. At FOM the job is to suck out as much money as you can.

      • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 27th February 2014, 19:03

        @omarr-pepper
        Keep telling that to yourself, i just believe that Red Bull are nothing more than Jaguar without that blown floor, 2014 will prove it

        • OmarR-Pepper (@omarr-pepper) said on 27th February 2014, 19:43

          @tifoso1989 yeap, and Batman without his gear is just Bruce… come on, give credit to Horner and his team (not only Newey please, the team.) Alonso needed a team to get his 2 championships too, didn’t he? The same with Hamilton, Mansell, Senna… etc etc. Except Brabham who was the only one who built his team and won championships. And if 2014 sees Red Bull defeated, good for the victor. But wouldn’t you feel like something is missing if RB turns into a not-a-threat team now? You want to defeat Macimus The Gladiator in fair play? or after Comodus stabbed him?

        • Andrei (@crandreico) said on 27th February 2014, 22:12

          So easy to say that, when neither Renault powered team are in conditions to do something close to a race simulation or race stint, don’t you think?

          Also, don’t you believe is kind of sad when Ferrari (or neither other team) couldn’t beat those “Jaguars with blown floors”, as you name them, for 4 consecutive years?

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 27th February 2014, 6:26

      I think Horner is fine where he is now.

  6. TMAC that’s my concern too. I don’t care how fast they go on qualifying I care about how slow they will look like in the race. Last year there was a 5 sec gap but this year I heard from Gary Anderson that fuel alone it will only be 3 secs, but the other systems will amount I fear for more than the 5 sec gap. How dull were F1 cars at the start of a gp in 2013, they all look slow and far from the edge not to mention the tyre concern they had to contempt with. When I’m re watching the turbo era the most disconcerting phenomenon of it is looking to how much the times flex from lap to lap or stage of the GP, especially at by the end of the era the cars were so steady that it was more like F1 stroll than F1 show. My point is that visually watching the cars do their business was not very exciting, managing something in F1 may be good for the championship for the races but it’s not eye candy. In the end I’m being pessimist. We will hopefully get some of the 83, 84 spectacular powerslides, and some of the explosions of the height of the turbo era.

  7. Chad (@chaddy) said on 27th February 2014, 2:24

    Horner is a smart guy, a good man, and clearly a great manager. We’d be lucky to have respectability back at the head of the sport.

    • obviously said on 27th February 2014, 2:48

      Horner is a smart guy, a good man, and clearly a great manager. We’d be lucky to have respectability back at the head of the sport.

      Smart guy? I’d say he’s slick.

      Great manager? He seems quite good in what he does, that I gotta admit.

      But saying he is a good man? I’m sorry, but from what I can see from his actions and interviews (which isn’t really knowing someone in person) I think he hardly has much to be admired at, as far as true human virtues are concerned.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 4:20

      There’s something brown on the end of your nose.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 27th February 2014, 18:19

      Hm, can’t say I feel the same about it @chaddy.

      Lets see, can’t judge Horner and being smart, although he must be to do the job he is doing.

      A good man, what makes someone “good”? I don’t think that frequently changing what you think and do based on where the wind is blowing counts as such. Nor is letting one of your drivers down by letting another get away with things. Hard to tell, but I do not see much to support this one.

      Last one, a good manager. Hm, a good manager is not one that gets ignored by his drivers, called back by his boss, has to change his opinions and strategies based on what an advisor of the boss says etc. So, no for this one Horner certainly does not qualify IMO.

      But sure, why not Horner as top dog at CVC, at least he will be more easily ignored by all, and that might actually help improve F1 for the people who actually make it a sport by competing in it as well as for those who want to visit races or watch them.

      • Albrecht said on 28th February 2014, 12:59

        @bascb

        Last one, a good manager. Hm, a good manager is not one that gets ignored by his drivers, called back by his boss, has to change his opinions and strategies based on what an advisor of the boss says etc. So, no for this one Horner certainly does not qualify IMO.

        Nitpicking very particular events of a extraordinarily successful career as a team manager? I know we have to hate Horner, but still, what you posted is borderline absurd when talking about the manager under whom a team became the dominant force of F1.

        • BasCB (@bascb) said on 1st March 2014, 23:34

          Nitpicking you say Albrecht?
          To me those things I mentioned are not small things, and how many particular events do you need to make your judgement, because all those things I mentioned have happened repeatedly during the last 4 years. This is not about hating the guy, but about seeing him called a good manager, when there really is not that much to show how Horner is one.

          Horner does seem good at somehow balancing things out, but that would make him more apt as a team leader or the boss of FOTA if it still existed, than to be the top man of a company group like FOM.

          • Albrecht said on 2nd March 2014, 0:47

            @bascb

            Anyone who has had experience in a huge laboral environment (and that’s looking for excuses to criticize someone for any reason whatsoever) would know that yes, those are small things in the big scheme of things.

            Even smaller when you consider how successful he’s been.

            Complaining is all too easy when you’re behind a keyboard, but that doesn’t change that he achieved what other team principals, with comparable ressources anf way more history, couldn’t.

            As I said, absurd.

    • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 27th February 2014, 19:05

      Thanks heaven Ferrari has that veto

  8. Chad (@chaddy) said on 27th February 2014, 2:48

    I’d be very interested in the results of this hypothetical F1 Fanatic poll:

    “Who will score more points this year, Kimi Raikkonen or Fernando Alonso”
    (a) KR, and I’m a KR fan
    (b) FA, and I’m a KR fan
    (c) KR, and I’m a FA fan
    (d) FA, and I’m a FA fan
    (e) KR, and I wouldn’t consider myself a fan of one over the other
    (f) FA, and I wouldn’t consider myself a fan of one over the other

    Relative team strength is anyone’s guess, but a match up between new teammates in identical rides seems easier, and more interesting, to estimate.

    For the record, I’d pick (e) but not feel too confident over choice (f).

  9. tmax (@tmax) said on 27th February 2014, 2:52

    If only Big Luca could let it happen……

    Red Bull Boss becomes the Big Bull of F1….!!!!!

  10. JohnBt (@johnbt) said on 27th February 2014, 3:51

    Personally I feel Ross Brawn would be a better candidate.

    • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 27th February 2014, 4:23

      Totally agree @johnbt and would add Sir Jackie Stewart to this short list of worthy candidates to care more about the sport than the greed and self serving team interests.

      Let us ask why Horner’s name keeps getting floated out there and who could be the source of the floating? It seems obvious that Bernie is the logical source of these constant rumors and the notion that he could “train him up” (as quoted by news sources). Why would the team principal of Red Bull be repeatedly pushed out there as the only candidate who could possibly do the job? Are there any reasons why Bernie would not want someone like Ross Brawn or Sir Jackie Stewart to be his successor? One can only guess the reasons why Mr. Ecclestone seems to be trying so hard to name his successor. Could those reasons include some sort of continuing influence or some sort of financial benefit such as super secret consultant ad infinitum for the privilege being named successor? How silly! Bernie would never try to manipulate any such deal or bribe his way into anything like this. Right…

      I hope Horner sticks to his guns and stays out of it. We can only hope that Bernie’s successor is not hand picked by him, but is someone who can help the sport recover from the darker sides of Bernie’s dealings.

      • MaroonJack (@maroonjack) said on 27th February 2014, 7:37

        Who would choose Bernie’s successor, if not Bernie? CVC board? Do you think that’s a better solution? I think it could be much worse.

        Are there any reasons why Bernie would not want someone like Ross Brawn or Sir Jackie Stewart to be his successor?

        Ross Brawn is an engineer, not a businessman. Sir Jackie Stewart is just 9 years younger than Bernie, so the replacement would be temporary at best. Any other alternatives?

        • bull mello (@bullmello) said on 27th February 2014, 8:23

          Probably CVC is choosing the successor, based on Bernie’s advice. Guess I’m wishing for an honorable successor who knows the sport of F1, but without the avarice of Bernie. Somebody strong enough to balance out the interests of the CVC, FIA and teams. The two mentioned above are unlikely to be offered the job or accept it if offered. I was thinking of characteristics as much as the actual individual. Wish I could think of more alternatives…

  11. HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 4:24

    Perhaps we should prepare ourselves for; “The Red Bull F1 world championship series”

  12. Hamish said on 27th February 2014, 6:11

    Random thought while I lay here at Heathrow trying to get over this jetlag – whats the deal with the 107% rule with all these new rules?

    I know in the end it is at Charlies discretion, but hes about as qualified as us given the new rules and regulations.

  13. JCost (@jcost) said on 27th February 2014, 6:39

    MotorSport article

    Banning team PRs from circuits to encourage freedom of speech and allow personalities to flourish

    How do you do this?

    The removal of all pits-to-driver communications

    No way, it’s not the way to go.

    A reduced, 15-round F1 calendar with Grands Prix only staged in countries with a strong F1 fan base

    Keep dreaming.

  14. andae23 (@andae23) said on 27th February 2014, 6:50

    Bullets from MotorSport:

    Restructuring the sport’s finances to give F1 teams greater return, combined with the introduction of a budget cap. This would make F1 teams less beholden to demands from commercial partners and remove the need for technical sterilisation of the sport and pay drivers
    Opening out the technical regulations to allow for greater competitive volatility
    A reduced, 15-round F1 calendar with Grands Prix only staged in countries with a strong F1 fan base
    Reducing fees charged to circuit promoters staging Grands Prix, thus reducing ticket prices
    The re-introduction of a tyre war to generate more unpredictability
    The end of codified driver penalties to encourage real racing
    The removal of all pits-to-driver communications
    Banning team PRs from circuits to encourage freedom of speech and allow personalities to flourish
    Capped-costs feeder formulae with chassis engineering freedom

    The only thing I strongly disagree with is the re-introduction of a tyre war, which adds very little, in my opinion. And although I get terribly bored listening to interviews with drivers, I’m not sure about the PR team idea either. But apart from that, I think these are fantastic ideas.

    • dragoll (@dragoll) said on 27th February 2014, 20:16

      I think the term Tyre War is over stating the actual results of having multiple tyre suppliers in the sport. What happens if there are 2 or more tyre companies in the sport, teams lobby a manufacturer to get the characteristics of the tyre to suit their cars needs/flaws.

      The other point I’d make is that there can only be 1 tyre manufacturer who is better than the other, sure it could be close, but more often than not, there is a gap in performance. This is no different to comparing the different teams on the grid, none of the cars are identical, some teams get close to each other while others are Marussia’s…

      • HoHum (@hohum) said on 27th February 2014, 21:08

        I just want the teams to have the best possible tyres for the job, whether there is 1 or more suppliers doesn’t matter to me just as long as every team can have any tyre at the same price as every other team. However it would be much simpler and economic to appoint a single supplier to supply the best tyre they can at a negotiated price.

  15. Jason (@jason12) said on 27th February 2014, 7:44

    Toto Wolf would be better candidate than Horner to follow Bernie.
    He’s more enterprising.

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.