‘Urgent’ need to improve F1 as Strategy Group meets

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Donald Mackenzie, co-chairman and co-founder of F1 owners CVC Capital Partners, says there is an urgent need for improvements to F1, as the controversial Strategy Group reconvenes ahead of the British Grand Prix.

Links

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

CVC boss acknowledges 'urgency' to improve F1 (Motorsport)

"There is definitely some urgency to see some improvements made, to make it a more exciting sport."

F1 strategy meeting must be decisive, says Horner (Reuters)

"The sport's Strategy Group, which includes six leading teams (Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull, McLaren, Williams and Force India) along with the commercial rights holder and governing FIA, is due to meet in London before the sport gathers at Silverstone this weekend."

F1 needs vision and leadership, says McLaren CEO Jonathan Neale (ESPN)

"We need constancy of purpose, some sense of direction and less of a spin-the-bottle approach to regulation making."

Formula E more of a threat to GP3 than F1 - Christian Horner (Autosport)

"(Fanboost) was the one thing I liked about it. The interaction with the fans was great."

F1 planning group must get it right for 2017, says Christian Horner (The Guardian)

"Compare (Formula E) more to GP3 than F1. You can see it’s full of all the people that didn’t quite make it in F1."

Maria De Villota's family state Formula 1 test crash 'irregularities' (BBC)

"The family's lawyers are studying the report in order to identify the next steps that the family may wish to take, including court proceedings."

Working through the summer (Ferrari)

Kimi Raikkonen: "I think I prefer the old (Silverstone layout), it was more traditional and now it's a bit... obviously the pits are nicer because they're new but the layout I prefer the old one."

Alonso to switch to old engine (Sky)

"The Spaniard will not incur a penalty as he will be using components already used this season."

Susie Wolff - Q&A Interview (Crash)

"Do I want to go back down the side - GP2, GP3 - no. I want to see how far I can get in Formula One, and then let's see how things pan out."

Vandoorne in 'regular talks' with McLaren over future (F1i)

"My main focus is winning GP2 in the best way possible. We'll see what happens. I still have regular talks with Ron and with Eric about what happens with the opportunity."

Tweets

Comment of the day

Short shrift for Mark Webber’s Red Bull revelations:

If things went south in 2010, why did Webber keep renewing his contract year after year until 2013? Surely he could have walked out and pursued a different team to drive in F1 or go do the World Endurance Championship. 2010 was the closest he got to winning the championship and yet he feels he was not given parity.

Why did he then think the situation will ever change? As much as Webber can cry about not getting equal treatment, it was Vettel who kept putting the car in places it belonged. It made sense for Red Bull to back him post 2010.

He stuck it to pole, raced away to a distance and maintained position to get the wins. Compared to Webber who would most like qualify a little lower than what his car was capable of, get bogged down at the start, end up 8th and do a recovery drive.

Mark Webber is not going to win anything from revealing his time at Red Bull while continuing to be there for three more years. His chance at speaking up was probably sometime in 2010/11. He missed that and all these interviews now look like purely desperation to put himself in better light.

I liked Webber when he drove for Red Bull but seeing what Vettel is doing in a different car, makes me believe it wasn’t purely the car. The guy had consistency at the sharp end of the grip.
@Evered7

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Tom Moloney and Pj!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Antonio Pizzonia won the British F3 round at Donington Park on this day 15 years ago. The first four drivers home were all future F1 drivers, Pizzonia being followed by Gianmaria Bruni, Takuma Sato and Narain Karthikeyan.

Pizzonia’s title rival Tomas Scheckter – son of 1979 F1 champion Jody Scheckter – collided with rival Matt Davies:

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

81 comments on “‘Urgent’ need to improve F1 as Strategy Group meets”

  1. Fanboost was what you *liked* about it? Horner, are you deliberately trying to get everyone to stop taking you seriously?

    1. Exactly, this is how blinkered they are.

      The one thing the fans and pundits have lambasted, is the only thing that is picked up by F1 as a “good idea”.

      Bring on the bananas and toadstools!

      1. Call me sexist but fanboost is a great opportunity for an attractive female driver, I’m thinking Champagne soaked T-shirts on the podium, more fanboost than could be used.

        1. @hohum is sexist

    2. Lewisham Milton
      1st July 2015, 1:11

      He shouldn’t be let anywhere near the Strategy Group. Clearly Geri is the brains behind the operation… And Formula E is full of Toro Rosso drivers who were doing absolutely fine in F1.

    3. Obviously from a sporting point of view fanboost is grossly unfair but I don’t mind it’s application in Formula E. Use in F1 fills me with abhorrence mind you so do 50% of F1’s decisions! I hope it’s never used in F1 but it’s an idea based on engaging with fans and using technology which is very FE. No other sport could introduce this without ridicule as it can only work from a sport’s inception imo. I think when, or if, Formula E graduates to a premier sport in it’s own right and a top brand of motorsport where it attracts the very best in every area then it will review fanboost but for now I don’t think it’s doing too much harm. If Dominicali and Whitmarsh weren’t such nice guys then you would believe they were in charge Horner’s press releases nowadays ;)

    4. I like the fanboost, I also like that has a very weak effect.

      Let’s not pretend that F1 drivers don’t get a kind of “Fanboost” based on popularity, Maldonado gets a $30m fanboost every year…. without it, he wouldn’t even be there, at least Fanboost is transparent, and very ineffective.

      1. I like the fanboost, I also like that has a very weak effect[…]at least Fanboost is transparent, and very ineffective.

        If Fanboost is so weak, they might as well scrap it, and do a separate survey asking who the most popular driver is.

    5. Shows how much they know about their fanbase… They have no fricking idea

    6. although I also dont really care for fanboost, it is another example of how formula E is doing a better job, embracing social media + fans. Having every race on youtube for example is awesome, a total contrast to F1 who go out of their way to stop fans video being posted.

    7. I hated it, then I got used to it, then I actually voted in the last race!

      I look at it like this – in F1 no one has equal equipment, it’s not a level playing field. Even within a team you can’t always assume the two drivers have the same car (see Webber’s grumbles).

      So what’s the problem in having a slightly uneven playing field in Formula E, and why not have that advantage decided by the fans?

      I think it will come into its own even more in the coming seasons as development is opened up. I can imagine lots of votes for popular drivers in inferior cars – just think if we could give Vettel a bit of a boost this season in F1 to spice things up!

      And for those that say it’s too weak to have an effect, you probably haven’t watched the second half of the FE season as drivers have often been using it to try and initiate overtakes. Not always successfully I admit, but hey this isn’t DRS we’re talking about.

      1. I think this is actually a fantastic way to look at it and hadn’t thought of it in that way before.

      2. If you gave them identical cars he wouldn’t be half a second slower, he would be a full second slower. He weighs 10kg more than his ex-teammate.

    8. The more I read Horner’s opinions, the more I want to see Red Bull leave F1. He does not seem to have any vision for the future of F1, all he knows is that they “need to put on a better show and create a better product”. If RB want to sell products and put on a show, they should keep selling energy drinks and organise show events; F1 should be a sport.

      Fanboost has nothing to do with sport and it has nothing to do with “interaction with the fans” either. I have always been open to changes in F1 but if the powers that be turn the sport into a scripted reality show, then I am out of here.

    9. There’s something wrong with Horner…

      1. You don’t say …

    10. knoxploration
      1st July 2015, 16:16

      Exactly. I have always defended Horner, but this is one of the dumbest comments I’ve seen in a long time. Fan Boost is an awful, awful idea that turns a sport into a reality TV-style laughing stock. I will not watch any form of racing containing anything even remotely resembling that idea.

  2. CVC Boss – “There is definitely some urgency to see some improvements made, to make it a more exciting sport.”

    oh did you finally notice that your pockets are lined thick with money anymore? give me a break!

  3. Sean (@spaceman1861)
    1st July 2015, 0:54

    Found an article this morning relating to Ric and Ferrari
    http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sport/formula-one/daniel-ricciardo-not-ruling-out-switch-from-red-bull-to-ferrari-for-2016-formula-1-season/story-e6frf3zl-1227422888846

    Is there a spot i can put articles of f1 nature that haven’t been already scooped up in the round up :)?

    1. I found it very weird that Ricciardo took it as a compliment when all Arrivabene said was something like “guess he doesn’t have my number”.

      1. Sean (@spaceman1861)
        1st July 2015, 1:36

        Its interesting comment from Arrivabene it kinda sounds like he is expecting/waiting/prompting him to call.

        1. Not really. I think it’s some of the fans and Ricciardo projecting.

    2. I will eat my hat of DR’s red bull doesn’t fail in every session from now until the end of the season with him talking like that. Does this guy have no clue how RB operate? Loyalty is the most important thing at RB above all else. Seb will go down in history as the champion of playing poker against RB. Dan shouldn’t have been let in the casino, 3 gifted wins really goto a fellas head. I liked him last year but reserved judgement to see how he handled his first year as a proper team leader. Throwing his team under the bus, stating publicaly that Sr members of RB should be fired, and now flirting with Ferrari. He’s playing with fire and really hasn’t proven he can back it up. Good luck matey.

      1. Throwing his team under the bus, stating publicaly that Sr members of RB should be fired

        What? I’d love to see that interview…

        1. It was outrageous really. For a driver to state something like that. Not to mention, it doesn’t really make much sense, as that team is still pretty much the same one which has won championships.

      2. Especially as according to the BBC Ricciardo is under contract to Red Bull until 2018.

    3. I would say this is the right place for them @spaceman1861!

      1. Sean (@spaceman1861)
        1st July 2015, 7:28

        Groovy. In that case.

        http://www.foxsports.com.au/motor-sport/formula-one/mark-webber-reveals-how-sebastian-vettel-avoided-punishment-over-multi-21-scandal-in-2013/story-e6frf3zl-1227423042972?sv=38ac80207e1cb5822e527f36bc2a3586

        Love the headline ha ha but there is some stuff in there I hadn’t heard before relating to:
        “When Ann (Neal, Webber’s partner) later pressed (Christian Horner) about why the team had never reprimanded Seb or issued any punishment for the ‘Multi 21’ incident, he admitted that the team had received a two-page letter from Seb’s lawyer a few days after the Malaysian race stating that they were in breach of his contract by giving him an ‘unreasonable instruction/team order’,” Webber wrote.

        1. LOL I like this man. He sent a letter saying you can’t order me around. That’s guts. Not like he was just one of their drivers, he was a 3-time- world champion at the time.

        2. ColdFly F1 (@)
          1st July 2015, 12:35

          Actually @spaceman1861 I DON’T think this is the right place.
          The article is poor journalism with statements like ‘Ferrari is believed to’, and inserting/copying quotes without revealing the source (they probably copied from an ESPN article). There must be a reason @keithcollantine is leaving foxsports’ links out!

          But if you find any robust articles then please link them in here.

          1. Good point about posting articles that seem to borrow too much (rather are almost or completely a copy of) from other authors/publications @coldfly

            After looking at the article you linked to, it does seem to be full of things taken from earlier articles. Often its also a reason for Keith not to include them, as he does do his best to find original articles rather then include a copy or even translation of them @spaceman1861

          2. Sean (@spaceman1861)
            1st July 2015, 13:33

            The source is quoted as mark’s book @coldfly I just thought it was an interesting bit of news I’m sorry if I offended you by putting it up. I agree that foxs news is very sensationalist but in this case the fact that they quoted from mark’s book made me feel like it was worth sharing. If you look at the article that is at least what they say.

            @BasCB A fair point, I grabbed the only new bit of info out in my second comment and shared it and linked the article mainly as a source not as a good read. Again I was only trying to share some info that I hadn’t seen on this site :( just trying to help lads.

          3. ColdFly F1 (@)
            2nd July 2015, 17:38

            @spaceman1861, no worries! And certainly no need to apologise.

            I was actually taking about your first link (with all the DR quotes). Suggest next time you try to find the original story and share that link. That would certainly be appreciated.

        3. From that article:

          Webber also reveals his take on his deteriorating relationship with Vettel, which he believes began to slide as early as mid-2009 when Webber beat him to second place in the Turkish Grand Prix.

          “It seemed the thought of me simply being quicker was not one he could entertain!” he wrote.

          No mention of the team orders given to Vettel (which he obeyed, although he wasn’t happy about it) in Turkey 2009, to stay behind Webber when he was catching him fast.

    4. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
      1st July 2015, 10:24

      Surely Vettel wouldnt let that happen

    5. If you have a driver who wants to win the championship, I don’t think you need another one who is capable just so they can push each other or something. It would get toxic. Though, of course we don’t know what type of driver Ricciardo really is. One swallow doesn’t make a summer.

  4. I agree with Kimi. The old silverstone was a lot more fun to drive on in racing games although I understand that they needed to change the track as there weren’t enough overtaking opportunities.

    1. I thought the new Silverstone circuit was constructed specifically for the return of the MotoGP in 2010. Wasn’t F1 supposed to go to a revised Donington Park the same year?

    2. @dryyoshi @rob91 Yeah the new loop was built for MotoGp when F1 signed the deal with Donington.

      When Donington didn’t happen & the contract went back to Silverstone they decided to use the new loop for F1 as well.

    3. I think, from a racing point of view, the new layout works much better than the old one – from Turn 3 all the way to Copse there are constant switchbacks which happened to give us a great Alonso v Vettel last season, among other splendid moves.

      Let’s face it, the old layout was just a butchered variant of the fast-flowing old circuit, at least as far as the section from Club to Woodcote goes. It was a compromise on safety and required length and one that had to be fitted with an outdated (but brilliant) old design in the first place.

      Populous was thinking outside the box when it created the new section, unlike Tilke used to do, and seemed to really understand what current generation racing machines – be it MotoGP or F1 – needs in order to create good, side-by-side racing.

      As much as I liked Silverstone 1950 to 1974 and even up to 1987 with the quick Woodcote chicane, I think the current layout is the second (or, in the above case, third) best in the circuit’s decorated history.

  5. Everyone seems to be calling for urgent improvements and yet nothing has been decided. Longtime fans like myself have seen F1 go through many changes through the years, good, bad and so-so. Everyone keeps talking about BIG changes for 2017 and yet there is no concurrence on what that might mean. We as fans have pretty good ideas on what kind of racing we would like to see even if we don’t always agree on how to make it happen.

    The top deciders of what will or won’t happen in F1 are all over the place in what they say they want and many times are at cross purposes. The longer they talk without deciding anything the less likely it is there will be major changes for 2017 without a complete disaster. It takes time and huge resources for constructors and engine builders to adapt to large scale changes.

    Would it be a safe guess to say that there will be no major agreement by all parties for 2017 regulations before the end of the current season? Even if there is an agreement and regulations are set soon after the end of the season that would only give about one year to adapt, make plans, make computer models, build, test and hope everything works out. That’s not enough time for “BIG” changes. Especially if the changes are complex major changes across the board.

    Honda and Renault have known the regulations for the engines for how long now? And look at their struggles. While talking and getting everyone’s hopes up F1 is talking itself right into a corner with no time to act. Less major or less complex changes is what they are setting themselves up for. That may not be what a lot folks want to hear, but what can be done?

    1. “We as fans have pretty good ideas on what kind of racing we would like to see even if we don’t always agree on how to make it happen.”

      I’m not even sure that there is that much agreement on what the wider fanbase wants, though I’d certainly agree that the biggest problem is that there is even less agreement on what we want done. The few times that the fans have really been united in something is when they are complaining about what they do not want – we’re good at defining ourselves in opposition to something, but no good at defining what we want to stand for.

      1. As the headline and survey stated, fans want closer racing and less artificial contrivances. If not universally, at least that could describe what a majority want. The details on methodology to achieve that goal is a veritable mixed bag of Pandora’s boxes.

    2. someones been busy drawing F1 cars of the future which are very nice maybe they should be heading in this direction because that would make them look way ahead of their time,

      http://www.motorsport.com/f1/photo/main-gallery/formula-1-concept-cars-by-andries-van-overbeeke-46/?sz=9&r=52867&s=-6&oft=47&id=4357473&i=4

      1. Some of those are pretty interesting. I like how simplified the front wings are.

  6. No doubt we can rely on this bunch of clowns to come up with a selection of prat-falls to improve the circus, and we fans don’t all want the same thing, at least not initially, newer fans are often beguiled by the quick-fix gimmicks that have been sprinkled liberally into the competition (sport no longer) but if the strategy group had read and analyzed the constant views of the fans over several years they should be aware of what is needed to fix their problem, finances aside.

    1. Closer racing;
    a. we wont get closer racing with more pit stops.
    b. we wont get closer racing with tyres that cannot last when driven in turbulence or pushed to the maximum performance the cars are capable of.

    The answer to a and b is well known but ignored, less aero dependence, more mechanical grip from tyres that can take all the abuse a driver can throw at them with minimal roll-off of grip levels, and drop the mandatory pit-stop and sub optimal tyre use.

    2. Power units :
    These PUs are the torqueiest most powerful engines we have had since the V10s, they are great for racing, great for the manufacturers to test fuel efficient technologies on, the only problems with them are the design straight-jacket and the enforced limit of engines per season, the inequality of performance is part of the essence of F1, engines come and engines go, the problem now is a result of misguided maladministration by the FIA in the laughably incompetent attempt to reduce costs, ask yourself as a team principal would you rather buy and use 20 engines at $0.5 million each or 10 engines at $3million each, the one obvious and workable place a cost cap could have worked was in the supply of engines to teams, simply by forcing manufacturers to supply their engine to any team that wanted to use them at a capped price per season. Teams would need to decide by mid season if they wanted stay with manufacturer X or change to manufacturer Y, Z, W for next year, the manufacturer be free to develop and test their engines as much as they wanted to but only 1 specification could be used for a season.
    This is getting far too long, but getting back to basics is the answer.

    1. @hohum

      b. we wont get closer racing with tyres that cannot last when driven in turbulence or pushed to the maximum performance the cars are capable of.

      The “can´t follow another driver”-phenomenon and debate has been around for 20 years in a multitude of different tyre-eras. It´s not an effect caused by the tyres. If anything, the tyres of today have given the drivers the choice that they could attack while destroying their tyres, when in e.g. the Bridgestone-era they couldn´t get anywhere close to the driver in front regardless how they pushed.
      Even if you only look outside the DRS-zones, there hasn´t been as much close racing as in 2011-2013 since they have banned ground-effect-cars and began developing into the wing- and diffuser-dominated aero.

      1. Like I said, we don’t all want the same things @crammond, but as you say we have known for a long time about the following-driver problem and efforts have been made to improve the situation and these tyres totally negate all those efforts, if they couldn’t get closer than 2 seconds in the Bridgestone era it wasn’t the tyres that were the problem.

  7. Would it be possible for the 2017 regulations to be developed and then not made public? No matter what decisions are made there will be people pleased, upset, enraged, enthralled, etc. I almost would rather not even know, spare the years of complaining and debating, and just show up in 2017 and hope for the best.

  8. COTD might be right but I DON’T think that a) Mark had many chances to stay in a competitive car back then, and b) it’s wrong to open up about all this now.

    Mark was no Barrichello during his stay at Red Bull. He was very vocal about the situation (maybe not as much as he can be now that he’s not attached to them), but he wasn’t silent and accepted everything like Rubens, as much as I like him, did as MSC’s team mate.

    I find it interesting and not at all surprising that Red Bull did what they did back then, even before Silverstone and right after Mark’s 2 wins at Barcelona and Monaco.

    Mark had his chance, and after 2010 there was no better place to race than at Red Bull. Why would he move? even if not completely happy, he had a better chance there than anywhere else (2012? remember he was 2nd to Alonso in the WDC after Silverstone, even after a whole 2011 of NOTHING).

    And I’m sure that no one really can say that Mark wasn’t completely trashed by Seb, and that Seb isn’t a really, really special driver. It’d be daft to say so, with so much evidence.

    1. @fer-no65, Webber did reveal that he was approached by Ferrari as a potential replacement to Massa, and was in active negotiations with them – I think he actually cited it as a reason for being particularly slow to renew his contract in 2012 – so there does seem to have been some interest in him from other top teams at the time.

      1. @anon, Right. imo, Ferrari was looking to replace Massa with another No.2 driver. It wasn’t until Alonso and Raikonnen teamed up that they went for the clear no No.2 driver policy. Barichello was not as vocal as Webber probably because his contract clearly stated his position as a No.2 driver (according to unverified reports)

      2. @anon Webber said that he didn’t want to go to Ferrari because he knew he’d play the No.2 role, and at Red Bull, even if he didn’t completely like it, he had a real chance. He failed, no doubt about it, but he had a chance.

    2. @fer-no65 I agree with your take on MW.

      @Ravin RB himself verified his situation particularly after Austria 02 when interviewed after the debacle of a finish with him handing MS the ‘win’ with meters to go, the fans furious, and he stated he thought he should obey his contract. The teams’ actions throughout the EI/RB/MS era spoke for itself anyway.

  9. What a couple of days! First a mention in F1Fanatic and next a COTD.

    Thank you Keith!!! I think I got the person right this time :)

    1. That was a great COTD @evered7

      Mark Webber says current F1 is rubbish and WEC is the place to be but he spends more time talking about F1 than WEC… Red Bull has a #1 driver metality and Seb was their #1 driver and he eraned that status because he was faster than Mark.

      1. To be fair, journalists ask Webber more questions about F1 than the WEC.

        1. To be even more fair, Webber keeps giving them juicy bits leaving them wanting more of the same. ‘No comments’ being uttered a few times might force them to stop asking him those questions.

          Not be robotic like Kimi but be more PC. Because it is not like he was the perfect teammate for Vettel at RB. Has a fair share of skeletons in his closet as well.

      2. @jcost Thank you!

        Your comment is what I tell everytime Mark opens his mouth about F1. If you like WEC better, stick to it. Let people who love F1 continue seeing it.

        I don’t understand the constant need to put down F1 comparing it with other series as if they are full of roses.

  10. I wish Alonso would just use a completely new engine again, or at least any parts that he needs, instead of bolting together some parts from the old PU.
    It really doesn’t add up that Kimi ruins Alonso’s race, completely taking him out and destroying his engine, all through his own mistake and doesn’t get any penalty, while Alonso has to take a penalty for using a new engine, only because Kimi damaged his previous one. If Kimi’s mistake can be called “just a racing incident” and warrant no penalty, can’t Alonso’s engine change also be called racing incident and be free of any penalty?

    I guess that would be too simple and too logical for FIA.
    And Todt asks where is all of this negativity come from? Should I send him a few links…

    1. Too much thought process involved. Considering the way they have handled the token system, I doubt they even considered such a scenario.

      1. I think the most important element of change is admitting that a mistake has been made. I would love to see F1 return to its most basic form. No silly tyres, no mandatory pitstop, tyre choice in Q2 has no bearing on the race, no DRS, no grid penalities for reliability issues, no parc ferme, and no fuel flow limit. It is all complete and utter nonsense and distracts from the racing. Scrap it all and lets start again. If that means we return to 1993 (minus the electronic aids) then so be.

  11. Why do they never just start from the position that the sport is entertaining enough and work out how to put it front of more people?

    The real fans hate the gimmicks and anyone watching for the latest fad is likely to drift away again. If only they could sort out the stupid engine rules (and yes they are clearly stupid) and maybe make the sport accessible to people who can’t currently afford the pay TV or trackside pass we could just talk about how good the racing is!

    1. If you look at it, that is more or less what Neal says, that the biggest issue is not promoting the sport and not explaining why/how the engine formula is actually pretty impressive @bigwilk.

      I think its unlikely that they will really agree on much, unless its another horrible gimmick. The line that “we have to agree now, time is running out” is something we have heard in F1 for at least a year now, and its more or less the same we have heard from the EU negotiations with greece for the past 6 months. Still not resolved in either of the cases.

      Big changes need a long period to prepare, otherwise it will just be another case of one of the big teams being dominant. I can understand when RBR see their chance in that. But their domination was not more interesting than Mercedes dominating, or than Ferrari dominating in the 2000s were for the fans.

  12. One of the best ways of improving F1 would be to abolish the Strategy Group.

    1. would also save quite a bit of cost for luxurious lunches @red-andy

  13. F1 strategy meeting must be decisive, says Horner

    No, it’s to late to be decisive now. What they must do is sort of sacrifice 2016/2017 and create a long term plan, like in MotoGP.

  14. Completely agree with COTD. When Webber had the chance to do something about it by going public with these stories or go to a different team or championship, he decided to take one for the team, keep his mouth shut and just go with it. And now that it doesn’t matter anymore, he decides to come forward with claims like that. I’m sorry Mark, but that’s just so weak.

    1. He wasn’t that silent. He liked to raise a stink every now and then.

    2. Evil Homer (@)
      1st July 2015, 14:12

      When was Webber silent?? And he certainly is not weak!!!! He always made his opinion heard at Red Bull and unlike most F1 drivers didn’t churn out the normal PR machine. He has also come out with comments since he retired that Seb smashed him (2010 was his year but he stuffed it) and also gives respect to Seb and says it was his opinion and Vettel has his own, which they now discuss openly. Senna and Prost done the same, just in much greater proportions. I thought is was a great interview, not just about Vettel but his whole career.

  15. For once, I agree with Räikkönen. There’s not much to like about the new Silverstone layout.

    1. Yeah, they’ve made a right mess of it. The old one was much better.

      1. (Not sarcasm, by the way!)

  16. “Vision and leadership”?

    Good luck with that!

    1. I think McLaren needs it more than Formula 1.

  17. ColdFly F1 (@)
    1st July 2015, 12:44

    Looking at the other news today I’m just wondering what happened with Greece makes plans for grand prix near Athens.
    I’m sure Bernie will be better to get money out of them than the IMF ;-)

  18. F1 doesn’t need urgent improvement. Every time they put their heads together and do something urgently, it ends up being an ill conceived mess. What they need is not urgency, but a long term strategic plan. Something this so-called Strategy Group has absolutely failed to deliver. They should be thinking four, five years down the line, not trying to think up new and whacky rules changes for the following season.

    Maybe this is what you get when you have a group made up of F1 teams. F1 teams are so focused on the here and now, it’s probably not surprising that for them ‘long term’ is 12 months down the line. It’s something also has a knock-on effect for the costs – give themselves more time to design and build a car for a significant rule change, and the cost can be spread. But announce halfway through the season that in less than a year, things are going to be racdically different, the only solution is to throw large sums of money at it. Thus ensuring that the divide between the haves (who have blank cheque budgets and the resource to throw at these things) and the have-nots (who generally work hand-to-mouth, developing their current cars as the money slowly trickles in through the season) will only get bigger and bigger.

    It’s not a strategy group at all. It’s a Disproportionate Knee-Jerk Response Group. It’s a Fiddling While Rome Burns group. The Rearranging Deck Chairs On The Titanic Group. They haven’t got a strategy. They haven’t even got any idea why viewer numbers are falling, despite the answer being so painfully obvious – they put the sport behind a paywall and then proceeded to collectively talk it down at every opportunity. ‘Strategy’ Group take note – if you put your tomato plants in a dark room, no amount of changing the fertiliser is going to make your fruit grow.

    1. Exactly !

  19. I have as much confidence in the “strategy group meeting” tomorrow as I do with Manor winning a race.

    get rid of this useless pathetic group already.

  20. Evil Homer (@)
    1st July 2015, 15:15

    Strategy Group-
    We are all F1 fans and want our sport to thrive and continue to be the pinnacle of motor sport. Imagine the reaction of other sports (AFL, EPL, NFL, NBL, NBA, NASCAR or Indy) top management to be told that these issues are to run by the teams!! I am not sure for all these sports as there may be some team say (I am not sure- only care about F1), but lets have F1 be run by people that don’t have an invested interest- Ross Brawn and others to have a big say seems good to me!

    Formula E
    I was in LA heading to Vegas for a mates wedding (thanks for the expense bud!! :) and Long Beach E-Prix was on. I took my son almost 9 and it was awesome!!!

    We paid $75 US for a Paddock tour and I have paid Paddock Club many times at F1 (but you cant compare of course) but the no BS attitude was great. My lad watches F1 with me so meeting Bruno, JEV, Lucas Di Grassi, Luizzi, Sam Bird, was great, but his photo with Alain Prost his highlight (and even as an Ayrton fan, mine too :)

    We had a good chat to Nelson Jnr about his thoughts on Van da Gardes lawsuit on Sauber and he has a very strong opinion (ironically), my lad learnt some choice words lol.

    The cars are slow- 230kph, but still cool to watch, they don’t seem easy to drive. An engineer at Trulli team said they should do 290-300 next year and no car change- that would be good!

    So we had a great day! If you are an F1 (or racing fan) and an E-Prix is close by get there, it wont be F1 (and nothing is) but I was surprised how much I loved it.

  21. They need to rip up the rule books & start again from fresh, as for rule changes they need to be done more like the AOC do at LeMans, sit about have a chat about new rules & then decide on the rules & that in three years they will come into force & then don’t change them until the next round of rule changes in three/four years time.

    One of the big problems is the rules keep changing & the rule changes cost money.

    I have been to a F1 race at Silverstone & it was good, but when i went to the FIA GT races & Touring car races there they were much more enjoyable & more fun.

Comments are closed.