Check this out:

nine-point plan

Comments?

I think the aggregate qualifying isn't a bad idea. I also approve of getting rid of most testing, it's expensive, redundant and doesn't contribute anything to the racing spectacle. The single engine rule and no body-work changes are also promising (although if a team screws up at the beginning of the year on the car design - it's hosed for half the season) Maybe only being able to change body-work every forth race is a better idea. I also like the idea of standardizing the electronics for driver aids (I don't like the driver aids - but if they can't police them, everyone should at least have the same electronics).

- BT

 

"Mosley reportedly wants qualifying to be reduced to two 30 minute sessions on the Friday and Saturday before a race with each driver completing at the most eight laps. The two best times from each session would then be added up, with the starting grid worked out by taking an average of a driver's four quickest laps."

That is an awful idea, there would be no flying final lap with 2 minutes left where everyone is on the edge of their seats! You can be 2 seconds ahead of everyone else on one lap, but the rest of your laps you were awful, you still would not qualify first.

 

The rotating driver scheme could have unfortunate consequences for those at the top of the paylist. Take MS for example. With an existing contract for 2003, he would be grandfathered into the new arrangement. It would be a new game in 2004, however, where the drivers would seem to lose their major point of leverage in salary negotiation. With the drivers all then signing up with the one party, he would either have to accept what was offered or leave F1.

Problems lurk in many of the other proposals, for example in mandating that one engine must last four races. Suppose that a car is involved in a fairly heavy accident. Presumably the rule will have a clause allowing a new engine for the next race, or the next session, if the old engine is damaged in a major incident. Bernie, Max and the boys would not want to discourage drivers from exploring the limits of their cars. With a new chassis at each race and limited practice opportunities, a driver might be expected to have a few more off-track excursions during qualifying. Who will decide if the incident is major enough to allow an engine substitution?

Levelling the playing field to remove advantages from teams with the deepest pockets seems to be the motivation for most of the nine-point plan. Such a philosophy may work and be beneficial at the grassroots of motorsport, but it should have no place at this level.

 

I'm thinking that the more radical ideas will never happen. They simply serve as a smokescreen to allow the FIA push the less radical ideas through.

- BT