Force India and Arbitration 11/02/2008 I see that Force India is continuing with the arbitration regarding customer cars in the shape of the Toro Rosso and Super Aguri teams. This action was begun at the beginning of last year and one wonders whether it will ever see a conclusion, so long has it been running.Force India teamAlthough separate from Williams' threatened legal action should Prodrive enter F1 with a McLaren chassis, the arbitration issue was, no doubt, an added factor in persuading Dave Richards to give up on his attempt to compete in the sport this year. With a Force India spokesperson maintaining that the team would be happy to see STR and SA forced to withdraw from F1 ("the lesser [sic] competition, the better"), it becomes clear that this issue has the potential to drastically limit the number of teams on the grid for 2008.To my mind, it is time this matter was brought to a close, one way or the other. Although I wish Force India all the best in their efforts in the sport, the endless arbitration drama has gone on too long already and does nothing but harm to F1 in general. It is presumably too late for anything to be done about STR and SA participating in the 2007 season and it seems farcical that still no decision has been reached after an entire year has gone by.I know that everything has been complicated by the failure of the teams and the FIA to sign a new Concorde Agreement, but that is no excuse for allowing things to drag on for so long. If the existing structures cannot cope with the matter, it surely is time that the FIA stepped in and brought the whole business to an end. Max seems to think that the lack of a Concorde Agreement gives him a free hand anyway; let him use that to decide things once and for all.The teams argue that, with no new agreement in place, the old one continues, but this is dubious in the extreme. A time limit is a time limit, after all, and I agree with Max on this one (a rare event indeed).As long as this continues, any prospective entrants to F1 will be turned off the idea. That may suit Force India in that it allows them to finish higher up the race order but it is not good for the health of F1. Ninth in the constructors' championship may sound better than eleventh but it is still last place if only nine teams compete.In fact, Force India's decision to carry on the arbitration process rather gives the lie to their ambitious statements at the launch of their 2008 car. If they are hoping for midfield places later in the year and podiums in the years to come, they are going to have to compete with much stronger teams than SA and STR. Getting rid of their weakest rivals may even be delaying the team's vacating of the last places on the grid; they will find it much harder to get on terms with the likes of Honda, Toyota and Williams.I do not know why the arbitration has been such a long drawn-out affair and, quite frankly, I do not care. The point is that it needs to come to an end without further delay. It benefits no-one apart from a bunch of lawyers and, in the meantime, F1 is left in a state of limbo, not knowing whether the so-called 'B' teams will be allowed to compete or not.The sports' structures have failed to bring about a quick and decisive result; it is time that Force India acted in the best interests of the sport and called the whole thing off. It may have suited Spyker to start the process last year but Force India should not be saddled with such a sour and divisive legacy. Vijay Mallya should realize that arbitration can achieve nothing for his team and he should end the matter now, before the new season begins.
Clive
Number 38 Your last line Clive, really says it all: "Vijay Mallya should realize that arbitration can achieve nothing for his team."Is this a case of 'more money than brains'? This weekend there are 65 cars qualifying for the Daytona 500 and only 43 grid places. And we in F1 have but 22 and some trying to reduce it to 18. NASCAR will put on a real show, 3 abreast racing, 30 car pit stops, 220,000 in the grandstands and we in F1 watch a parade, a small, short parade. We've even got pundits that want to ban re-fueling! Talk about worlds apart.NASCAR fans are upbeat, 65 drivers with large fan bases, EVERYTHING is good, few drivers change teams and when they do it's BIG news, Toyota was WELCOMED into NASCAR last year, F1 drivers are welcomed, yes even Villeneuve, team merchandicing runs in the mega-millions, most everything is up-beat, but in F1......................what has happened? Few will argue poor LEADERSHIP at the FIA, greed at FOM, and incompetant management at team levels,espionage and law suits, we the fans drive out good drivers just because we tire of them, but still we come back. Hmmmmmm? Date Added: 11/02/2008
Steven Roy It is absolutely ludicrous that no decision has been made. This is a fundamental issue and there should be a limit in the procedures by which date a decision must be made. Imagine if by some miracle Super Aguri make a minor modification to last year's Honda which sorts out its problems and Sato wins the championship. Is Max then going to make a decision that changes the result of the championship? Given he pronouncements at the end of last season I doubt it. My understanding is that the Concorde Agreement stays in force until the end of 2012. I posted something on this subject on GP Wizard. I will try and find it. I am sure Alianora can recite whatever rule applies anyway. Date Added: 11/02/2008
Clive You describe two different worlds, Number 38. What you are saying is quite true but you forget why we watch F1 - and you watch it too! I'm not quite sure that I remember the reason we watch but it must be in there somewhere! Perhaps it's just that we don't like stock cars... ;) Date Added: 11/02/2008
Clive I think it's the teams that consider the Concorde Agreement to run to 2012, Steven - Max certainly doesn't. Strangely, there have been no challenges either way as yet and we will probably have to wait until an issue comes up that depends on the agreement for its settlement. Then we'll find out who is right.Every time I write about customer cars, I do so in the knowledge that Alianora will set me straight on the letter of the law. I'm quite sure she'll help us out this time too! :) Date Added: 11/02/2008
Steven Roy I found the appropriate thread. It refers to a grandprix.com piece which stated that the FIA, FOM and Ferrari had decided that in the event of the Concorde Agreement not being renewed the existing agreement would stay in force until 2012. Given the lack of comment presumably the other teams agree with the idea that the FIA, FOM and Ferrari run F1. First time I have seen that structure formalised.http://www.gpwizard.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=4748.0 Date Added: 11/02/2008
Clive Interesting, Steven - I must have missed that one. And that means that things must remain unclear as regards customer cars, since the agreement is ambiguous on that score... Date Added: 11/02/2008
sidepodcast.com "Toyota was WELCOMED into NASCAR last year..."number 38, you're stretching the truth a bit there. many were wary of such a move - fans, drivers and other teams included.as it happens they earned a decent amount of respect throughout the year, but not from the offset. Date Added: 11/02/2008
Alianora La Canta The customer car case is being decided by the Swiss Court of Arbitration in Lausanne. It is not controlled in any way, shape or form by the FIA or any of the teams involved in this case. Short of withdrawing, none of the parties have any power over the speed of the proceedings. Colin Kolles knew this when he started the proceedings, but it is the only way a provision of the Concorde Agreement can be challenged, according to the regulations. As to the Concorde Agreement itself, no Concorde Agreement holds for the most part (the FIA/FOM/Ferrari one was provisional, and it was in agreeing the details that it fell over). The teams agreed to have a Concorde Agreement at that point, but since no definitive 2008 Concorde Agreement existed, they had to fall back on the 1998 one in order to stay within the agreement they made in March 2006 to get on the 2008 starting grid. Messy... In any case, parts of the 1998 Agreement still apply because they are embedded in the current Technical Regulations. Although customer cars are not included in that, the arbitration process is still valid because it started when the Concorde Agreement was still in force (2007) and in any case the Technical Regulations are written in a way that still forbids their use (even though Max Mosely hasn't figured this one out yet...) However, the Court of Arbitration still has the power to supersede the FIA if (as in this case) it is asked to intervene on specific points of the regulations.Anyway, when Spyker initially started the arbitration proceedings, the FIA and Bernie lost control of the issue, and legally cannot get it back until the case is decided or ended. If the arbitration case rules that the customer teams should not have been in the 2007 championship, then some sort of recompense will have to be arranged, probably monetary. This would help Force India because it still doesn't have a Ferrari-esque budget, even with Mallya's large contribution.There's also the future principle. If customer teams are allowed, then inevitably teams will compete to have the most customers for their chassis. This will result in the number of constructors gradually reducing as constructors fall out of the arms race. Remember that sameness of car reduces overtaking and team performance mobility when everything else is equal. Eventually, the most likely occurrence is that Ferrari and its fastest competitor of the time will be left supplying the field - in a very samey competition with little competition, and no room whatsoever for a small constructor like Force India. So Force India is fighting for the long-term future of F1, at the expense of some short-term discomfort and blocking the likes of Prodrive from getting in. The trouble is that without a long-term for the concept underlying Force India, there really isn't any point in it being there. For that matter, the likely consequence of permitting customer cars in this age would lead to F1 being seriously unsustainable, so FI's time to make an impact would be shortened. So logically it must continue to fight this battle, regardless of the cost - and unfortunately the cost is pretty high.Hope this helps. Date Added: 11/02/2008
David AlianoraIndeed it does!Thank you ... even though such logical reasoning endangers my ‘last of the male chauvinist pigs’ status.I don’t suppose you’d have any interest in replacing Mad Max after he eventually retires, or alternatively is finally committed to care?David Date Added: 12/02/2008
Clive Alianora is truly wonderful and I support your nomination of her for FIA president completely, David. Thank you again, Ali, for yet another clear and concise explanation of the convolutions of FIA and Concorde regulations and procedures. Without you we would forever be mired in our misconceptions and assumptions! Date Added: 12/02/2008
Alianora La Canta It would be interesting to be the FIA president. However, I can't honestly put myself forward as a candidate yet... ...the travel fares would scare my bank manager! If the FIA would pay me to be their information manager, though, I could see me doing well in that position. Maybe then I could help make sure that the rules are written clearly enough so that Force India, Super Aguri and Toro Rosso do not feel the need to do the FIA's job for them... Date Added: 12/02/2008
Alianora La Canta Oh, and one more point on the budding "ALC for FIA president" campaign: having reviewed the list of things that need to be done before becoming FIA president, I think I'd need to do a bit more work on my contacts as well. I still haven't met any FIA members of the WMSC yet... Date Added: 12/02/2008
RSS comments feed
Back to the main blog
You may use some HTML in comments. For bold text use <strong></strong> and for italic text use <em></em>. If you know what you're doing feel free to use more complex mark-up but please no deprecated tags, break tags or JavaScript.
Enter the code shown above: Name * Comment * Email * URL
