After all the hype, the Formula One Teams Association (FOTA) has produced its list of suggestions for changes in F1, just as promised. There were no representatives from Force India at the meeting (perhaps they are taking it that travel costs deserve to be cut as much as anything else) but the presence of Ross Brawn gives much fodder for the eternal speculation on the survival of the Honda team (there will be an end to the saga, surely). Monty the Molo was there, however, making all the right noises about FOTA unity and shared goals, all for the good of F1.
Nelson Piquet in testing
The proposals themselves are an odd mix, ranging from the expected to the pointless. We all thought that the drive towards lowering costs would continue and, sure enough, most of the technical points are concerned with this. But then, buried amongst the sporting suggestions, there is a request to shorten the length of GPs - with no reason given, not even a wave at the market survey supposedly driving many of the proposals. I am tempted to think that this one has more to do with the increasingly strict limits being imposed on the number of engines allowed in a season than with improving the sport or "show". If the engines have to last for more races, let's make the race mileage lower, goes the thinking.
FOTA are already showing the signs of decision-making by committee with necessary and sensible points being negated by the introduction of silly ones. For example, the suggested points awarded for race finishes is an obvious improvement to the existing system, increasing the value of a win while retaining incentive for the lower places. But this is immediately watered down by the desire for points-scoring in all sorts of unlikely areas. The teams want points for the fastest pit stop, apparently, as though this was not an area already rewarded by finishing higher up the order; Mickey the Shoe and his buddy Brawn showed us long ago that races can be won or lost by the performance of the pit crew.
Such things do not worry me too much as long as they are limited to the Constructors' Championship - no one cares too much about that anyway. Remembering Martin Whitmarsh's earlier thoughts on qualifying format, however, I get scared when the committee signals a desire to mess with that area.
When FOTA get to the commercial aspects, they are on firmer ground and hit the most obvious of improvements. The trouble is that half of the suggestions could very easily be implemented by the teams now, without reference to the FIA, and the rest depend upon the compliance of Mr Ecclestone and his commercial interests. Considering that Bernie is still hot on such details as the use of the term "F1" by anyone other than FOM (as USF1/USGPE found out this week), despite the fact that he holds no copyright over it, how likely is it that he could be persuaded to provide more access to such things as video of the races?
Overall, the list is a curious concoction of good sense, bad ideas and wishful thinking. I suppose this is only to be expected when much of it is justified by a survey that limited the participation of genuine F1 fans to a paltry 25%, preferring the opinions of the occasional viewer and those who will never watch anyway. Of course, the idea is to see if there is a way to increase the numbers watching but I would suggest that the existing audience needs to be retained first. Turn the thing into a freak show if you will but do not expect the real fans to remain loyal - even they have their limits.
Hopefully, Max Mosley will retain his present stance of common sense long enough to reject the sillier ideas while implementing the best. I have the feeling that his attitude has been adopted purely for the purpose of re-election as FIA President, however, and do not expect it to survive his inevitable continuation in power. Perhaps this is the best way to run the sport after all - to have such various and conflicting groups constantly jostling for power while, in the background, the teams and drivers just get on with the job...