All of the above are entitled to their opinion. They have achieved so much
success and longevity in the sport that their views should be taken
seriously. Their warnings are given weight and comprehensive coverage.
Clearly, after the race in Sakhir, many have been premature in their
judgements, but they are free to be so.
The real issue has been the almost total absence of any kind of
counterbalance. With the exception of Mercedes – in particular, the team’s
technical executive Paddy Lowe – and McLaren, as well as some of the
midfield teams, the new regulations have been left to fend for themselves.
Against the might of Ecclestone, Red Bull, Sebastian Vettel and Ferrari,
they did not stand a chance in the public’s perception.
As Max Mosley, the body’s former president, told Telegraph Sport over lunch
this week: “’If there is one thing I feel could have been done better it is
how the new regulations, and the reasons behind them, have been explained to
the public. An opportunity has been missed.”
A bad taste has already been left in the mouth of some fans, and overcoming
that negativity is a bigger challenge than it needed to be. Bahrain, touted
by some as the greatest race of the century, certainly helped, but plenty
more needs to be done.
The move to hybrid engines, as Mosley pointed out, has been a decade in the
making. With all the testing in factories it is incredible that issues over
the engine noise could not have been warded off before the first outing in
Jerez, at the end of January. The FIA now has to play catch up, with a test
planned next month in Barcelona to explore some possible solutions.
In the FIA’s defence, it is not really in their job description to promote the
sport. And as Jean Todt, Mosley’s successor, admitted last weekend, they are
aware of the shortcomings so far.
“It is education,” the Frenchman says. “You need to explain to people that the
drivers are driving flat out from the first to the last lap. You need to
explain what is the flow meter, and at the moment, we at the FIA as well,
need to do a better job to explain exactly what are the new regulations.
“The supporters: they don’t know completely what the new regulation is. I must
say, they are complex. Nobody has explained properly the difference between
2013 and 2014. All that needs to be explained better.”
The FIA are keen to stress that Todt is a man of action, not a man of words.
He is obviously less comfortable in front of the cameras than his
predecessor. But at the moment, words and a clear message are what is needed
if the sport’s fresh direction is to prosper in the face of the PR onslaught
of Ecclestone and co.
There needs to be a relentless explanation of why the changes were critical
(Mercedes’ suggestion earlier this week that they may have left the sport
without the new engines was a timely reminder), and what could have happened
if F1 stuck with the V8s of old.
As Mosley puts it: “It is important for Formula One to evolve. Safety was the
big challenge of the 20th century and the environment is the big challenge
of the 21st. If that fact is not understood and embraced, the sport runs the
risk of becoming irrelevant.
“Corporate social responsibility is important for car manufacturers, so there
is a need to move in this direction so the sport does not lose sponsors and
manufacturers. They see how important this technology is in the development
of road cars.”
While this view has been articulated, it has not been done frequently enough
or with the required vigour. The riposte to Ecclestone’s claim circuits are
tittering on the edge of leaving the sport should be repeated reminders that
F1 could have been left with one, maybe two, engine suppliers if the status
quo had remained.
This is not to say one side of the argument is worthier than the other, but
the FIA’s vision needs to be reiterated. It is worrying that in response to
proposals the race distance could be shortened – an almost sacred principle
of F1 for decades – the guardian of the sport’s rules could suggest that as
long as there is “unanimous agreement” among the various stakeholders, he is
not overly concerned.
It should not be surprising that the teams who are prospering under the new
regulations are the keenest to talk up their virtues. Conversely, the sport
should have been able to anticipate that those teams who have lost ground
would let their displeasure be known.
That is the nature of Formula One. But this is where the FIA must step in to
make sure the new era is not talked into oblivion.
Regardless of their merits or faults, Formula One has these new engines for
the foreseeable future, and the public could do with hearing a little more
than that they are, to put it bluntly, “total c***”.