Formula 1 Solves Qualifying Dilemma, but Governance Problems Remain
Common sense finally—finally—prevailed in the Formula One qualifying saga this week. Unfortunately, it took a near-unprecedented showing of team unity to force the FIA's and Formula One Management's hands, so don't hold your breath waiting for that common sense to spill over into other decisions regarding the future of the sport.
On Thursday, after receiving a unanimous letter from the teams, the FIA and FOM issued a joint statement acquiescing to their demands and announcing a return to the qualifying format used in 2015.
In case you missed it, here is a quick recap of the circuitous route to this seemingly obvious (at least to everyone outside the inner circle of the sport's leadership) decision. In February, the FIA announced a new, elimination-style qualifying format, which drew a lukewarm reception from the drivers, per Sky Sports' James Galloway.
.jpg?w=256 "Colts Jaguars Football")
Just a few days later, F1 chief executive Bernie Ecclestone told the Independent's Christian Sylt that implementation of the new system would be delayed until the fifth round of the season, in May, due to software issues.
After everyone had a good chuckle about that, the FIA made another announcement that the new system would, in fact, be ready for the first round in Australia. More chuckles.
Then, fans, teams and drivers got their first taste of the new format, and Twitter (or at least the F1 corners of it) nearly had a meltdown. A small sample of the ones who managed to refrain from cursing:
Clearly, the new qualifying format was...not good.
Of course, the whole debacle could have been avoided by testing the new format before implementing it, but I guess no one thought of that.
By Sunday in Australia, the team bosses had agreed to return to the old qualifying format for the second round of the season, according to the BBC's Andrew Benson.
When it came time to vote for that change, though, the FIA and FOM did not give the teams the option of returning to the 2015 format. Instead, they proposed a revised version of the elimination-style format. This broke the teams' unanimity, so qualifying went unchanged for Bahrain.
After another disappointing Saturday, the fans complained and the drivers complained; the teams wrote their letter, and those in charge of the sport finally listened.
Despite the unnecessary qualifying drama, the first two races of the season were actually very exciting. Or, as longtime F1 journalist Joe Saward put it on his blog, "What is wrong with Formula 1 is the decision-makers, not the product."
And with Ecclestone and FIA president Jean Todt still in charge, you can bet we haven't seen the last silly proposal for "improving the spectacle"—that catch-all phrase for describing the many gimmicks recently introduced to F1, such as the drag reduction system, titanium skid plates and high-degradation tyres.
The FIA and FOM statement regarding qualifying even promises that there will be a "global assessment" of the grand prix weekend format for 2017.
However, fans are not complaining about the format of the weekend. The loudest complaints are about the lack of competitive racing, at least at the front of the grid. Mercedes have won 34 of the last 40 races, dating back to the beginning of the 2014 season—one of the most dominant stretches in the sport's history.
The gap is slowly closing, though, as the hybrid V6 engine regulations mature and the law of diminishing returns applies itself to Mercedes.
So of course the technical regulations are to be upended again for the 2017 season in an unnecessary attempt to make the cars faster. Unnecessary both because that is already happening naturally and because, once again, everyone want closer racing, not just faster cars.
One or two teams will likely grasp the new regulations better than the others, thus pushing the field further apart, rather than consolidating it.
If the Strategy Group, with its representatives from the teams, FIA and FOM, was actually thinking strategically, it might see that. Instead, everyone in the group is looking out for their own interests. Mercedes want to stay ahead; Ferrari want to catch them; Sauber...well, Sauber aren't part of the Strategy Group (another problem), but they just want to pay their bills and keep showing up to the races.
As Todt said recently, per ESPN F1's Laurence Edmondson, F1's governance is unlikely to change until at least 2020, when the teams will sign new commercial agreements. Any change before then would require unanimous consent from not only the teams, but also the FIA and FOM.
And if they can only barely agree on something as obvious as the need to fix qualifying, what are the chances Ferrari, for example, are going to give up the influence they hold through the Strategy Group?
Probably about as likely as Ecclestone's pal Vladimir Putin willingly ceding control of the Russian government.
For now, we just have to hope that all the political game-playing and smokescreens don't obscure our view of what is shaping up to be a very interesting season.
Follow me on Twitter for updates when I publish new articles and for other (mostly) F1-related news and banter:
.jpg?w=480 "Colts Jaguars Football")
