In these befuddled times for F1, the Monaco Grand Prix, which takes place today, serves as an enduring monument to the stability of a sport that has seen many incarnations since it was first staged here in 1929.
There might be more buildings around its 0.7 square miles, more ostentatious yachts in its harbour, bigger F1 cars that have outgrown its streets; but still the spectacle is like no other.
And nowhere else are the champions of today measured against the heroes of yesterday more than here in Monte Carlo. For the place strikes fear into the heart of every competitor when they first arrive. Damon Hill found it forbidding. "Monaco is an intimidating place; I don't care what they say," he once said.
Contrast that to the experience of Lewis Hamilton. "I enjoy every single moment I get to spend time on the track," he said. Now there's a driver who feels at home between the guard rails.
There is no hiding place for the faint-hearted nor is there refuge if it all goes wrong.
So while the drivers go about their job in this most raw of environments which measures pure talent in millimetres, some of the teams have other issues on their mind.
For in this amphitheatre of the uber-wealthy, in this citadel of conspicuous consumption, trouble is brewing in the very arena that reminds us why F1 will survive the politics of its bitterly divided family.
In the red corner is Scuderia Ferrari. Founded by Enzo Ferrari in Modena, also in 1929, the iconic name started life in a small workshop, producing grinding machines for ball bearings. It didn't manufacture cars until 1946.
In the green corner, the colour of money if you like, is the sprightly shape of 79-year-old Bernie Ecclestone, a mere babe-in-arms when Enzo originally formed his members' club. Throughout the decades, Ecclestone single-handedly took F1 to a new and more prosperous level which made many teams, drivers and individuals very wealthy indeed.
When his friend and colleague Max Mosley was made FIA president, together they formed an impenetrable union that enjoys 360 degree control. But now there is dissent within the rank and file. F1 could not sustain the limitless budgets which favoured the wealthy few. So with one eye on the dollar and the other on the future, the FIA concocted a plan to bring more teams on board and reign in the expenditure of those who had gone off into another stratosphere. Hence the £40m budget cap for 2010.
For F1 to endure it needs healthy grids. Car manufacturers exit F1 at the slightest hint of a recession, as Honda recently did. It is not inconceivable that others will follow now that we have a global meltdown. You cannot be seen to be spending hundreds of millions of dollars on sport while at the same time laying off thousands of employees.
Which makes it harder to imagine why companies would rail against fiscal cuts in the current climate, except that maybe Ferrari doesn't like the idea of being associated with 'caps' unless it is for petrol tanks, and the idea that they are being forced to comply with running their team within budgetary limits or under a two-tier system goes against everything they and their luxury brand stand for. Though in reality it's hard to see how budget-capping could be policed without FIA-appointed forensic accountants being assigned to each team.
In its determination to maintain its special status, Ferrari took the FIA to court last week on the basis that they had a veto which could prevent the new regulations being enforced. They lost and are now threatening to pull out of F1 altogether, which is inconceivable given that hundreds of millions of dollars of their turnover is attributable to F1 merchandising alone. That's an embarrassment of riches to give up in the name of autonomy.
Meanwhile, Ecclestone is now flexing his power and threatening legal action for breach of contract and the return of retrospective TV rights money if Ferrari does not sign up to compete in 2010 by the end-of-the-month deadline.
Should Ferrari and a handful of other dissenters decide to set up an alternative series they will find the going tough. Ecclestone owns the rights to the F1 name, he has contracts with circuits, TV broadcasters and sponsors which would lock out any possibility of someone setting up a successful rival series.
And all the while newcomers, such as Lola, keenly await this portal of opportunity. The FIA must stick solidly to Plan A if it is to underpin the future of F1.
Ferrari might do well to remember the aftermath of their founder's death in 1988 when the team was beset with internal wrangling. It took 11 years to get their act together and win another constructors' trophy.
Some of the teams were meeting over a glass of champagne on board Renault boss Flavio Briatore's yacht to discuss moving forward against the tide of financial capping. A few have trouble with reality. They want to spend more money, and being prevented from doing so keeps them awake at night.
Were Ecclestone invited to give a rousing speech for unification, he could draw on parts of the Gettysburg Address:
"Eight long decades ago our fathers brought forth on this principality a new era in Formula One, conceived on this street circuit, and dedicated to the proposition that all teams are created equal. But somewhere along the line, we have lost our way.
"Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether F1, conceived and dedicated, can still endure. We meet on a great battlefield of that war, here in Monte Carlo on Flavio's yacht, to decide if, without Ferrari, we shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the teams, for the teams, shall not perish F1."
But then again Bernie-speak is a bit more direct and he's more likely to utter, "If you don't show then there's no dough."
Now that's terminology F1 people understand.
David Kennedy is Setanta's Formula 1 analyst
Monaco Grand Prix
Live BBC1, 12.55
Click
No comments:
Post a Comment