60 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

Jean Todt's term of office is up in December 2021 and, as you might imagine, Dieter Rencken is casting his eye over the likely runners and riders, plus the internecine politics soup that they all swim in (if runners and riders can also swim). The whole article is well worth reading, a short extract is below.
 

Sources close to Todt have since told RaceFans that he is adamant he will step aside in December.

The FIA general assembly comprises fully paid-up member clubs – whether motorsport, touring or both – all of which hold votes. Thus, a caravan association has as much input into the FIA’s future as does a motorsport club, while Liberty Media and the commercial rights holders of other FIA series have no sway over the voting process. Nor, for that matter, do F1 teams and drivers, sponsors and partners, or fans at large.
The end of Todt’s third term means the FIA general assembly faces FIA presidential elections in December, currently scheduled for the third week. The statutes require that candidates have the (written) support of at least six each ACNs (national automobile associations – think RAC in Britain), touring/mobility clubs (such as Britain’s Camping and Caravanning Club) and ASNs (national sporting authorities – Motorsport UK).
 
In addition, presidential candidates are required to present a ‘slate’ nominating a president of the senate (which supervises FIA finances and management), a deputy president for mobility/tourism, a deputy president for sport, plus seven vice-presidents for sport. This VP septuplet needs to be drawn, one each, from the Middle East, Africa, North America, and South America/Asia-Pacific, plus two from Europe.
 
Thus far only Emerati Mohammed ben Sulayem has announced his candidacy, under the campaign slogan ‘FIA for Members’.
“We will take our time on policy formation to ensure it is developed in the most inclusive and democratic way. We will do this by seeking the advice of our members via a process of open consultation,” his website states.
Ben Sulayem is the president of a local ACN (ATCUAE), former regional rally champion, one of seven FIA vice-presidents for sport and chairman of the Arab Council of Touring and Automobile Clubs. He nominated Carmelo Sanz de Barros, chairman of the Spanish ASN RACE, as senate president, Tim Shearman as deputy president for mobility, and world champion rally co-driver Robert Reid as the sporting equivalent.

 

They are not expected to be the only candidates. Britain’s Graham Stoker – Todt’s long-serving deputy president for sport – is likely to throw his campaigning hat into the ring, while Motorsport UK chairman David Richards, the former world champion co-driver who draws on a raft of rally and F1 experience as chairman of Prodrive, is another potential presidential candidate. There may be one or even two more, although gender diversity seems lacking.
 
With the prize of most powerful person in the world of motoring in all its forms at stake, vicious campaigning is expected through to mid-December – the first such electoral skirmish since the 2009 elections, when Todt faced Ari Vatanen, 1981 world rally champion. Todt, who enjoyed the support of predecessor Max Mosley, beat his former Peugeot rally charge by 135 votes to 49.
 
In 2013 road safety advocate and former director-general of the FIA Foundation (a charity created from the proceeds of the sale of F1’s commercial rights) David Ward, announced his candidacy but withdrew after failing to secure sufficient support. Four years later Todt was returned unopposed – a sign of the unity he established in what was once a fragmented body. The word is that ben Sulayem considered standing, then thought better of taking on Todt…
The world of motoring faces unprecedented change – socially, culturally, technologically and environmentally, whether at mobility or sporting levels. It would be no exaggeration to claim that the future of the FIA hangs in the balance unless a visionary leader assumes the wheel from Todt and steers the 117-year-old organisation through the choppy roads that evidently lie ahead.

 

https://www.racefans...dt-has-started/

[owenmahamilton]

I expect that Toto Wolff and Ross Brawn will be linked with the job.

[fifi]

from the names mentioned id go with dave richards

[Anja]

Wasn't Lucas di Grassi interested a while back? 

[Fastcake]

I do enjoy the internal democracy of these sporting associations. During the good times the leadership is unquestionably supported, decisions are taken unanimously, pesky things like elections are conveniently avoided, and the money flow under the table from Swiss bank account to bank account.

Then when the leader inevitably finds themselves aged out of office or just too corrupt to carry on, the members all swoop in for the kill and it turns out they’ve all really hated each other this entire time.

All for jobs which, officially, usually are full time and unpaid.

[KWSN - DSM]

Brawn, Toto or Dominicali.

[MKSixer]

Brawn, Toto or Dominicali.

Will Ross Brown throw his hat into the ring, as well?

 

It would definitely pitch the election into complete disorder!

[LucaP]

When things worked, nobody knew who the Fia president was

[Clatter]

When things worked, nobody knew who the Fia president was

 

If your looking back that far then yes. I only know the last 3, and they span the last 36 years.

[jonpollak]

I voted Jacques Villeneuve

Jp

[noikeee]

When things worked, nobody knew who the Fia president was

I don't think Todt has done a bad job. It's not been spectacular, but an improvement over Max Mosley's wild ideas, acceptance of pretty terrible state of things (remember the whole "F1 is like chess" rubbish?? When we had like 1 overtake per race and the races were decided through refueling stops), and Mosley's vindictive penalties and tampering with the competitive order.

The little we've talked about Todt the last 10 years is a good sign. Albeit there's a decent argument that he's been too absent and ceded too much power to the F1 teams.

This speaking from a F1 perspective. Of course, the FIA is more than just F1.

[FLB]

When things worked, nobody knew who the Fia president was

Which means never.

[PayasYouRace]

The real question is did anyone know who the FIA president was when we only cared about the FISA president?

[Marklar]

A member of the Autosport Forums should do it

[Risil]

A member of the Autosport Forums should do it

You've got my vote

[noriaki]

I don't think Todt has done a bad job. It's not been spectacular, but an improvement over Max Mosley's wild ideas, acceptance of pretty terrible state of things (remember the whole "F1 is like chess" rubbish?? When we had like 1 overtake per race and the races were decided through refueling stops), and Mosley's vindictive penalties and tampering with the competitive order.

The little we've talked about Todt the last 10 years is a good sign. Albeit there's a decent argument that he's been too absent and ceded too much power to the F1 teams.

This speaking from a F1 perspective. Of course, the FIA is more than just F1.

I think he's done a terrible job even from a F1 perspective. Okay, racing may be somewhat ok right now, and hopefully it will improve with next years regs too, and I actually like the halo as a solution now - but during Todt's tenure the biggest new thing introduced were the hybrids and they have been a big failure, imo.

They were extremely costly to introduce and were supposed to appeal to the manufacturers, but only managed attract one manufacturer, Honda- which already left. The competitiveness at the top of the grid has been worse than ever on the hybrid era, and as cars, they've even failed to be particularly exciting to fans. Granted, from the initial hatred, the popularity of the hybrid formula has improved, but it's only risen to indifference mostly.

As you concede, there definitely is also an argument he has given the teams way too much power to preserve their status quo (or why did we only have a single new entry in the past 10 years and no other serious new team candidates to expand the grid either?) and been way too absent when he should have been present (handling of the Aus GP shambles last year a prime example). "No tampering with competitive order" ? Ferrari 2019 says hi. Not to forget, of course, the FIA's inability to fix the stewarding issues of the sport lately.

Most positive developments in F1 that I can think of during the 2010's (the vast improvements in the social media presence/content, DtS, the push to diversify the calendar) have been the result of Liberty's actions: not the FIA's.

[r4mses]

Don't mix up stuff the FIA did/did not/is responsible with things Liberty did/did not/is responsible for.

[danmills]

I would have liked to see Flavio do it if we hadn't had crash-gate and he was tarnished. I still want to see him back in F1.

Money is on Dave Richards.

I think Montezemolo would have been a shout if he hadn't gone AWOL.

Wurz, Vettel or Grosjean will probably try for it next term.

[noikeee]

I would have liked to see Flavio do it if we hadn't had crash-gate and he was tarnished.

WTF 🤣

I'd take the random forumer over him

[GlenWatkins]

A member of the Autosport Forums should do it

jonpollack for President!!

[Widefoot2]

You've got my vote

And my axe to grind.

[KWSN - DSM]

Will Ross Brown throw his hat into the ring, as well?

 

It would definitely pitch the election into complete disorder!

 

If he does he has my vote.

[shure]

I don't think Todt has done a bad job. It's not been spectacular, but an improvement over Max Mosley's wild ideas, acceptance of pretty terrible state of things (remember the whole "F1 is like chess" rubbish?? When we had like 1 overtake per race and the races were decided through refueling stops), and Mosley's vindictive penalties and tampering with the competitive order.

The little we've talked about Todt the last 10 years is a good sign. Albeit there's a decent argument that he's been too absent and ceded too much power to the F1 teams.

This speaking from a F1 perspective. Of course, the FIA is more than just F1.

I think Todt's been an absolute disaster for F1 and turned it into a mockery of its former self.  He was a major force behind the introduction of the hybrids and the way it was done was a complete shambles throughout, and the obsession with making everything "road relevant" has done more harm than good.  The switch to Pirelli as the sole supplier and the ridiculous cheese tyres happened under his watch, too.  He's been unremittingly awful and can't wait to see the back of him.

[jonpollak]

jonpollack for President!!

He’s got nothing else on his plate
And the grid girls would return.
Jp

[noikeee]

The hybrids were a bad decision yes (then again we would've always ended up with hybrids as the only logical solution, could've done it differently though) but I don't agree with Pirelli, took us some time to get there but the current gen of tyres seem to work fine to produce good races now. Getting a control tyre, from a manufacturer willing to produce a tyre that degrades on purpose, to generate a certain amount of pitstops per race was the correct call.

Everyone wishing for a different president: be careful what you wish for...

[jonpollak]

Exactly... you may just get it.. Then what?
Jp

[shure]

The hybrids were a bad decision yes (then again we would've always ended up with hybrids as the only logical solution, could've done it differently though) but I don't agree with Pirelli, took us some time to get there but the current gen of tyres seem to work fine to produce good races now. Getting a control tyre, from a manufacturer willing to produce a tyre that degrades on purpose, to generate a certain amount of pitstops per race was the correct call.

Everyone wishing for a different president: be careful what you wish for...

The fact that it's taken the better part of a decade to get raceable tyres is proof enough to me that it was a terrible decision.  The end doesn't justify the means.  Drivers being unable to mount repeated overtaking challenges after driving hard to catch up is not good racing entertainment in my book, nor is them being unable to drive to close to the car in front for fear or ruining their tyres.  As far as I'm concerned they are still rubbish, have always been rubbish and will likely always be rubbish.  It's consistent with Todt's philosophy of trying to introduce variables into racing instead of actually fixing the root problem but they remain a band aid cure rather than a cure

[noikeee]

In 15 years of forum I'm still to hear a convincing argument of what's the "root problem" and how to fix it.

[shure]

In 15 years of forum I'm still to hear a convincing argument of what's the "root problem" and how to fix it.

The root problem has been discussed for a good while and that's the inability of cars to overtake without some kind of large advantage.  Which is why we've had things like cheese tyres and DRS in the first place.  I don't think that's a secret.

 

if the solution would be easy, then it would have been done.  But that doesn't mean whatever they do should be considered acceptable.  The trouble is what they have done is now very difficult to undo so we are left with ever-more patches to a crappy system

 

There have been a sequence of poor decisions which have been the hallmark of Todt's tenure.  the hybrids is the big one, of course, not so much in their introduction per se but in the way they were introduced and the staggering costs and complexity which has made F1 a 2 tier series like never before.  But there have also been a long list of decisions which try to counter the problem without actually dealing with the core issue.  So eg instead of working out a way to make sure cars can overtake, they pursued the path of throwing in wild cards like cheese tyres to cause surprise upsets, resulting in drivers complaining for years that they weren't fit for actual racing and which were actually counter productive for the most part as it meant it was all but impossible for cars to follow one another.  DRS was supposed to be another short term fix but we all know it's here to stay.  Then we have the decision to ban physical testing on cost grounds and move to wind tunnels which actually cost far, far more and have given the larger teams an even bigger advantage over the poorer ones than ever before and have meant that teams starting off on the wrong foot are all but guaranteed to stay there for years.  Development and testing restrictions when introducing entirely new and untried tech is all but guaranteed to cause an imbalance, which is why it's surely no coincidence that the moment testing was banned it ushered in two consecutive periods of continuous dominance broken only by severe rule changes.  And then of course we have secret deals with teams accused of cheating which couldn't upset other teams and fans more if that had been their design from the outset. Almost everything F1-related Todt has touched has brought far more negatives than positives.

Edited by shure, 15 April 2021 - 09:35.

[P123]

In 15 years of forum I'm still to hear a convincing argument of what's the "root problem" and how to fix it.

The problem is the root problem has been there for near 30 years, in terms of financial disparity (even greater in the early 90s), performance disparity (far greater in the 90s, front to back) and cars unable to race (far worse races in the 90s than now).  Some steps have been taken to address these, finally.  Mosely was always too preoccupied with manipulating championships due to his closeness to Ecclestone and trying to score a hit against one team or another.  Todt thankfully took a step back from that approach.  I think he has done fine for F1, less so for rallying.

[BobbyRicky]

How about Sato?

[sheSgoTthElooK]

Wait, what is Max Rufus Mosley doing?

 

And what about Mika Häkkinen? After Jean (Ferrari) Todt, we can go for Mika (Mclaren-Mercedes) Häkkinen. Or Mark (the Red Bull) Webber? Or Flavio (Renault) Briatore?

 

BTW I would like to see Peter Sauber as FIA president. 

Edited by sheSgoTthElooK, 15 April 2021 - 10:29.

[Risil]

In 15 years of forum I'm still to hear a convincing argument of what's the "root problem" and how to fix it.

 

The root problem of F1 or the root problem of this forum? 

[Risil]

The problem is the root problem has been there for near 30 years, in terms of financial disparity (even greater in the early 90s), performance disparity (far greater in the 90s, front to back) and cars unable to race (far worse races in the 90s than now).  Some steps have been taken to address these, finally.  Mosely was always too preoccupied with manipulating championships due to his closeness to Ecclestone and trying to score a hit against one team or another.  Todt thankfully took a step back from that approach.  I think he has done fine for F1, less so for rallying.

 

I think the FIA must carry some responsibility for the boom-and-bust of sports cars in the 2010s too. Although I don't know how much of the blame needs to be shared with the ACO and the manufacturers who initiated the hybrid arms race. 

[krapmeister]

The hybrids were a bad decision yes (then again we would've always ended up with hybrids as the only logical solution, could've done it differently though) but I don't agree with Pirelli, took us some time to get there but the current gen of tyres seem to work fine to produce good races now. Getting a control tyre, from a manufacturer willing to produce a tyre that degrades on purpose, to generate a certain amount of pitstops per race was the correct call.

Everyone wishing for a different president: be careful what you wish for...

 

 

Come on, y'all know you want it...

[Risil]

People coming to the presidency with a background in entertainment isn't necessarily a bad thing -- it's a quintessentially American industry after all.

But I do have big worries about people becoming president who have never held public office or even shown evidence of thinking hard about what public office means (all the more important when you have no practical experience). Naming no names.

 

(Oops, thought I was in the Paddock Club there.)

[SophieB]

I think that's fair. After all, although the F1 bit is unquestionably the aspect of the organisation with the highest profile and widest reach, the FIA's total remit is vast. The ability to effectively run such a sprawling empire seems key.

[Risil]

I think that's fair. After all, although the F1 bit is unquestionably the aspect of the organisation with the highest profile and widest reach, the FIA's total remit is vast. The ability to effectively run such a sprawling empire seems key.

 

Equally, the concern when you have a vast empire built on the cooperation of individual touring clubs is that there is the risk that your system promotes people with no real vision for the sport but are very good at working the system. See FIFA. Although I felt at least in Sepp Blatter's case that he managed to construct a vision that was nonetheless in line with the dirty business of getting elected.

[ArnageWRC]

The FiA President will likely have some form of background in F1 - otherwise they'll likely not get elected.

 

I recall the 2009 election, and Todt was up against Vatanen, who ran a very good campaign. On the day of the election, which coincided with the first day of RallyGB, there was a discussion on BBC radio about the election; on the panel, who were supposedly motorsport journalists, most had no idea who Vatanen was, with only one knowing who he was.

 

Dirtfish had an article about a month ago; and I'm afraid they came up with too many rally candidates who have no chance of the job. Dave Richards would have been a good shout, but he hasn't been great as the MSUK chairman.

[noriaki]

The problem is the root problem has been there for near 30 years, in terms of financial disparity (even greater in the early 90s), performance disparity (far greater in the 90s, front to back) and cars unable to race (far worse races in the 90s than now). Some steps have been taken to address these, finally. Mosely was always too preoccupied with manipulating championships due to his closeness to Ecclestone and trying to score a hit against one team or another. Todt thankfully took a step back from that approach. I think he has done fine for F1, less so for rallying.

The cars were very much able to race in the nineties. It was just the pronounced performance disparity in the early to mid 90s and the regulations not yet finetuned to create a good show, that caused the snoozers. But when the stars aligned, the cars could race.

Yeah, the cars did start gaining in aero and hence have slowly become worse and worse for racing ever since 1998 (with big changes to address that problem made in 2009 already: it wasn't entirely successful but an attempt nonetheless, and since then we've had less decline in raceability and more or less a status quo wrt) - but that problem was offset by the evaporating performance disparity and the increased variation in the competitive order. Throughout the 1998-2013 era there were lots of ebbs and flows between all teams' performance, even from year to year, which kept things fresh enough that a whopping 2 straight years of Ferrari building a dominant car was seen as an excrutiating period of dominance and big changes were demanded to make it stop.

The good thing about the early 2000's the development being open allowed quick catchup for the numerous factory teams if they only got things right. That became unrealistic as the factory teams pulled out, hence the frozen engine regs of the late 00's and the early 2010's were exactly the right move and allowed midtable budget teams like Lotus, Sauber and Williams to catch the lightning and build genuinely competitive cars as late as 2012. For all his numerous faults - this was also what Mosley wanted to see from f1 be with his (poorly implemented) budget cap concepts and whatnot. Unpredictable.

But then Todt came along and boom, now the performance disparity is back and with the token systens and all, everything is much more predictable and stagnant again. Especially at the top end of the grid, there's very little performance variation from year to year again. (Save for Ferrari being good old Ferrari obviously.) We can only hope the 2022 regs will finally bring change.

Edited by noriaki, 15 April 2021 - 11:57.

[Ben1445]

cheese tyres

When and why did we start referring to them as cheese tyres? 

 

I cannot remember. 

Edited by Ben1445, 15 April 2021 - 12:06.

[Risil]

When it comes to food metaphors I remember when Michael Schumacher (memorably) described the Pirellis as "driving on eggshells".

[shure]

When it comes to food metaphors I remember when Michael Schumacher (memorably) described the Pirellis as "driving on eggshells".

greasy eggs, I think it was!

 

edit, raw eggs aparently:

 

The main thing I feel unhappy about is everyone has to drive well below a driver's, and in particular, the car's limits to maintain the tyres. I just question whether they should play such a big importance, or whether they should last a bit longer, and that you can drive at normal racing car speed and not cruise around like we have a safety car.

 

"They're playing a much too big effect because they are so peaky and so special that they don't put our cars or ourselves to the limit. We drive like on raw eggs and I don't want to stress the tyres at all. Otherwise you just overdo it and you go nowhere."

 

https://www.theguard...irelli-tyres-f1

Edited by shure, 15 April 2021 - 13:11.

[KWSN - DSM]

He’s got nothing else on his plate
And the grid girls would return.
Jp

 

Solid platform!!

[Risil]

greasy eggs, I think it was!

edit, raw eggs aparently:

The main thing I feel unhappy about is everyone has to drive well below a driver's, and in particular, the car's limits to maintain the tyres. I just question whether they should play such a big importance, or whether they should last a bit longer, and that you can drive at normal racing car speed and not cruise around like we have a safety car.

"They're playing a much too big effect because they are so peaky and so special that they don't put our cars or ourselves to the limit. We drive like on raw eggs and I don't want to stress the tyres at all. Otherwise you just overdo it and you go nowhere."

https://www.theguard...irelli-tyres-f1

Raw eggs! Much better!

(Do any of our German posters know if that is a German idiom or was it all Michael?)

[Claymore25]

Jean Todt was a disaster. To me he was worst than Max Mosley and that's saying something.

[Burai]

Jean Todt was a disaster. To me he was worst than Max Mosley and that's saying something.

 

I've yet to see Todt do anything as self-serving, short-sighted and greedy as selling the commercial rights of the sport away to his mate for 100 years for a knock-down price. We've still got 80 years of that deal left to go, by the way. None of us will live to see the end of it.

[shure]

I've yet to see Todt do anything as self-serving, short-sighted and greedy as selling the commercial rights of the sport away to his mate for 100 years for a knock-down price. We've still got 80 years of that deal left to go, by the way. None of us will live to see the end of it.

But there again I've never seen Mosley do anything as dumb as introducing comedy tyres or forcing everyone to use tech that hadn't been invented yet, so, you know

[William Hunt]

I would have liked to see Flavio do it if we hadn't had crash-gate and he was tarnished. I still want to see him back in F1.

 

 

Surely this must be a joke, Flavio is / was one of the most corrupt figures we ever saw in F1: not only did he cheat at Benetton & Renault, he is also a mass tax fraud.

[Fastcake]

I think that's fair. After all, although the F1 bit is unquestionably the aspect of the organisation with the highest profile and widest reach, the FIA's total remit is vast. The ability to effectively run such a sprawling empire seems key.

A problem the FIA has historically had is that without Formula One, it would have been broke and irrelevant. I think that at some point when Mosley took over in the 90s, the FIA’s revenue consisted of a few million of their cut from Bernie’s burgeoning empire, and about £10 from everything else. It was how Mosley tried to justify his deal with Bernie; it cemented the FIA’s ownership of F1 while giving them a solid financial foundation.

The FIA actually publishes accounts nowadays and things seem a lot healthier. I think Jean Todt’s stewardship over Formula One has been characterised chiefly by his absence, and F1’s recent moves to sustainability has largely been pushed by a change in the commercial rights holder. Perhaps though he’s been more successful in other motorsport. There’s certainly a lot more FIA series now than there were a decade ago. There’s no “rogue” championships, or threats of splits from the major FIA world championships. Even FIA sanctioned but independently run stuff, like the former single-seater ladder, has seen itself disappear in favour of an FIA controlled F4 to F1 pipeline. Perhaps that’s the reason the FIA members have been so content under Todt - the FIA is a lot stronger now than it ever has been.

Edited by Fastcake, 15 April 2021 - 16:10.