FIA regulations proposals

[GuestAgain]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

I dont think its a good idea to cap budgets.
Firstly, that means the FIA will have to interfere/regulate the business of the Teams as a going concern.
Secondly, it can not be policed without the aforementioned interferance etc.
A law/rule, which can not be policed is a bad one however you look at it.
Thirdly, if the cap was $100m, say. Team B can only raise $1000 to go racing with and Team A have or raised $100m. How is that different from the current situation. Team B will still almost certainly be at the back of grid and have no chance. The fact that the budget is capped will be of no use Team B. Every season, the argument becomes "the bugdet should be capped at a lower figure to help the struggling or back-of-grid Teams".
What is needed is a scenario where 'Mega-Bucks' Team has as much chance of being at the back of the grid as 'On-a-Shoestring' Team, REGARDLESS of budget or however much they spend. One way to achieve this is to have clearly defined rules/laws and widen the areas for the teams to be inovative.
The alternative is to regulate or stipulate that all cars must be Fiat Pandas, 1.2L, V2, unmodified production vehicles using Pirelli tyres supplied by tyres'r'us & sons (at least this way you will have more or less caped how much can be spent on the car and ensured they are all exactly the same).

[ajg]

You can't regulate in any shape the amount of money spent in an inovation type of series. If you want all the cars to be equal we call that SPEC racing. Everyone runs the same equipment all the time.

This will always be a problem with the top of motorsports. Inovation costs money and produces better results. The teams with less R&D are always going to be slower and less capable. If you want to see spec racing try F3000 or Toyota Atantic or Formula Renault.

F1 is supposed to be about cutting edge technology. Until they caped the technology side of things it used to be fairly equal. The high tech cars might be fast but did not always finish the race. The slower cars usually did mechanically finish the race unless a Newb driver crashed out.

They have tried to limit spending with limits to testing, but racing is expensive no matter how you stack the deck. Speed cost $$$ how fast do you want to go $$$$$?

[sharkie17]

You can't regulate in any shape the amount of money spent in an inovation type of series. If you want all the cars to be equal we call that SPEC racing. Everyone runs the same equipment all the time.

This will always be a problem with the top of motorsports. Inovation costs money and produces better results. The teams with less R&D are always going to be slower and less capable. If you want to see spec racing try F3000 or Toyota Atantic or Formula Renault.

F1 is supposed to be about cutting edge technology. Until they caped the technology side of things it used to be fairly equal. The high tech cars might be fast but did not always finish the race. The slower cars usually did mechanically finish the race unless a Newb driver crashed out.

They have tried to limit spending with limits to testing, but racing is expensive no matter how you stack the deck. Speed cost $$$ how fast do you want to go $$$$$?

no one here ever said anything about spec racing... and thanks for reminding me... ididnt know what spec racing was

also, i didnt know that speed and technology cost money... who would have thought that? lol

you said speed cost money... well, Max is trying to slow F1 down, for driver safety and possibly to curb costs...

also remember that lot of the research and development work on technology was done by SOMEONE else, thus F1 is just applying existing technology (e.g. CF was developed for the Aerospace industry... now we are seeing them in everyday use including F1).

if you use existing cutting edge technology whether it be from aerospace or advanced materials, it is definately doable to have a cutting edge F1 series... just because you have a 100 million (or whatever) spending limit doesnt mean that you will have a spec series or not so cutting edge series.

instead of critisizing, think of a way of adapting something like this...

[uzael]

F1 is supposed to be about cutting edge technology. Until they caped the technology side of things it used to be fairly equal.

Maybe we haven't been watching the same F1 all these years. Things being equal? You must be kidding. With exception of bennetton winning the CC back in 95, every other CC in the last 20 years has been won by williams, mclaren and ferrari. And it hasn't been intermixed, it's been 3 or 4 years in a row. That's not what I'd call even.

[Guest]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

In the perfect world it might work. But firstly it would be very hard to get the law passed. I'm no lawyer but if the law somehow got passed the big teams could get it thrown out in court. You can't tell any business how much to spend on wages, research anything.

[sharkie17]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

In the perfect world it might work. But firstly it would be very hard to get the law passed. I'm no lawyer but if the law somehow got passed the big teams could get it thrown out in court. You can't tell any business how much to spend on wages, research anything.

lol.. if FIA makes it a rule then everyone has to follow it.

you dont see the teams challenging rule changes do you?

anyway, my 100 million was just an idea so dont get too upset.

p.s. this system is in place in American football.

[dumrick]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

Well, if I was a team with sponsors that gave me 3 times that money, I would simply ask them to give me 1/3 of the money, create a new enterprise, ask them to buy from the new company heavy R&D with the other 2/3 and buy technology back from the other company, without the R&D costs (that were already paid). This is just one of hundreds of ways you could fool the system.

The only sensible thing I heard all this time was McLaren's proposal of forbidding tests with other cars than the race ones, and forbidding these to have the engine changed between races. This way, teams would only have a limited mileage available to test, has the engines would have to serve in races and until the next GP. But, has it would probably unsettle Ferrari, that would be very limited in the use of their test tracks, of course the FIA didn't care to take it seriously.

[Guest]

Yeah Ferrari's excessive testing is an issue. Sauber have pretty much half a Ferrari and are nowwhere near the red cars. Not shure about the stats but Ferrari do 5 to 10 times more testing than Sauber.

[Guest]

ive already proposed a 100 million a year budget to keep things competitive... about 3 months ago on this site... everyone thought it was a dumb idea, but i think its a great one...

In the perfect world it might work. But firstly it would be very hard to get the law passed. I'm no lawyer but if the law somehow got passed the big teams could get it thrown out in court. You can't tell any business how much to spend on wages, research anything.

lol.. if FIA makes it a rule then everyone has to follow it.

you dont see the teams challenging rule changes do you?

anyway, my 100 million was just an idea so dont get too upset.

p.s. this system is in place in American football.

What would you do if your wages are cut because of competition restrictions? Salary capping is in place around many sports, but it isn't legal. As I said you can't tell any business how much to spend

[Guest]

Salary capping is in place in all Australian football codes (NRL,AFL). The only reason it exists is because everyone agrees it's better for the competition, otherwise it's illegal. You can't cap a wage of a worker, there's only minimum wage not maxium wage in a workplace

[GuestAgain]

Sharkie wrote:

lol.. if FIA makes it a rule then everyone has to follow it.

you dont see the teams challenging rule changes do you?

anyway, my 100 million was just an idea so dont get too upset.

p.s. this system is in place in American football.

The FIA is an ass, but not stupid enough to try to impose such a rule. Not only would it be illegal, it would be like giving a very big bat to your detractors, cos you think they should have something good to hit you with. It would give anyone and everyone amunition to really go to town on them. The FIA (read Max) is not well liked , and as much as anything/anyone else, self preservation is first priority.
As guest said:

Salary capping is in place in all Australian football codes (NRL,AFL). The only reason it exists is because everyone agrees it's better for the competition, otherwise it's illegal. You can't cap a wage of a worker, there's only minimum wage not maxium wage in a workplace

In other words, even if everyone agreed, it would be an unwritten rule, and if it was written, it would be illegal and enforcing will also be illegal. Then, how will you police it? If you could police/enforce it all, it wont be through legal means.

[sharkie17]

Sharkie wrote:

lol.. if FIA makes it a rule then everyone has to follow it.

you dont see the teams challenging rule changes do you?

anyway, my 100 million was just an idea so dont get too upset.

p.s. this system is in place in American football.

The FIA is an ass, but not stupid enough to try to impose such a rule. Not only would it be illegal, it would be like giving a very big bat to your detractors, cos you think they should have something good to hit you with. It would give anyone and everyone amunition to really go to town on them. The FIA (read Max) is not well liked , and as much as anything/anyone else, self preservation is first priority.
As guest said:

Salary capping is in place in all Australian football codes (NRL,AFL). The only reason it exists is because everyone agrees it's better for the competition, otherwise it's illegal. You can't cap a wage of a worker, there's only minimum wage not maxium wage in a workplace

In other words, even if everyone agreed, it would be an unwritten rule, and if it was written, it would be illegal and enforcing will also be illegal. Then, how will you police it? If you could police/enforce it all, it wont be through legal means.

lol.. you crack me up dude.

read my post again... its an idea, dont get too worked up over it.
anyway, i dont know why youre bringing up all this legality stuff.
and saying that FIA is an ass... that has to be the dumbest statement ive heard today.

[Guest]

lol.. you crack me up dude.

read my post again... its an idea, dont get too worked up over it.
anyway, i dont know why youre bringing up all this legality stuff.
and saying that FIA is an ass... that has to be the dumbest statement ive heard today.

OK, I 've read it again and did not realise that your statement (w.r.t capping)

if FIA makes it a rule then everyone has to follow it. you dont see the teams challenging rule changes do you?

was 'an idea'. Pardon my ignorance.
What makes "FIA is an ass" so dumb a statement. I guess "the law is an ass" is also a dumb statement.

[sharkie17]

first of all guest, if you want to carry on a dialogue, i suggest you register...

second of all, if you are going to call something an "ass", then back up your statement... otherwise, say that what you said was your OPINION.
"law is an ass"? where the hell you getting that from? nobody made that comment. but if you did, yes, its a dumb statement.


e.g. in my opinion, FIA is an ass because...

[GuestAgain]

Nothing, at the moment, compels me to register. I may at some point, if I find it necessary. The term " the law is an ass" is often used to describe how silly, etc etc whatever, the law can be (or appears to be) sometimes. However its not terribly important or pertinent right now and would be digresing. My opinion of the FIA is something else entirely and best kept for another thread.
What I was commenting on, was my opinion (and reasoning) as to why I think capping will not work. Hence my comment regarding the legality of such a rule.