Formula One’s governing body is planning to reconsider the 2011 Bahrain Grand Prix and cast a revote among all teams, after its former president and one of its top drivers called for F1 to cancel the event among continued unrest.

“The way things are at the moment, we have no idea what is going to happen,” said Bernie Ecclestone, head octogenarian of the FIA corporate machine. Bahrain is slated to pay the FIA $40 million to host the race, but Ecclestone insists it isn’t about the money. “It is whether it is safe and good to have a race, that is the issue. We can change this by October 30 date by having a vote by fax if necessary. It can be done, and fast.”

So did it take Mosley to pipe up about Bahrain for the FIA to act, or was it inevitable all along? Well, head FIA president Dark Helmet Bernie Ecclestone is a buddy of his, and the two have stuck together through times of whips and chains thick and thin, and Mosley defends this new position from Ecclestone.

“I don’t think there is the slightest chance the Grand Prix will actually happen,” he said during a BBC radio interview. “Apart from anything else you cannot change the calendar, in the way that is proposed to change, without the unanimous agreement of the teams.”

Bahrain is still facing political turmoil as of recently, with police arresting protestors en masse. A vote to cancel the Bahrain race, currently scheduled for October 30th, would require a unanimous decision from all teams.

[Source: Times of India]

F1′s former chief commandant Max Mosley has joined Red Bull pilot Mark Webber in speaking up against the FIA’s decision to race in Bahrain this October, claiming that it is a mistake that “will eventually cost Formula One dear.”

“By agreeing to race there, Formula One becomes complicit in what has happened,” said Mosley in a column for the Sunday Telegraph.
“We will be told that holding the Grand Prix in October will show that, once again, Bahrain is a happy, peaceful country. So why is it wrong for Formula One to go along with this? Surely the line has to be drawn when a sporting event is not mere entertainment in a less-than-perfect country, but is being used by an oppressive regime to camouflage its actions.”

Of course, Mosley may have more clout than a mere racing driver—”hey, we don’t pay you to think!” seems to be the operative phrase with all the other domestic appliances. But for the son of one of Britain’s most infamous fascists, Mosley writes an impassioned opinion about the influence F1 would have on a country still facing its own charges of bloody oppression. “If a sport accepts this role, it becomes a tool of government,” he writes. “If Formula One allows itself to be used in this way in Bahrain, it will share the regime’s guilt as surely as if it went out and helped brutalise unarmed protesters.”

[Source: Times of India]

It’s been three years since Formula 1 last raced on American soil at Indianapolis Motor Speedway, but the owners of the exclusive Monticello Motor Club (essentially a country club with a race track rather than a golf course) are hoping that the sport will return to the United States at their venue.

According to a report in Autoweek, Ari Strauss, president of the Monticello Motor Club, has been sending overtures to F1 head honco Bernie Eccelstone, and has secured the blessing of F1 track architect Herman Tilke. Strauss, who is trying to obtain support from local, state and federal politicians, noted that “…securing F1 is like winning the Olympics; competition is fierce, and this is not a done deal.” Monticello is in a good position, since it’s 90 minutes from Manhattan and 10 minutes from a major airport. Hit the jump to read the full text of Strauss’ letter to club members regarding the race.

Continue Reading…

FIA President Jean Todt is looking at re-instating the 107% rule as a means of whipping chronically under-funded under-performing teams into shape. The 107% rule gets its name from the stipulation that in order for a driver to qualify for a race, he must obtain a qualifying time within 107% of the polesitter’s time.

The gulf between the “have’s” and “have not’s” is substantial, with many of the new-for-2010 entrants facing potential exclusion from competition. The 107% rule hasn’t been in place since 2002, and introducing it mid-way through the season would require unanimous approval from all teams, something that would have a snowball’s chance in hell of happening. Expect it to come next season, if it’s approved by 70% of the teams in an off-season vote.

[Source: Autoblog]

Max Mosley, the head of the FIA (Formula 1′s governing body) has agreed to scrap the Two-Tier system he had proposed for the series starting next year.

The system was opposed by almost every team in the Formula One Team’s Association (FOTA), including Ferrari, which issued a press release last week announcing its opposition and its plan to abstain from the series if the rules remained.

The new rules would see two groups of teams competing, with half running with restricted budgets with less strict rules (including the ability to use adjustable aerodynamics) and the other half running with no budget cap but under a tight set of rules.

So… problem solved, right?

Wrong!

Mosley is still holding firm to the £40 million ($60 million) cap for teams and FOTA has yet to agree to the terms. Currently the team’s association members are discussing alternatives to a cap but Mosley doubts it will amount to anything.

As Ferrari has been most adamant about its opposition to a two-tiered system and to a cap (and because they are easily the largest name in F1) Mosley specifically addressed the possibility of them not competing in the 2010 season by saying that while it would be sad, Formula 1 would go on without them.

He even went to far as to threaten teams that are currently on the fence about 2010, saying that an influx of new teams might leave no room for lollygagging veterans who don’t sign on by May 29th.

“Well, I think what would happen is that the team that was left outside when the music stopped, and there was no seat, they’d probably have to buy one of the small teams or something. They should think about that before they don’t put an entry in,” Mosley told the BBC.

[Source: AutoWeek]

Ferrari has officially declared that if FIA president Max Mosley intends to go through with his plan for a two-teared budgetary system in Formula 1 he can count the prancing horse out.

In a statement Ferrari’s board of directors declared that if the FIA goes ahead with it’s plans, “then the reasons underlying Ferrari’s uninterrupted participation in the World Championship over the last 60 years – the only constructor to have taken part ever since its inception in 1950 – would come to a close.”

The board blasted Mosley stating that, “The rules of governance that have contributed to the development of Formula 1 over the last 25 years have been disregarded, as have the binding contractual obligations between Ferrari and the FIA itself regarding the stability of the regulations.”

Ferrari is the first manufacturer to officially declare it would pull, after Toyota, Mercedes-Benz and BMW have made remarks that they might pull. Red Bull Racing and Scuderia Toro Rosso team owner v has also declared a boycott if Mosley goes ahead with his new rules.

As the most popular and marketable team in Formula 1, Ferrari’s threat is akin to the Yankees quitting baseball.

What exactly this new rule setup includes is a two-tiered setup with some teams spending an unlimited amount of cash to compete while other teams would have a £40 million  cap – not including driver salaries, marketing, engines or fines. Teams in the £40 class could use adjustable front and rear wings and have engines with unlimited revving capabilities.

There is speculation that the adjustable aerodynamics might provide an advantage that no amount of money spent on engineering could exceed, making high-dollar teams uncompetitive.

As well as practical reasons, Ferrari opposes the FIA’s two-tiered system in principle.

“The same rules for all teams, stability of regulations, the continuity of the FOTA’s (Formula One Teams Association) endeavours to methodically and progressively reduce costs, and governance of Formula 1 are the priorities for the future,” reads the statement. “If these indispensable principles are not respected and if the regulations adopted for 2010 will not change, then Ferrari does not intend to enter its cars in the next Formula 1 World Championship.”

The board of directors also asked that Ferrari’s many fans understand that the decision not to race in 2010 under the current rules was a difficult one but that it is consistent with Ferrari’s racing principles.

Official release after the jump:

Continue Reading…