Fifth Column: Nigel Roebuck
The top two teams have far too much clout, too often exerted for self interest instead of the long-term health of the sport as a whole
MAX VERSTAPPEN SUGGESTED LAST WEEK THAT IF Red Bull had the Mercedes engine, its rivals “would never see us again”, and maybe he’s right. In the opinion of most, Adrian Newey remains unsurpassed, so yes, Max and Daniel Ricciardo might well be in the pound seats for 2018 – if they had Mercedes power.
They don’t, though. When the team’s relationship with Renault was at its lowest, a couple of years ago, attempts were indeed made to do a deal with Mercedes – and Ferrari – but, unlike Renault, these two companies are famously reluctant to sell engines to any team that might threaten them.
When Zak Brown was casting about for an engine to replace Honda at Mclaren, unsurprisingly, given their mutual history, there was never a conversation with Ferrari, but there was much discussion with Mercedes, and Brown told me it got far down the line. What, then, ultimately killed it?
“Well – this’ll surprise you – politics! Some at Mercedes wanted us to have the engine, and some didn’t; then fuel became an issue – and also you needed permission to supply more than three teams from the FIA, who were insistent on keeping Honda in Formula 1: it became very political.
“Like I say, there were different opinions at Mercedes about supplying Mclaren, but in fairness to them they were prepared to help Honda develop their engine, so
I must give Toto [Wolff] credit for that.”
I am hardly alone in believing that in the Formula 1 of today Mercedes and Ferrari have way too much power, and not in the sense of engine output. Throughout the hybrid era the two companies have indulged in a financial arms race, approached only by Red Bull, and are intent on maintaining the status quo: look at the responses from
Wolff and Sergio Marchionne when Ross Brawn dared to suggest a simpler, cheaper, engine for 2021.
“You think they have too much power in the sport,” said Brown, “and I couldn’t agree with you more – 100%. Ross comes up with an idea for change, and they’re instantly on
“Mercedes and Ferrari have indulged in a financial arms race”
the attack, which I guess shouldn’t be a surprise.
“Formula 1’s got its problems, and I think as an industry we need to take a step back, and do what’s right for the sport, because in the end that’s going to be right for all of us. Some of the comments that have been made about Ross’s ideas – that it’s going to be a ‘spec’ formula, or like NASCAR – are a gross exaggeration of what’s being suggested, which is some standardisation of parts that you and I never see, and cutting back on some of the technological sophistication that costs a fortune, and does nothing for the fan.”
Recently, I said, Martin Brundle and I were talking about the absurdity of today’s front wing…
“Yeah – you should sit in some of the strategy meetings! The whole car’s ‘front wing’ now – countless millions are spent on getting tiny gains from it, and all it does is make the racing worse!
“Whatever the rules are, the big teams are going to be the most likely to win, because they’ve got more experience, knowledge – and money. Mercedes and Ferrari have such an economic – and engine – advantage that there’s a two-class system in the sport, and that’s not good.
“I think, for example, it would be fantastic to see Force India win a race. Could they ever win a championship? No, but I do think they should be able to win a race: as it was, last year they finished fourth in the championship – and didn’t make the podium once.
“If you look at the NFL, and who’s going to win the Superbowl… there are 30 teams, and most years you could probably consider 10 of them. If you did the same with F1, probably 75% of people would say Mercedes,
20% would say Ferrari, and 5% one of the other teams, and that’s not very compelling for the fanbase.
“Of course Mercedes and Ferrari want the rules to stay unchanged, and I get that: my view, though, is that they may be in First Class, with the rest of us in Business or Economy – but we’re all on the Titanic, and if it sinks, it doesn’t matter which class you’re in…
“First and foremost this sport is about the fans, and what they want to see is great drivers running hard in very fast cars, and overtaking each other. F1 has become a technology arms race, as well as a financial one, and that’s to its detriment as a sport.”
Brown, it will be remembered, was in something of a cleft stick a year or so ago, needing to choose between
Mclaren and Liberty Media, where the job on offer was that ultimately taken by Sean Bratches, who recently sparked controversy by announcing that grid girls would henceforth be replaced by grid kids.
“All I can say,” Zak laughed, “is that I’m glad I made the decision I did! You can do whatever you want around it – grid girls, grid kids, rock concerts, London Live, digital this, that and the other – but if you know, five races into the championship, that Lewis is going to win it, that’s all that matters.”
No arguing with that, and I concluded our chat with a question about the livery of the 2018 Mclaren-renault.
When it was revealed a year ago that orange would figure in it, there was dismay at the launch when this proved not to be ‘Mclaren orange’ – which did, though, make a hugely popular return on Fernando Alonso’s car at the Indy 500.
Brown grinned. “Yes, it looked great, and we had so many comments from people – ‘Use that colour for the F1 car!’
The paint scheme’s not finalised yet, but I’ll just say we’re proud of our past, and we’re listening to our fans…”