FIA confidence vote on Max Mosley & ADAC reaction

[jonkka]

I just read from finnish newspaper that Max Mosley has passed vote of confidence at FIA extra assembly meeting today. The German federation ADAC reacted with disbelief and has said that they will freeze all involvement with FIA until Max steps down.

What will this mean? ADAC Rallye Deutschland is just around the corner?!

[jonkka]

Here is Autosport news about the vote but nothing on ADAC
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67957

[jonkka]

And finally, non-finnish source for ADAC reaction:
http://www.pr-inside.com/max-mosley-wins-vote-to-remain-r621965.htm

[AndyRAC]

I just read from finnish newspaper that Max Mosley has passed vote of confidence at FIA extra assembly meeting today. The German federation ADAC reacted with disbelief and has said that they will freeze all involvement with FIA until Max steps down.

What will this mean? ADAC Rallye Deutschland is just around the corner?!

Or more siginficantly the German GP at Hockenheim - they surely won't cancel that.
It's not a surprise he's staying - too many vested interests - vote against him and lose your Rally/Race!

[jonkka]

Or more siginficantly the German GP at Hockenheim - they surely won't cancel that.

For all I care they can cancel that and all other roundabaout races, all that I shed are crocodile tears. But touch Rally Deutschland...

[AndyRAC]

For all I care they can cancel that and all other roundabaout races, all that I shed are crocodile tears. But touch Rally Deutschland...

I understand your feelings, but as I said in another thread - the WRC doesn't really matter. I'm sure they could live without the Rally - but the GP is different. I'm afraid that's the world we live in, and the fault could be blamed on the F1A.

[A.F.F.]

Max is counting fingers for the revenge. Isn't NORF on the list too ;)

[cali]

FIA is sort of a form of Mafia with bunch of idiots pulling the strings. This is just another decision which most of the public with common sence just do no understand at all. This is just unbelievable decision! Very sad day indeed.

[HaCo]

More about ADAC:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67958

[OldF]

Lets see how many sponsors WRC and F1 will loose.

[COD]

If ADAC has the balls, then that decision would mean no F1 nor WRC will be held in Germany. Let's wait and see....

[AndyRAC]

Lets see how many sponsors WRC and F1 will loose.

Thanks to the F1A the WRC doesn't have that many sponsors, certainly very few 'Blue chip' companies.

[jonkka]

More about ADAC:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67958

Nothing concrete on sporting side of the federation, just the regular motoring. I do hope that they don't cancel the rally, it would be quite difficult to make comeback (for financial reasons as well as getting FIA re-instate the event).

[A.F.F.]

If ADAC has the balls, then that decision would mean no F1 nor WRC will be held in Germany. Let's wait and see....

That could lead many things. Interesting I say. Let's say Mercedes and BMW go to Bernie and say this isn't right. Plus their sponsors. What would Bernie do?

I say Max's ass still is in danger to shake and not only because he had a whip in it.

[ST205GT4]

Well there's proof of the how much in each other's pockets officials in the FIA are.

Unbelievable.

Good on the Germans for standing up for decency. I'd be surprised if CAMS has the balls to do that.

[jonkka]

I'd be surprised if CAMS has the balls to do that.

I know that Gary Connelly doesn't represent (all of) CAMS but if you have a look at the link I posted above, there is Gary's slightly pro-Mosley comment towards the end of the article.

[ST205GT4]

You're right. Disgusting.

[HaCo]

More press talk about this:
http://www.crash.net/motorsport/f1/news/164324-0/f1_fia_in_crisis_facing_beginning_of_the_end.html
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/67961

[N]

I can't believe it, Max is taking a back seat with his deputies going to public events... what kind of president is that? Someone needs to stand up to FIA and say that this is enough.

[cut the b.s.]

Sad day for motorsport, good things were done in Maxs time but if he had any love for the sport he would have resigned, he has done huge harm to the sport now

[Daniel]

I know that Gary Connelly doesn't represent (all of) CAMS but if you have a look at the link I posted above, there is Gary's slightly pro-Mosley comment towards the end of the article.

Connelly is a ****wit. How many times do I need to repeat myself? :dozey:

Connelly sees himself as someone who is going places. Clue for you Gazza.... you're a no one and you're going nowhere.

[BDunnell]

If ADAC has the balls, then that decision would mean no F1 nor WRC will be held in Germany. Let's wait and see....

I for one would respect that. But I very much doubt that the FIA will force cancellation of any events in countries whose motorsport federations opposed Mosley in the vote, for doing so would be too blatant even for a deeply political organisation like this. Wouldn't it?

[AndyRAC]

I for one would respect that. But I very much doubt that the FIA will force cancellation of any events in countries whose motorsport federations opposed Mosley in the vote, for doing so would be too blatant even for a deeply political organisation like this. Wouldn't it?

Interesting point - surely they wouldn't. Would they? You really wouldn't know. So unpredictable.
My feelings are that the time has come for the F1A to be re-organised - at the moment it is a shambles. There are 3 FIA World Championships - yet only one is taken seriously - the other two seem to be more of an afterthought. This shouldn't be the case - the F1A should be doing everything they can to get those two the coverage, exposure and more Manufaxcturers they deserve.
The Max issue was understandably reported as an F1 problem - which just goes to prove to the general public and media that F1 is all Motorsport. I can't remember hearing too much from the teams from the WRC and WTCC.

[BDunnell]

Interesting point - surely they wouldn't. Would they? You really wouldn't know. So unpredictable.
My feelings are that the time has come for the F1A to be re-organised - at the moment it is a shambles. There are 3 FIA World Championships - yet only one is taken seriously - the other two seem to be more of an afterthought. This shouldn't be the case - the F1A should be doing everything they can to get those two the coverage, exposure and more Manufaxcturers they deserve.
The Max issue was understandably reported as an F1 problem - which just goes to prove to the general public and media that F1 is all Motorsport. I can't remember hearing too much from the teams from the WRC and WTCC.

Natural, though, isn't it? Like it or not, F1 is the most prominent championship in most of the world, so attention is focused on it. And really the WTCC is on a bit of a hiding to nothing in the UK, while we all know that the WRC gets about as much coverage as it deserves.

[sollitt]

Connelly sees himself as someone who is going places. Clue for you Gazza.... you're a no one and you're going nowhere.

Daniel, I am deaply indebted to you for opening up a whole new world of motorsport administration opportunity that I didn't know about.

I always thought that, having reached the position of World Motorsport Council Member, Gary Connelly had indeed gone somewhere ... about as far as you can go in this sport ... short of becoming the President of the FIA that is.

[Daniel]

Daniel, I am deaply indebted to you for opening up a whole new world of motorsport administration opportunity that I didn't know about.

I always thought that, having reached the position of World Motorsport Council Member, Gary Connelly had indeed gone somewhere ... about as far as you can go in this sport ... short of becoming the President of the FIA that is.

Pleasure......

[sollitt]

Whilst we're all flaming the FIA, and calling them names, perhaps it's time to reflect on who it is that they are and who put them there.
In truth, if you're a card carrying member of any one of the affiliated organisations, they're us. They are representatives that we have chosen, either directly or by association.

In our own Annual General Council Meeting as recently as 2 weeks ago our national president spoke about the importance of continuity and the subsequent need to return Mosely for the stability of the sport.
Despite the window of opportunity being open, nobody challenged this view nor even asked for an explanation.

I would suggest that this exact scenario was probably played out in many of the affiliate organisations throughout the motorsport world and that as a consequence 2 thirds of the voting delegates supported Mosely with the full knowledge and backing of those organisations they represent.

Is the FIA an 'old boys' club? I doubt it, but if it is, it is because we allow it to be. If there is genuine disquiet amongst the sports stakeholders it is not necessarily the FIA that needs changing. It is the apathetic affiliates that make up the organisation.

[Tomi]

Whilst we're all flaming the FIA, and calling them names, perhaps it's time to reflect on who it is that they are and who put them there.
In truth, if you're a card carrying member of any one of the affiliated organisations, they're us. They are representatives that we have chosen, either directly or by association.

In our own Annual General Council Meeting as recently as 2 weeks ago our national president spoke about the importance of continuity and the subsequent need to return Mosely for the stability of the sport.
Despite the window of opportunity being open, nobody challenged this view nor even asked for an explanation.

I would suggest that this exact scenario was probably played out in many of the affiliate organisations throughout the motorsport world and that as a consequence 2 thirds of the voting delegates supported Mosely with the full knowledge and backing of those organisations they represent.

Is the FIA an 'old boys' club? I doubt it, but if it is, it is because we allow it to be. If there is genuine disquiet amongst the sports stakeholders it is not necessarily the FIA that needs changing. It is the apathetic affiliates that make up the organisation.

Did your national president not suggest that Morie Chandler should deside what stand to take on the issue?
Was there by the way any talks about the letter he did send to Citroen about their top drivers outfit.

[sollitt]

No & No.

It's really bad, need some one to stop it immediately

[cosmicpanda]

Hockenheim GP is not in danger, I think I read on pitpass or some place that it's actually run by another German club. Rally Germany, though, that's probably in a bit of trouble at the moment.

[N.O.T]

The FIA are a bunch of puppets......the decision was a disgrace. Only the F1 can do something about it because they have the money and thats were all these corrupted men hurt.....if BMW and mercedes pull out then we will see some reactions.

[Daniel]

In our own Annual General Council Meeting as recently as 2 weeks ago our national president spoke about the importance of continuity and the subsequent need to return Mosely for the stability of the sport.
Despite the window of opportunity being open, nobody challenged this view nor even asked for an explanation.

I think therein lies the problem. No one wants to rock the boat even though it clearly needs a helluva lot of rocking. I'm sure at one point or another we've all been guilty of this. We've all sat in on a meeting with some guy talking absolute bullsh1t and not spoken up. But it's come to the point where someone needs to speak up.

I'm sure as hell glad that in WW2 the Allies didn't talk about the need for continuity for the stability of Europe and the rest of the world.

I think there are a lot of things the FIA is accused of that they're not guilty of and I'm more than happy to come out and defend them when someone comes out and says it's the FIA's fault Sebastien and Citroen are doing so well. The FIA however are guilty of some pretty woeful management of the WRC. Waaaaay back earlier this decade a lot of people talked about the need for changes to the technical regulations of the sport and also about how the events were being raped of their heritage and charm. It wasn't so long ago that Rally Australia went an hour East to visit the iconic Muresk stages and the awesome York Railway stage as well as going 2 hours down south for the stages around Harvey. The FIA's idea of having a rally that is historic/iconic is having 1 or 2 stages with names that people recognise rather than having a route full of stages like this.

The stupid cloverleaf rules that the FIA dreamt up meant all of a sudden you don't have Wellington Dam, Muresk, the Bunnings stages and York Railway...... you just have the Bunnings stages. Look at lots of the WRC events these days and they have perhaps 1 or 2 of their most iconic stages and the rest are just there as filler. I'm not old enough to remember group B or the Escort days but I seem to remember there was once a time when rallying was a bitch of a thing! A real challenge and people like Matthew Wilson and Conrad Rautenbach were considered "gentlemen racers" and would never have been seen in the coverage unless they had an amusing crash and it ended up in the start/finish credits. Now rallying is a bit of a bore. It isn't challenging in the true sense of things and in a historical sense it's not very spectacular. I could go on but I won't bore you with talk of the obvious.

Just ask yourself who is responsible for the state that the WRC is in? Is it the FIA and the World Rally Championship Commision? Yes.

If the WRC were a soft drink it would be Fanta. The Fanta we have here in the UK. It's labelled as Fanta so you'd think it was the "full fat" version with tonnes of sugar. But no..... it's not! It's been screwed around with and is full of artificual sweeteners and it tastes like vomit. Just like Fanta here isn't Fanta the WRC isn't really the WRC anymore.....

[AndyRAC]

I think therein lies the problem. No one wants to rock the boat even though it clearly needs a helluva lot of rocking. I'm sure at one point or another we've all been guilty of this. We've all sat in on a meeting with some guy talking absolute bullsh1t and not spoken up. But it's come to the point where someone needs to speak up.

I'm sure as hell glad that in WW2 the Allies didn't talk about the need for continuity for the stability of Europe and the rest of the world.

I think there are a lot of things the FIA is accused of that they're not guilty of and I'm more than happy to come out and defend them when someone comes out and says it's the FIA's fault Sebastien and Citroen are doing so well. The FIA however are guilty of some pretty woeful management of the WRC. Waaaaay back earlier this decade a lot of people talked about the need for changes to the technical regulations of the sport and also about how the events were being raped of their heritage and charm. It wasn't so long ago that Rally Australia went an hour East to visit the iconic Muresk stages and the awesome York Railway stage as well as going 2 hours down south for the stages around Harvey. The FIA's idea of having a rally that is historic/iconic is having 1 or 2 stages with names that people recognise rather than having a route full of stages like this.

The stupid cloverleaf rules that the FIA dreamt up meant all of a sudden you don't have Wellington Dam, Muresk, the Bunnings stages and York Railway...... you just have the Bunnings stages. Look at lots of the WRC events these days and they have perhaps 1 or 2 of their most iconic stages and the rest are just there as filler. I'm not old enough to remember group B or the Escort days but I seem to remember there was once a time when rallying was a bitch of a thing! A real challenge and people like Matthew Wilson and Conrad Rautenbach were considered "gentlemen racers" and would never have been seen in the coverage unless they had an amusing crash and it ended up in the start/finish credits. Now rallying is a bit of a bore. It isn't challenging in the true sense of things and in a historical sense it's not very spectacular. I could go on but I won't bore you with talk of the obvious.

Just ask yourself who is responsible for the state that the WRC is in? Is it the FIA and the World Rally Championship Commision? Yes.

If the WRC were a soft drink it would be Fanta. The Fanta we have here in the UK. It's labelled as Fanta so you'd think it was the "full fat" version with tonnes of sugar. But no..... it's not! It's been screwed around with and is full of artificual sweeteners and it tastes like vomit. Just like Fanta here isn't Fanta the WRC isn't really the WRC anymore.....

Here, here!! I agree.

Whatever you may have thought of Balestre - he was certainly more 'Rally friendly' than Mosley and less in with the F1 Big wigs - which was probably his downfall.
Look at the state of the WRC since Mosley took over. I have a Top Gear Rally Report tape of Mosley at a pre RAC 1994 test with Toyota - saying "he was a friend to the Rally world, and it was up to them (FIA) to get it up there with all those ball sports".
A year later and TTE are thrown out for 'cheating' - I've no problem with that. However I have got a problem when that leaves the WRC with 3 teams, yet last year Renault were found guilty yet weren't fined in case they left the Championship. Explain!
I know Motorsport is big business, but shouldn't Races/Rallies be awarded to the countries which meet certain criteria - not who pays the most money.

[jonkka]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear_hear

[jonkka]

The Toyota affair was very delicate one for numerous reasons:
-there were so few top teams
-banning one would leave huge power vacuum
-blaming the real culprit, ie. who were the real responsible (engineers or TTE brass or Japanese?)
-Japanese are very sensitive to losing face, how would they react?
-what decision would restore the lost image of the sport, yet keep sport running and hopefully Toyota coming back?

What happens over a decade later in roundabout racing concerns me not.

[AndyRAC]

The Toyota affair was very delicate one for numerous reasons:
-there were so few top teams
-banning one would leave huge power vacuum
-blaming the real culprit, ie. who were the real responsible (engineers or TTE brass or Japanese?)
-Japanese are very sensitive to losing face, how would they react?
-what decision would restore the lost image of the sport, yet keep sport running and hopefully Toyota coming back?

What happens over a decade later in roundabout racing concerns me not.

But where is the consistency in punishments?

Yet again F1 is looked upon favourably so a team ( Renault) isn't punished, yet the biggest and most powerful team at the time ( Toyota) is thrown out - leaving 3 teams left in the WRC.

[BDunnell]

But where is the consistency in punishments?

Yet again F1 is looked upon favourably so a team ( Renault) isn't punished, yet the biggest and most powerful team at the time ( Toyota) is thrown out - leaving 3 teams left in the WRC.

Toyotas from 'local' teams were still competitive in 1996, though, and the entry list that season wasn't too badly affected.

[AndyRAC]

Toyotas from 'local' teams were still competitive in 1996, though, and the entry list that season wasn't too badly affected.

Yeah, Toyota Team Sweden, Grifone, etc
Seem to remember Max saying that it was possible to actually ban Toyota the Manufacturer - instead it was TTE who were banned.
It's the principle I find baffling. As if they were trying to kill the sport off.

[jonkka]

But where is the consistency in punishments?

The only common factors between F1 and WRC are that both are organised by FIA and both are motorsports. All other things common between the two disciplines are artificial creations (like the current points scale) - so why should there be need for consistency in punishments across different types of sports and eras?

[jonkka]

Seem to remember Max saying that it was possible to actually ban Toyota the Manufacturer - instead it was TTE who were banned.

No, quite the contrary. Toyota as a make was banned from the championship, they could not register and were ineligible to score points. Toyota as cars were still legal and were used in 1996, run equally by TTE and satellite teams. Even entrant was Toyota Castrol Team, like the year before. So, in effect the only thing that happened was that Toyota lost their points for 1995 and were unable to score in 1996, otherwise everything was almost the same.

Additionally, Toyota was able to rid themselves off Celica. TTE had for long wanted to use a more suitable car as a basis for rallying but Toyota Japan had insisted on using the sporty Celica - even if it meant sacrificing competitiveness. During the ban, Ove Andersson managed not only persuade Toyota to continue in WRC but also to use Corolla to build a World Rally Car. I don't know how he managed that miracle but alas, it lasted only 2.5 years hence.

[BDunnell]

The only common factors between F1 and WRC are that both are organised by FIA and both are motorsports. All other things common between the two disciplines are artificial creations (like the current points scale) - so why should there be need for consistency in punishments across different types of sports and eras?

I agree.

[MJW]

Another development to this story is that today Luca DiMontezemolo (Ferrari's President) has called on Max to resign for the benefit of the sport.

[tmx]

Another development to this story is that today Luca DiMontezemolo (Ferrari's President) has called on Max to resign for the benefit of the sport. “He should realise that sometimes it is necessary to say to yourself ‘I have to leave for reasons of credibility.'"

And a few hours later: “I am happy that Max Mosley has been re-elected President of the FIA. He has done excellent work for Formula 1 in recent years. With regard to the future, it will be entirely up to him to decide if and when he should take a step back." link (http://www.crash.net/motorsport/f1/news/164387-0/montezemolo_backtracks_on_mosley_remarks.html)

[BDunnell]

“He should realise that sometimes it is necessary to say to yourself ‘I have to leave for reasons of credibility.'"

And a few hours later: “I am happy that Max Mosley has been re-elected President of the FIA. He has done excellent work for Formula 1 in recent years. With regard to the future, it will be entirely up to him to decide if and when he should take a step back." link (http://www.crash.net/motorsport/f1/news/164387-0/montezemolo_backtracks_on_mosley_remarks.html)

How ludicrous.

[gloomyDAY]

How ludicrous.
Well someone needs to be there to hand Ferrari titles. :p

On a serious note, Monte really dropped the ball on that former statement.
The latter was just a clean-up comment after Max rang his phone.

I'm still curious how the WRC is going to turn out with such poor leadership at the helm.
Don't really care for a man who leaves an entire motorsport left out to dry.

[sollitt]

I think therein lies the problem. No one wants to rock the boat .... I'm sure at one point or another we've .... all sat in on a meeting with some guy talking absolute bullsh1t and not spoken up.

I'm not disagreeing with the sentiment of what you're saying, it's often true, however the presumption that meeting attendees disagree with what is being spoken is not necessarily always correct.

Has anybody considered the implications of Mosley being deposed? Who would take over?
The FIA is a body encompassing much more than motorsport and, as I understand it, there's no guarantee that a replacement would necessarily come from the sporting side.
How would the sport fare with new leadership coming from the general motoring or industry side with, perhaps, an environmental bent rather than a motorsport one.

[Daniel]

I'm not disagreeing with the sentiment of what you're saying, it's often true, however the presumption that meeting attendees disagree with what is being spoken is not necessarily always correct.

Has anybody considered the implications of Mosley being deposed? Who would take over?
The FIA is a body encompassing much more than motorsport and, as I understand it, there's no guarantee that a replacement would necessarily come from the sporting side.
How would the sport fare with new leadership coming from the general motoring or industry side with, perhaps, an environmental bent rather than a motorsport one.

I think what people are tired of is the fact that Max is supposed to be a sport man yet he's running the WRC and to a lesser extent F1 as if he's fairly new to motorsport.

Then there's also the way teams are (not) penalised for cheating in F1. Of course the WMSC is responsible but I think with a leader who has a more idealogical/fair leadership style they might do things differently. I think a clear and no nonsense framework should be layed out for penalties. How McLaren can be found with a shedload of Ferrari documents yet the drivers don't lose their points when the Focus WRC's get found with glass that's .5mm too thin and they get a 5 minute penalty is beyond me. In one series they consider the fact that a penalty may affect the championship and the show and in another they just hand out penalties willy nilly.

A replacement from the manufacturers? Hmmmm not sure if I like that. Don't see how he/she could seem impartial. An environmental person? Actually I'd quite like that as long as they realise that motorsport is a drop in the ocean when it comes to emissions and that it could be a great testbed for new technologies which under Max the FIA is only just cottoning onto.....

[AndyRAC]

I think what people are tired of is the fact that Max is supposed to be a sport man yet he's running the WRC and to a lesser extent F1 as if he's fairly new to motorsport.

Then there's also the way teams are (not) penalised for cheating in F1. Of course the WMSC is responsible but I think with a leader who has a more idealogical/fair leadership style they might do things differently. I think a clear and no nonsense framework should be layed out for penalties. How McLaren can be found with a shedload of Ferrari documents yet the drivers don't lose their points when the Focus WRC's get found with glass that's .5mm too thin and they get a 5 minute penalty is beyond me. In one series they consider the fact that a penalty may affect the championship and the show and in another they just hand out penalties willy nilly.

A replacement from the manufacturers? Hmmmm not sure if I like that. Don't see how he/she could seem impartial. An environmental person? Actually I'd quite like that as long as they realise that motorsport is a drop in the ocean when it comes to emissions and that it could be a great testbed for new technologies which under Max the FIA is only just cottoning onto.....


Similar sentiments to mine earlier in this thread - no consistency in punishments across the sports. One penalty so the championship isn't ruined, yet not a thought to the other championship for a minor offence. They just seem to be applied Ad-hoc. Strange...???

[janneppi]

I vaguely remember a rather rather bitter, yet funny post few years back about hitting Max Mosley in the head with a shovel, can't for the life of me remember did it originate here or in F1 side. :D

[A.F.F.]

I vaguely remember a rather rather bitter, yet funny post few years back about hitting Max Mosley in the head with a shovel, can't for the life of me remember did it originate here or in F1 side. :D

I don't think it would work thought. Turns about our Max is so twisted he would probably get sexual pleasure from it and asked for more. :p :

[Finni]

There would be huge difference if only these two things would be right:

- Three drivers per team. More competition. I would say that with only few manufacturer this it's huge difference to have three competitive crews instead two. Money is not big factor with this. Watch how easely teams are able to run second teams with little sponsorship (little compared to teams whole budget).

- Selection of rallies. Rallying is at its best in fast and spectacular gravel roads. There should be less asphalt rallies and slow rough rallies and more beatiful spectacles like Argentina or New Zealand.

Imagine that few last years there had been three drivers in every work-team and better rallies. It would seem all different.

[jonkka]

One penalty so the championship isn't ruined, yet not a thought to the other championship for a minor offence. They just seem to be applied Ad-hoc. Strange...???

That is correct assessment because they are applied ad-hoc. The highest body that any disciplinary action can be taken is FIA International Court of Appeal and beneath that, any punishment is handed out by sport-specific bodies which in WRC are the stewards of the rally in question. Amongst them there is only one permanent member (Nasir Hoosein) and all others are more or less national figures.

I don't know how things are in F1 (and for the record, I don't care).

What comes to rules, there are lot of passages where penalty and severity of it are left to discretion of the stewards. Which is good because every situation is different and unique but of course can lead to different level of punishment for similar offenses.

[jonkka]

You're taking this off-topic but no matter, you also make good points (though I partially disagree).


- Three drivers per team. (snip) Money is not big factor with this. Watch how easely teams are able to run second teams with little sponsorship (little compared to teams whole budget).

This is not as simple thing as it may seem. Allowing three drivers per team would put richer teams in better position (and surely nobody would support the idea of allowing one manufacturer to "buy" it's way into title, no?). In principle, if only the sporting side is considered, I support this scheme. Allowing three drivers would get more out of the same event without unduly increasing the costs.

But at the same time there is the question how to level the playing field between the rich teams able to hire Sainz, McRae and Loeb (like Citroen did in 2003) while poorer must settle to Loix, Schwarz, Stohl and Valimaki (like Hyundai did in 2003)? One attempt was the "young 3rd driver" -rule which was quickly overturned, another is allowing only two pre-nominated cars to score and there surely are many other variations as well.

Would the extra car and PR value of that without points scoring opportunity be big enough incentive for at least some teams to run 3rd car? I think so, they are doing it already in a limited scale. Then again, that would allow the third driver to test new parts or settings for that team and again push the envelope further compared to poorer teams.

So, in that sense the B-team with restricted technical rules (no parts homologated later than start of the season) is rather good compromise.


There should be less asphalt rallies

I disagree. Even if that means Loeb will have guaranteed easy wins I still think that tarmac must play a significant role in WRC. Most of populace never drive on gravel and while asphalt rallying isn't as spectacular, WRC is still the top formula and world champion should demonstrate versatility. What is good portion of tarmac to gravel is open to debate, of course.