The solution to the WRC

[rjbetty]

The 2003 WRC season was one of the best motorsport seasons I ever saw. I remember it fondly and knew it was a special one at the time.

Check out the driver line-up:


PEUGEOT:
2 x World Champion Marcus Gronholm
1 x World Champion Richard Burns
Multiple Rally Winner and popular character Gilles Panizzi
Rally Winner Harri Rovanpera

FORD:
Markko Martin
Francois Duval
Mikko Hirvonen - All very promising talents

SUBARU:
4 x World Champion Tommi Makinen
Future 1 X World Champion, 3 x runner-up, and hugely popular character Petter Solberg

HYUNDAI:
Rally Winner Armin Schwarz
Promising driver Freddy Loix

SKODA:
1 x World Champion Didier Auriol
Promising talent Toni Gardemeister

CITROEN:
1 x World Champion and hugely popular character Colin Mcrae
Future 9 x World Champion Sebastien Loeb
2 x World Champion Carlos Sainz



Amongst the 16 full time works drivers, there were no less than 14 drivers who won or who would go on to be rally winners, while the World Champion count was 7! That is quite astonishing.


Which leads me to the solution for the WRC. Why not just change the rules to how they were around 2001-2003? It seems very simple that if the WRC moved back in that direction, it would regain it's soul and become great again.

Bring back 3 scoring drivers please, and be done with the abomination of superrally, which I loathe, forever.

Absolutely awful gimmicks proposed for 2015 have finished the sport off for me for good now I think, and I sadly rarely post here now. A slide which began with Max Mosley's new rules for 2004.

[PLuto]

Which rules you would like to change? And how?

[N.O.T]

Go away and come back when you are 18.... or not at all.... F1 is far superior stay there.

[rjbetty]

Which rules you would like to change? And how?

Just simply reverse all the bad ones from 2004 onwards, which got rid of Colin Mcrae and others, and caused the mass exodus at the end of 2005.

The 2 changes I really want is 3 cars teams to return, so we get more quality drivers in top cars, therefore more potential winners. And getting rid of superrally which is a cover up for the lack of competitors these days. I also really miss the old pre-2011 cars but I understand they won't be coming back.

The rules of the last 10 years have got rid of drivers like Mcrae, Duval and Galli.

And scrap the proposals for 2015 immediately. These will destroy what is left of the soul of the WRC for me...

[tommeke_B]

I don't think that the "exodus of manufacturers" that started in 2005 is caused by the rules. The rules didn't change dramatically back then, as far as I remember (only SupeRally arrived in '06). I think it's more about the manufacturers individually changing their marketing strategy...

About drivers... Don't blame the rules for McRae, Duval and Galli leaving the scene. It's quite obvious why these drivers didn't get (or should I say take) any chances...

[rjbetty]

Ok, I think it was caused by the extra 2 rounds up to 16 in Mexico and Japan for 2004, which increased the costs, which was the reason cited for most of the pullouts. Also, manufacturers were only allowed 2 cars meaning just 10 works cars per rally, rather than 15, making things much less interesting.

[PLuto]

The 2 changes I really want is 3 cars teams to return, so we get more quality drivers in top cars, therefore more potential winners. And getting rid of superrally which is a cover up for the lack of competitors these days. I also really miss the old pre-2011 cars but I understand they won't be coming back.

But we have 3 cars teams - Citroen has Meeke, Ostberg and Al Qassimi, VW has Ogier, Latvala and Mikkelsen and Hyundai has Neuville, Sordo/Hanninen and Paddon, M-Sport has Hirvonen, Evans and Kubica...

[PLuto]

I think there is more factors why WRC is in situation where it is. To have complex reason it should take more time to think about it, but in very short:

a) very bad promotion of WRC (promoter ISC was not working perfectly, but its followers were/are much worse)
b) not stable regulations, it was changing all the time, not sure view for more years
c) Citroen and Ford were talking to this regulations so much...
d) Sebastien Loeb and his unbeatable era
e) not interest about "rest of the field" from organisers/promoter/FIA ; on WRC events everybody is interested only about WRC drivers...
f) not so good changes in calendar, when legendary rallies are going out and are replaced by noname or not so interesting events

[tommeke_B]

g) global warming and the whole change of marketing, where cars have to be green, eco-friendly etc. ;) Rallying doesn't fit in their marketing strategy anymore as it did more years ago.
h) FIA took too long before replacing the 2L cars. Almost nobody was still making production 2L cars in the category of cars suitable for making a WRC of.

[PLuto]

ad g) I dont know, if people really wants to have "more green cars" or it is mainly part of marketing...

[Doon]

For me the WRC has become less marketable or attractive to prospective manufacturers because of the domination of a single team/driver. With Loeb gone, the WRC could be dominated by Ogier/VW (on an even larger scale!) until 2019, or even longer.

For a die hard fan, it becomes a little uninteresting when you know that Ogier will win pretty much every rally. We are half way through the season and would anyone bet against Ogier from taking title number 2? It was the same in 2013. VW obviously have a far superior car, the drivers will propbably finish 1-2-3 in the final standings. Is there a solution to this? The only fair way I can think of budget caps for the teams.

The fact its the sport would be more popular if the results were unpredictable. This will never happen if one team dominate, no matter how much you promote the show, or how many live stages, final day shootouts, or pit stops there are.

[havk]

I agree with rjbetty that bringing back pre-2004 rules could help, although IMO Pluto is right that there are plenty of other factors that caused WRC is no so much attractive. I started interesting in WRC in 1997, and agree that 2001-2003 was really amazing, probably best time for WRC.

I also very much dislike Super Rally. If I remember correctly it was 2005 when Super Rally drivers started being classified in the final results of the rally and I lost much of my interest in WRC because of this. I never liked ideas that turn sport into a show. And SR is probably one of the reason that there is so little private WRC drivers.

The problem is that FIA is looking for solution in some strange way (shoot out) rather than bring back eurosport TV coverage. Lack of good promotion is IMO main problem.

[Mirek]

I think that everybody on this forum already know that I hate superally so I won't write another wall of text which anyway everybody hates to read :)

Just one point... Superally removed the goal of finishing the event.

[Rallyper]

g) global warming and the whole change of marketing, where cars have to be green, eco-friendly etc. ;) Rallying doesn't fit in their marketing strategy anymore as it did more years ago.
h) FIA took too long before replacing the 2L cars. Almost nobody was still making production 2L cars in the category of cars suitable for making a WRC of.

g) There´s a pedagocical thing to explain the need of rallying making production cars better for average Joe. None of this we´ve seen.

[Eli]

http://www.rallye-magazin.de/rallyes/wm/nachrichten/news-detail/d/2014/07/07/hyundai-teamchef-plaediert-fuer-mehr-leistung/index.html#.U7qqLZSSyUY

[tommeke_B]

g) There´s a pedagocical thing to explain the need of rallying making production cars better for average Joe. None of this we´ve seen.

Rallying making production cars better? It was the case in the past yes. Thanks to FIA's unsuccessful attempts to reduce the running cost, nowadays WRC cars are packed with 20-year old technology, apart from the dampers...

[rjbetty]

Just one point... Superally removed the goal of finishing the event.

Totally agree with this. Back around 2005 or so, I used to keep the main results in a spreadsheet not having much access to the web then. I hated superrally so much I didn´t count the drivers who had used it in my results!!

I also agree it stuffs privateer drivers over, as they ought to earn the right to points having kept it going to the end. I didn´t mind in 2004 when superrally was trialled where drivers who had retired could still run, thus pleasing the fans, but they weren´t included in the final results.

I wouldn't mind a compromise where it would return to drivers not being included, but maybe they could still be included for manufacturer (team these days?) points, thus giving drivers an incentive to push.


EDIT: Also, a huge problem for me is that like F1, top WRC cars are ultra-reliable these days compared to 10yrs+ ago. This has heavily contributed to the lack of different winners. I mean between 2006-present I think all rally wins have been divided between just 5 drivers:
Loeb, Gronholm, Hirvonen, Latvala and Ogier - with the exceptions of Mads Ostberg in Portugal 2012 and Dani Sordo in Germany 2013.

Compare that with 2001-2003 alone where rally winners included;

Tommi Makinen
Harri Rovanpera
Didier Auriol
Colin Mcrae
Marcus Gronholm
Richard Burns
Jésus Puras
Gilles Panizzi
Carlos Sainz
Sébastien Loeb
Petter Solberg
and Markko Martin


I'd say ultra-reliability just as in F1 is ruining the variety. What I've also particularly been unhappy about is that smaller works teams and privateers haven't been able to score points due to top drivers benefitting from superrally, thus stopping them creating an impression, and killing their careers.

Matthew Wilson suffered a lot of flak but I'm sure he would have got at least 1 podium somewhere. Others like Antony Warmbold suffered as well, as I know he was pushed out of the points several times by superrallying drivers in better cars, such as Monte-Carlo 2005.

[AndyRAC]

Rallying making production cars better? It was the case in the past yes. Thanks to FIA's unsuccessful attempts to reduce the running cost, nowadays WRC cars are packed with 20-year old technology, apart from the dampers...

Old technology, not much good for the Manufacturers, is it? If you were in charge of a car Manufacturer's Motorsport programme would you really enter the WRC? I'm not sure I would....

[Mirek]

Carmakers take it as a marketing tool. I don't think they really care if there is some engineering challenge. The people who decides the involvement are economists and marketing specialists not engineers. They simply want to defeat their rivals on the market in something what is as much visible on public as possible.

[Rallyper]

Carmakers take it as a marketing tool. I don't think they really care if there is some engineering challenge. The people who decides the involvement are economists and marketing specialists not engineers. They simply want to defeat their rivals on the market in something what is as much visible on public as possible.

Agree, but marketing people just love to have messages like "this car has been tested in hardest condistions etz..." and also I do believe some good things still comes out to production cars from rallying. Dampers was mentioned. Yes. Good example.

[Mirek]

Agree, but marketing people just love to have messages like "this car has been tested in hardest condistions etz..." and also I do believe some good things still comes out to production cars from rallying. Dampers was mentioned. Yes. Good example.

They can put the same slogans anyway. Very few buyers care about technologies in their cars.

Those dampers from your example... such dampers are ridiculously expensive for common cars. It's something different to speak about brands like Porsche and Ferrari or about Peugeot and Škoda. The first group can sell true hi-tech stuff for adequate prices. The second fights for every Euro they can make out of one car. Porsche makes average profit on one car over 16500 Euro, Škoda 750, VW even less and Seat -300 (from VAG brands). What kind of hi-tech can they put in?

I would say that what may have a real influence on stock production is tyres.

[HaCo]

I would suggest to remove the rule that only 2 nominated cars can score points for a team. Remove that and young, but also experienced local drivers will get a chance at their event. If a top driver retires it is not such a big problem for the team since other cars can still score. I understand that small teams cannot affort to run a lot of cars, but that's a part of rallying. If we had 10 proper teams with 2 cars this wouldn't be necessary, but this is far from the case.

[Jack4688`]

The fact its the sport would be more popular if the results were unpredictable. This will never happen if one team dominate, no matter how much you promote the show, or how many live stages, final day shootouts, or pit stops there are.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

[Rallyper]

They can put the same slogans anyway. Very few buyers care about technologies in their cars.

Those dampers from your example... such dampers are ridiculously expensive for common cars. It's something different to speak about brands like Porsche and Ferrari or about Peugeot and Škoda. The first group can sell true hi-tech stuff for adequate prices. The second fights for every Euro they can make out of one car. Porsche makes average profit on one car over 16500 Euro, Škoda 750, VW even less and Seat -300 (from VAG brands). What kind of hi-tech can they put in?

I would say that what may have a real influence on stock production is tyres.

What you´re saying is that marketing people must tell how expensive dampers are on a rally car? You know they just telling what´s needed. And they can squeeze anything out of nothing if needed. Rallying makes better cars in many ways. Marketing people knows how to use that fact.

[Munkvy]

I would suggest to remove the rule that only 2 nominated cars can score points for a team. Remove that and young, but also experienced local drivers will get a chance at their event. If a top driver retires it is not such a big problem for the team since other cars can still score. I understand that small teams cannot affort to run a lot of cars, but that's a part of rallying. If we had 10 proper teams with 2 cars this wouldn't be necessary, but this is far from the case.

This would benefit MSport quite a bit, given typically half the field lately is in a Ford of some sort. Even if they are at the bottom half of the field these days!

[stefanvv]

This would benefit MSport quite a bit, given typically half the field lately is in a Ford of some sort. Even if they are at the bottom half of the field these days!

No, it'll benefit VW

[Sulland]

This WRC mess will make ERC explode in numbers in 2015!

[N.O.T]

This WRC mess will make ERC explode in numbers in 2015!

ERC will not explode in numbers... it will always be a nice championship for all the B and C class drivers to test their skills, it is a nice championship to follow but it cannot be taken seriously... when was the last time the ERC produced a first class driver who would be a threat to the WRC ?

[Mk2 RS2000]

ERC will not explode in numbers... it will always be a nice championship for all the B and C class drivers to test their skills, it is a nice championship to follow but it cannot be taken seriously... when was the last time the ERC produced a first class driver who would be a threat to the WRC ?

About the same time the APRC did

[Mirek]

ERC will not explode in numbers... it will always be a nice championship for all the B and C class drivers to test their skills, it is a nice championship to follow but it cannot be taken seriously... when was the last time the ERC produced a first class driver who would be a threat to the WRC ?

From current WRC active drivers it's Neuville, Mikkelsen, Hänninen, Bouffier...

Not that bad at all I would say...

[sete]

Meeke is also import of IRC/ERC ( he is champion from 2009)

[N.O.T]

From current WRC active drivers it's Neuville, Mikkelsen, Hänninen, Bouffier...

Not that bad at all I would say...

From the list only Neuville and Mikkelsen have a future the other two are just nobodies... and we are talikng about a WRC with 2 teams and 2 drivers capable of winning not a WRC of a decade ago....where these two would not even be capable of shining the shoes of the proper drivers.

[N.O.T]

Meeke is also import of IRC/ERC ( he is champion from 2009)

we talk about first class drivers... there are a lot of ERC nobodies who drove in the WRC.

[Munkvy]

From the list only Neuville and Mikkelsen have a future the other two are just nobodies... and we are talikng about a WRC with 2 teams and 2 drivers capable of winning not a WRC of a decade ago....where these two would not even be capable of shining the shoes of the proper drivers.

I wouldn't say Bouffier is a nobody, given he has already out performed Neuville and Mikkelsen in the only WRC event he has competed at this year...

[N.O.T]

I wouldn't say Bouffier is a nobody, given he has already out performed Neuville and Mikkelsen in the only WRC event he has competed at this year...

He is nothing special... maybe use him in events he knows by heart, otherwise he must pay.

[Mirek]

Bryan was something special but nobody gave him a chance when he was young. Now he is too old for starting a WRC career (his first ever start with WRC car on RMC 2014 happened in age of 35). Realistically he has no WRC future. Purely because of his age.

[N.O.T]

You have to ask yourself why was not given a chance... he comes from a country that has a good rally tradition of supporting extraordinary talent...maybe he was not one.

[Mirek]

It's not like that all the good talents were once given a proper chance. Moreover only very few were given dozens of chances in years of crashing like Latvala was...

[N.O.T]

Latvala was given his chances either because there no one else worth investing in or by paying... I think the reason why Latvala was not dumped (as he should in my opinion) was either because the money investment on him was too big to scrap or because he just payed his way out of bad situations...

In a sport like rallying where it is not popular most of the drivers do not get "proper" chances... they just grab any chance they have and make something out of it... some succeed some fail.

[Rallyper]

JML always been fast. That´s why he could stay. (Between crashes I should say - else you would)

[N.O.T]

JML always been fast. That´s why he could stay. (Between crashes I should say - else you would)

Other drivers were also fast tanak, aava and some others.... the fact that they left and latvala stayed indicates there are more things a driver needs other than speed to hold on to his place is he crashes a lot.

[Rallyper]

Other drivers were also fast tanak, aava and some others.... the fact that they left and latvala stayed indicates there are more things a driver needs other than speed to hold on to his place is he crashes a lot.

Yes, as you said investments. But raw speed the others you mentioned isn´t near. And facts shows it was good decision. JML today one out of two three drivers that might disturb Seb a bit.

[Doon]

Yes, as you said investments. But raw speed the others you mentioned isn´t near. And facts shows it was good decision. JML today one out of two three drivers that might disturb Seb a bit.

....the other one is also driving a Volkswagen. Which is why the sport is in a downward spiral in terms of interest and investment.

If the Hyundai is developed considerably for the 2015 season and the car can match the VW's then we may have a challenger in a different car, i.e. Neuville. Otherwise it's basically a one horse race, and who wants to follow a one horse race?

[Mirek]

But raw speed the others you mentioned isn´t near. And facts shows it was good decision.

Naturally... as JML has been around for 12 years (8 years in a WRC car) and did 137 WRC events (in average every event 9x). Do You seriously believe that if You made a time-travel and took 2002 or 2003 Latvala against 2014 Latvala that he would be anywhere close?

Was it a good decision? Maybe but I believe that the goal for Malcolm was to win the title which Latvala didn't manage. I don't blame him for that but it's like that. Nobody competes to be second. Anyway You can't say that other guys would not get farther after 8 full-factory seasons because You can not know...

[Antony Warmbold]

Naturally... as JML has been around for 12 years (8 years in a WRC car) and did 137 WRC events (in average every event 9x). Do You seriously believe that if You made a time-travel and took 2002 or 2003 Latvala against 2014 Latvala that he would be anywhere close?

Was it a good decision? Maybe but I believe that the goal for Malcolm was to win the title which Latvala didn't manage. I don't blame him for that but it's like that. Nobody competes to be second. Anyway You can't say that other guys would not get farther after 8 full-factory seasons because You can not know...

Had I been the boss of the Ford rally team and thinking of how to make money, I would have asked the manager for shares into the driver's future salaries with a hypothetical future manu who pays..., in exchange for having a lot of patience with all the crashes etc. Had I done that I would be reaping the rewards today...

[Doon]

Had I been the boss of the Ford rally team and thinking of how to make money, I would have asked the manager for shares into the driver's future salaries with a hypothetical future manu who pays..., in exchange for having a lot of patience with all the crashes etc. Had I done that I would be reaping the rewards today...

There are only a couple of paid drivers in the WRC, so I don't think you'd be making much money out of it. How many are actually paid by the manufacturers? My bet is Ogier, Latvala and Neuville.....that's about it.

[Antony Warmbold]

There are only a couple of paid drivers in the WRC, so I don't think you'd be making much money out of it. How many are actually paid by the manufacturers? My bet is Ogier, Latvala and Neuville.....that's about it.

I'd be really surprised if VW would not be paying all their drivers.

[DonJippo]

Had I been the boss of the Ford rally team and thinking of how to make money, I would have asked the manager for shares into the driver's future salaries with a hypothetical future manu who pays..., in exchange for having a lot of patience with all the crashes etc. Had I done that I would be reaping the rewards today...

So hypothetically speaking you would now have a manufacturer like VW paying part of your costs of running a Ford rally team?

[Rallyper]

Naturally... as JML has been around for 12 years (8 years in a WRC car) and did 137 WRC events (in average every event 9x). Do You seriously believe that if You made a time-travel and took 2002 or 2003 Latvala against 2014 Latvala that he would be anywhere close?

Was it a good decision? Maybe but I believe that the goal for Malcolm was to win the title which Latvala didn't manage. I don't blame him for that but it's like that. Nobody competes to be second. Anyway You can't say that other guys would not get farther after 8 full-factory seasons because You can not know...

I´m not talking about what could have happened. As thing happened to be, JML was always fast between crashes and no other of mentioned drivers have been in same situation. And it has paid off.

And I´m sure the investers now getting money back on JML salary from VW.

[Antony Warmbold]

So hypothetically speaking you would now have a manufacturer like VW paying part of your costs of running a Ford rally team?

Hypothetically, yes. ;)

[Doon]

I'd be really surprised if VW would not be paying all their drivers.

It would be interesting to find out who is paid by the manufacturers, who pays for their seat with their own money, and who pays from sponsors. My guess is;

Ogier + Latvala - Paid by VW
Mikkelsen - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Hirvonen - Sponsors pay for his seat
Evans - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Ostberg - Sponsors/family money
Meeke - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Neuville - Paid by Hyundai
Hanninen + Sordo - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Paddon - Sponsors pay for seat

[N.O.T]

It would be interesting to find out who is paid by the manufacturers, who pays for their seat with their own money, and who pays from sponsors. My guess is;

Ogier + Latvala - Paid by VW
Mikkelsen - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Hirvonen - Sponsors pay for his seat
Evans - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Ostberg - Sponsors/family money
Meeke - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Neuville - Paid by Hyundai
Hanninen + Sordo - Not paid, but doesn't pay for his seat
Paddon - Sponsors pay for seat

what is the point of guessing for such things ??

[Doon]

what is the point of guessing for such things ??

What is the point of anything? To pass time before our inevitable demise?

[N.O.T]

What is the point of anything? To pass time before our inevitable demise?

that is way too pesimistic... i like it.

But really discussion about salaries and who pays and who doesn't and all remind me of the F1 girls discussing the hair styles of their lifestyle idols... plus it is pretty much obvious in most cases.

[Doon]

that is way too pesimistic... i like it.

Well this is a revelation; N.O.T actually likes something!


But really discussion about salaries and who pays and who doesn't and all remind me of the F1 girls discussing the hair styles of their lifestyle idols... plus it is pretty much obvious in most cases.

It was mainly to point out that no money could have been made by brokering a deal with a driver to give up a percentage of his future salary, in exchange for letting them bend millions of pounds worth of WRC car. This is because there are only a couple of the guys being paid.

[Brother John]

Had I been the boss of the Ford rally team and thinking of how to make money, I would have asked the manager for shares into the driver's future salaries with a hypothetical future manu who pays..., in exchange for having a lot of patience with all the crashes etc. Had I done that I would be reaping the rewards today...

Like most sports it's more about money and salaries!
Look at Tennis, Golf, F1 and many more, you name it.
Where is the real sport?

[OldF]

I don’t know how to get people more interested in rallying. Maybe these days there are lot more options for amusement than in the past. In the past before youtube I was happy if there was at least something on the TV. Nowadays everything is on pay channels and I’m not going to pay 20-30 € / month and watch about 5% of the programs.

rjbetty mentioned the 2003 season as one of the best. Imo the end of 90s and beginning of 2000 were good. I also liked the seasons 1990-1994 when Auriol, Kankkunen and Sainz took turns championships. Sainz had a bad season in 1993 when he was driving a Lancia but returned to the “team” in 1994 with Subaru. In those days the cars had around 400 hp so the power figures was at the right level.:)


I made some small statistics about winners and champions from 1979-2013.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Winnersperyear_zps2c3c3843.jpg

Lancia ruled the field during 1987-1989 but then came Toyota and they were quite equal.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Cars1979-2013_zps4ce3fe98.jpg

Below a list of winners. Champion in red, 2nd in blue and 3rd in green. First part in this post and the rest in the next one.

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Driverwins1979-20131_zps45b3647a.jpg

[OldF]

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Driverwins1979-20132_zps78fe9a05.jpg
http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Driverwins1979-20133_zps1e9edac2.jpg
http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Driverwins1979-20134_zps2565b098.jpg
http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii284/OkdF/Driverwins1979-20135_zps0e683878.jpg

[OldF]

Have you guys already read Martin Holme’s article “Rallying’s confidentiality crisis” in newest issue of MotorsportMonday (pages 98-100)?

“The logical conclusion is to deduce that the WRC promoter is no more than an agent who seeks to profit from the organisers being dealt with. But for whose advantage? Is the WRC promoter any more than a fund raiser for FIA? Where does promotion of the World Rally Championship come into the picture?

http://digital.motorsportmonday.com//launch.aspx?eid=7b859551-0d52-4feb-b2a1-3b0bb3a5a7cf (http://digital.motorsportmonday.com/launch.aspx?eid=7b859551-0d52-4feb-b2a1-3b0bb3a5a7cf)

Very much my feelings.

PS The idle time is very short before being thrown out of the forum.

[AndyRAC]

Hmmm, can't say I'm impressed with the Promoters..... In fact I'd say they've been poor! All they've done is sell rights to Pay TV..... Marvellous.....Not.

[stefanvv]

“The logical conclusion is to deduce that the WRC promoter is no more than an agent who seeks to profit from the organisers being dealt with. But for whose advantage? Is the WRC promoter any more than a fund raiser for FIA? Where does promotion of the World Rally Championship come into the picture?

Totally agree. Its not like rbmh are uncapable of doing somthing right.

[N.O.T]

At the end of the day if you want to make money you have to spend, the thing is rallying was always the sport for the few, compared to ladytrack sports it is hard to spectate, hard to understand who the winner is (for the unitiated) and hard to cover it on TV.

So any promoter will have to take a risk to expose the sport to the public and spend money on live coverage, better camera spots and better presentation, but when he sees the caveats i mentioned above is sceptical to do so because it may very well be money thrown down the drain, and that is why i somehow understand Capito when he looks for ways to change the sport.

The sport was way better in the early 00s because back then the situation was economically far better so companies did not care if they spend money on nothing. Like china and the emirates do today....

The world is changing and the older you get the harder will be for you to understand these changes, by holding evolution back you just making a dinosaur out of a sport.... let it evolve and then judge if the changes are good or not.

[stefanvv]

You're right as well, especially that WRC is not that popular as curcuit racing motorsports. But this makes me think, ok - what is the role of promoter? Isn't to make the sport popular, not just for fans, but also for the companies potentially interested in investment in it. So currently it looks like "the sport is not popular, and we'll only lose money trying to make better coverage, so we must change the format to make it popular, then we can promote it to average joe". This looks like little funny hen and egg situation, so which must come first?

[Lousada]

You're right as well, especially that WRC is not that popular as curcuit racing motorsports.

How did you come to this conclusion? Apart from F1 and some select meetings like the Le Mans 24h, rallying is a whole lot more popular than circuit racing. Just because circuit racing organisers say it is popular doesn't mean it is.

Simple example, just look at the world rallycross event in Belgium last weekend. The announced spectators was 25.000. Yet the only spectator areas were a grassy knoll some 100 metres long and 7 metres high, and some small temp grandstands. Imagine a football stadium of 25.000 people. How big and tall the grandstands are, everybody shoulder to shoulder. And then imagine them on a rallycross track... won't work. Yet Rallycross is supposedly the 'it'-sport right now because it is so popular and young and fresh and blabla.

[stefanvv]

How did you come to this conclusion?

Easy, just look at tv coverage percentage. Of course it might be different from country to country, but globally, this is the case

[Rallyper]

The role of a promoter is to show a popular sport being from proper rules that attract carmakers and competitors. If rules are good and competion thrilling the promoter has an easier job. However they have to move forward and not be static, showing only pics from junctions etz.