Neuville vs Mouton

[Lundefaret]

Michele Mouton is getting a battering from Neuville and several others of the modern rally drivers because she advocates night driving and other aspects the modern crop of drivers dont like.

This is from Autosport:
Hyundai's Thierry Neuville said drivers wanted Mouton - the 1982 WRC runner-up - to experience first-hand what the current field were facing.
"Things have changed since she was competing," said Neuville.
"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip and they were fighting for minutes, not for tenths of seconds.
"The invitation is not only coming from me to sit in the car, it's from all of the drivers - every one of us would like the chance to show Michele how is it today compared with when she was driving."

Well, I would like to comment on all these statements made by Neuville. But in stead of it being only personal and subjective comments, I would like to use Junnkas (juwra.com) incredible WRC archive to see if Neuville is on to something, or not.

"Things have changed since she was competing,"

Well, lets see if they have.

Monte Carlo 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 4196,8 km vs 1.383,2
Days: 7 vs 4
SS distance: 716,8 km vs 355,48
Fastest stage: 112,22 km/t vs 111,69 km/t
Slowest stage: 70,82 km/t vs 80,46 km/t

Sweden 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 1.499,1 vs 1.441,7
Days: 3 vs 4
SS distance: 470,1 km vs 308,0 km
Fastest stage: 135,9 km/t vs 117,65 km/t
Slowest stage: 90,16 km/t vs 57,49 km/t

Portugal 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 2.399.9 km vs 1.501,9 km
Days: 4 vs 4
SS distance: 643,0 km vs 352,1 km
Fastest stage: 134,33 km/t vs 100,14 km/t
Slowest stage: 75,12 km/t vs 75,08 km/t

Finland 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 1.461,0 km vs 1.260,6 km
Days: 3 vs 4
SS distance: 472,43 km vs 320,0 km
Fastest stage: 134,05 km/t vs 135,25 km/t
Slowest stage: 66,06 km/t vs 75,25 km/t

Tour de Corce 1983 vs 2008
Total distance: 1.715,1 km vs 1.094,3
Days: 3 vs 3
SS distance: 1.066,1 km vs 359,0 km
Fastest stage: 97,45 km/t vs 106,48 km/t
Slowest stage: 76,43 km/t vs 88,04 km/t

2015 is Shorter: Well, things have changed. Rallies have gotten shorter. In Tour de Corce the total km of Special Stages are just 1/3 of 1983. And that in the same number of days.
2015 is Slower: Most rallies had higher maximum stage speed in 1983 compared to 2015.


"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip and they were fighting for minutes, not for tenths of seconds.

Well. Half speed?
No, it could not have been half speed.
Performance wise a 1983 Audi would have about the same power as a 2015 car, but would be lighter. It would be (A LOT) more difficult to drive in respects to the manual transmission, weight distribution, diffs, tires, dampers etc. When we see that the stage speeds are faster in 1983 than 2015 (not the same stages off course) I think we safely can say that the drivers drove flat out. This we also can see in the number of offs between the top drivers. Reece was also completely different, where You could in most cases do the stages as many times as You liked, and this would often be practiced at very high speeds.
The exception is the Safari and Ivory cost, which today is comparable to Endurance rally events.

Old tires?
Well, they were new then :) The tires off course had a lot less grip than today.

Fighting for minutes, not tenths of seconds?
Well...
In 2015 Neuville was fourth in Finland 3 minutes and 59 seconds off the leader.
In 1983 Per Eklund was fourth in Finland 2 minutes and 19 seconds off the leader.
The fact that the rallies was longer, and that there was no SuperRally should be taken in account. Also that there was differences in tire strategy/usages.

Conclusion:
I think its an alarm signal when modern rally drivers complain about things like dust, darkness, early mornings, late evenings, not posh enough hotels etc.
Its not their fault, because it is not them that have evolved the sport of rallying to what it has become.
But what we have now is drivers that are much more like circuit drivers, and a sport that is much more like circuit driving than before.
If it was foggy, dark, dusty, muddy etc in 1983, well, You had to adjust Your attack to that fact.
I understand Neuville, because he has been brought up in a totally different sport than Mouton, but not different in the ways he thinks.
It was just as much flat out driving in Moutons time (on comparable stages/rallies), but the sport was much harder, and the drivers and teams had to endure much more discomfort.

In such respect Mouton has more chest hair and bigger balls than Neuville, because You had to have it to be competitive in that time. But because of this she will have difficulty communicating to the pampered drivers of today, because it will be difficult for here to take in how easy living WRC rallying has become.

I my self have been a passenger in both WRC cars (driven by WRC drivers including Loeb and Østberg), and other earlier rallycars like a 1985 quattro S1 E2 and a 1983 quattro A2. I think Mouton would be disappointed being a passenger in a modern WRC car. It is off course blindingly fast, but because of the dampers - where You would be shaking around and really feeling the road and the speed in a 1983 rally car - You are whiskered away on a magic carpet in a 2015 WRC car. I dont think she would be very impressed to be honest. And I think this is why really passionate drivers like Latvala and Meeke has - what I would think - even more fun in old classic rally cars than in modern ones.

Rally needs to bring back some of the mojo of earlier days, combined with new possibilities in connecting the sport to the public. I think its better to listen to Mouton than to Neuville.

[N.O.T]

Neuville gave that old man a lesson... well said terry although you are crap as a driver the last 2 seasons.

[Rallyper]

Neuville gave that old man a lesson... well said terry although you are crap as a driver the last 2 seasons.

Haven´t you understood one thing of the statement above? Lundefaret points out exactly everything that isn´t today. Yesterdays drivers were men and one woman. And nowadays we have only a few men, other are boys.

[N.O.T]

the old man comment was for that Mutton person.

Compared to todays drivers those of the 80s with an exception of kannkunen should just crawl back to their caves and not have an opinion about the sport anymore... driving around in slow motion has nothing to do with what the proper drivers of today do.

[Mirek]

Lundefaret, I don't want to make advocate to Neuville but You made some wrong assumptions. The high average speed of some stages in 1980' was mostly due to the nature of such stages and the fact that such stages are not run anymore as they are seen as useless with modern cars. In the same corners the cars were really a looot slower than today.

I can give You an example with stage Pindula of Barum rally.

In 1983 Harrald Demuth with Quattro A2 had average speed 94,6 km/h. When it was last time run in same direction in 2010 in the same length the average speed of Valoušek with works Fabia S2000 was 112,6 km/h. The difference is 9,6 s/km which is enormous. The road of course wasn't in same condition (but as large part of the road was built in 1980' it was maybe better than now when it is very very rough). Also there were no chicanes in 1983 but several in 2010.

Let's say that half of the 1983 Barum route is seen nowadays as useless due to looong straights on rpm limiter, few difficult places etc. On the other hand there were some extremely difficult stages which are not run anymore for various reasons (such as Pržno-Kateřinice). Also adding several soft sandy stages in a Safari style to a tarmac rally is a big no no today but it was normal in that time.

[AndyRAC]

The problem is that the modern driver has been brought up with the modern 9-5 'office hours' WRC events - that's all they know, just like a lot of the modern fans.

Anybody who thinks the modern era WRC is better than ever, seriously needs help. The WRC has been the most 'dumbed down' of world Motorsport.

[Lundefaret]

Lundefaret, I don't want to make advocate to Neuville but You made some wrong assumptions. The high average speed of some stages in 1980' was mostly due to the nature of such stages and the fact that such stages are not run anymore as they are seen as useless with modern cars. In the same corners the cars were really a looot slower than today.

I can give You an example with stage Pindula of Barum rally.

In 1983 Harrald Demuth with Quattro A2 had average speed 94,6 km/h. When it was last time run in same direction in 2010 in the same length the average speed of Valoušek with works Fabia S2000 was 112,6 km/h. The difference is 9,6 s/km which is enormous. The road of course wasn't in same condition (but as large part of the road was built in 1980' it was maybe better than now when it is very very rough). Also there were no chicanes in 1983 but several in 2010.

Let's say that half of the 1983 Barum route is seen nowadays as useless due to looong straights on rpm limiter, few difficult places etc. On the other hand there were some extremely difficult stages which are not run anymore for various reasons (such as Pržno-Kateřinice). Also adding several soft sandy stages in a Safari style to a tarmac rally is a big no no today but it was normal in that time.

Off course I know that the cars where slower, the point I am making is that the drivers was just as fast, and that the drivers, codrivers, mechanics etc, had to endure A LOT more discomfort, in every possible way. The events where much tougher, so the teams had to be too.

Neuville stating that Mouton should come with him in a car to show her how the sport has changed, thinking she would be gobsmacked by the experience, it is just so devoid of any knowledge of WRC history in general, and Moutons history in detail, that I am mowing Neuville over in the "spoiled brat" category of modern rally drivers.

In stead of Mouton riding in a WRC car with Neuville, I would suggest that Neuville accompanies Kris Meeke the next time he is doing the Baja 1000 solo on a motorbike. ;)

The Hyundai service park is the best symbol of how the sport has changed. Now even the mechanics can't work outside, they have to bring the fricking work shop with them... Oh my...

[Simmi]

I think there's one big misconception here which is that modern rally drivers don't want to do stages in the dark.

I think Ogier made one quite sweeping statement about night stages and gravel, but he went on to talk about the dust - which was the only issue here. Paul Nagle said last night on the Absolute Rally podcast that the crews don't have any issue with driving at night. He said some of the most incredible stages of the WRC are after dark. The issue is simply the dust and how it puts you at a set disadvantage to the first man on the road. The drivers and teams also feel upset that they weren't listened to despite raising the issue at multiple points.

Maybe if the events were a lot longer a small stage with a bit of dust is not an issue. But nowadays each rally is so short that the drivers don't want to be giving anything away.

Honestly I can see why Mouton would be offended by some of Neuville's comments - as he's essentially belittling what the Group B drivers went through. I think in general the current WRC service park should harden up a bit. But I don't support the inclusion of a short 8km, mickey mouse night stage that was just shoe-horned into the event as a gimmick. Clearly it wasn't worth the bother.

[Mirek]

It's not so easy to say that it used to be tougher in those days. The cars weren't so durable (but service was available after every stage) and the crews mostly had reasonably worse physical codnition than today. Nowadays all professional drivers from WRC are kind of athletes in the way they do gymnastics, excercises in sauna, eat special food etc. We shall not take the speeding-up too easy. It's very demanding for the crews to cope with such speeds.

All in all I don't want to say that it's harder today than it used to be back in 80' or vice versa. I want to say that it's very missleading to judge from some particular values such as stage distance. I don't think that someone smoking cigars after every stage could get in top 10 of WRC today.

[Lundefaret]

I think there's one big misconception here which is that modern rally drivers don't want to do stages in the dark.

I think Ogier made one quite sweeping statement about night stages and gravel, but he went on to talk about the dust - which was the only issue here. Paul Nagle said last night on the Absolute Rally podcast that the crews don't have any issue with driving at night. He said some of the most incredible stages of the WRC are after dark. The issue is simply the dust and how it puts you at a set disadvantage to the first man on the road. The drivers and teams also feel upset that they weren't listened to despite raising the issue at multiple points.

Maybe if the events were a lot longer a small stage with a bit of dust is not an issue. But nowadays each rally is so short that the drivers don't want to be giving anything away.

Honestly I can see why Mouton would be offended by some of Neuville's comments - as he's essentially belittling what the Group B drivers went through. I think in general the current WRC service park should harden up a bit. But I don't support the inclusion of a short 8km, mickey mouse night stage that was just shoe-horned into the event as a gimmick. Clearly it wasn't worth the bother.

I partly agree with You. But the dust thing is not the inly complaint nowadays.
Several of the top WRC drivers complains if the last stage is too late and the first stage is too early, so they dont get their full 8 hours of beauty sleep. Etc etc.

The WRC as a whole needs to harden up a bit. The drivers won't give away comfort willingly, so someone in the FIA should take charge and make rallying a modern version of what is the legend of the WRC.

There has newer been a time better suited for rallying as a sport than right now, given the incredible opportunities that exists in the form of scissile media, the inter web, etc. But to create a demand for rallying, it needs to be a concept that makes it easy to tell great stories. And today, with the androgyne look-a-like events it is not, and with drivers complaining like they do - sounding like spoiled primadonnas, in stead of tough and hard heroes, they dont help either.

[rayh_mx]

Regardless of all that can be said about the before and after stages all participants are executed with the same conditions, if it is night, all night run, if there is fog, dust, moisture.

Sure, you may have some rain and some just wet, but it's ralling.

[Mirek]

Regardless of all that can be said about the before and after stages all participants are executed with the same conditions, if it is night, all night run, if there is fog, dust, moisture.

Sure, you may have some rain and some just wet, but it's ralling.

Unfortunately it's not same conditions. For example only WRC drivers have 3-4 minutes gaps in night gravel stages. Others have to do it with 1 minute etc.

[rayh_mx]

Unfortunately it's not same conditions. For example only WRC drivers have 3-4 minutes gaps in night gravel stages. Others have to do it with 1 minute etc.

The point is that nothing like it, if the dust, if I get out first, if that record the time at the end of the stage is not handsome and so on.

The only way would be the same conditions from the comfort of a simulator, and could even be in the air and calling for an occasional drink for better hang

[Simmi]

A lot of people have been comparing dust to fog, driving snow, heavy rain etc.

The difference for me is that the dust can be accurately predicted. The others are random, natural factors and are not caused by the cars themselves.

[Mk2 RS2000]

The difference for me is that the dust can be accurately predicted..

Not in our neck of the woods

[itix]

Michele Mouton is getting a battering from Neuville and several others of the modern rally drivers because she advocates night driving and other aspects the modern crop of drivers dont like.

This is from Autosport:
Hyundai's Thierry Neuville said drivers wanted Mouton - the 1982 WRC runner-up - to experience first-hand what the current field were facing.
"Things have changed since she was competing," said Neuville.
"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip and they were fighting for minutes, not for tenths of seconds.
"The invitation is not only coming from me to sit in the car, it's from all of the drivers - every one of us would like the chance to show Michele how is it today compared with when she was driving."

Well, I would like to comment on all these statements made by Neuville. But in stead of it being only personal and subjective comments, I would like to use Junnkas (juwra.com) incredible WRC archive to see if Neuville is on to something, or not.

"Things have changed since she was competing,"

Well, lets see if they have.

Monte Carlo 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 4196,8 km vs 1.383,2
Days: 7 vs 4
SS distance: 716,8 km vs 355,48
Fastest stage: 112,22 km/t vs 111,69 km/t
Slowest stage: 70,82 km/t vs 80,46 km/t

Sweden 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 1.499,1 vs 1.441,7
Days: 3 vs 4
SS distance: 470,1 km vs 308,0 km
Fastest stage: 135,9 km/t vs 117,65 km/t
Slowest stage: 90,16 km/t vs 57,49 km/t

Portugal 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 2.399.9 km vs 1.501,9 km
Days: 4 vs 4
SS distance: 643,0 km vs 352,1 km
Fastest stage: 134,33 km/t vs 100,14 km/t
Slowest stage: 75,12 km/t vs 75,08 km/t

Finland 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 1.461,0 km vs 1.260,6 km
Days: 3 vs 4
SS distance: 472,43 km vs 320,0 km
Fastest stage: 134,05 km/t vs 135,25 km/t
Slowest stage: 66,06 km/t vs 75,25 km/t

Tour de Corce 1983 vs 2008
Total distance: 1.715,1 km vs 1.094,3
Days: 3 vs 3
SS distance: 1.066,1 km vs 359,0 km
Fastest stage: 97,45 km/t vs 106,48 km/t
Slowest stage: 76,43 km/t vs 88,04 km/t

2015 is Shorter: Well, things have changed. Rallies have gotten shorter. In Tour de Corce the total km of Special Stages are just 1/3 of 1983. And that in the same number of days.
2015 is Slower: Most rallies had higher maximum stage speed in 1983 compared to 2015.


"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip and they were fighting for minutes, not for tenths of seconds.

Well. Half speed?
No, it could not have been half speed.
Performance wise a 1983 Audi would have about the same power as a 2015 car, but would be lighter. It would be (A LOT) more difficult to drive in respects to the manual transmission, weight distribution, diffs, tires, dampers etc. When we see that the stage speeds are faster in 1983 than 2015 (not the same stages off course) I think we safely can say that the drivers drove flat out. This we also can see in the number of offs between the top drivers. Reece was also completely different, where You could in most cases do the stages as many times as You liked, and this would often be practiced at very high speeds.
The exception is the Safari and Ivory cost, which today is comparable to Endurance rally events.

Old tires?
Well, they were new then :) The tires off course had a lot less grip than today.

Fighting for minutes, not tenths of seconds?
Well...
In 2015 Neuville was fourth in Finland 3 minutes and 59 seconds off the leader.
In 1983 Per Eklund was fourth in Finland 2 minutes and 19 seconds off the leader.
The fact that the rallies was longer, and that there was no SuperRally should be taken in account. Also that there was differences in tire strategy/usages.

Conclusion:
I think its an alarm signal when modern rally drivers complain about things like dust, darkness, early mornings, late evenings, not posh enough hotels etc.
Its not their fault, because it is not them that have evolved the sport of rallying to what it has become.
But what we have now is drivers that are much more like circuit drivers, and a sport that is much more like circuit driving than before.
If it was foggy, dark, dusty, muddy etc in 1983, well, You had to adjust Your attack to that fact.
I understand Neuville, because he has been brought up in a totally different sport than Mouton, but not different in the ways he thinks.
It was just as much flat out driving in Moutons time (on comparable stages/rallies), but the sport was much harder, and the drivers and teams had to endure much more discomfort.

In such respect Mouton has more chest hair and bigger balls than Neuville, because You had to have it to be competitive in that time. But because of this she will have difficulty communicating to the pampered drivers of today, because it will be difficult for here to take in how easy living WRC rallying has become.

I my self have been a passenger in both WRC cars (driven by WRC drivers including Loeb and Østberg), and other earlier rallycars like a 1985 quattro S1 E2 and a 1983 quattro A2. I think Mouton would be disappointed being a passenger in a modern WRC car. It is off course blindingly fast, but because of the dampers - where You would be shaking around and really feeling the road and the speed in a 1983 rally car - You are whiskered away on a magic carpet in a 2015 WRC car. I dont think she would be very impressed to be honest. And I think this is why really passionate drivers like Latvala and Meeke has - what I would think - even more fun in old classic rally cars than in modern ones.

Rally needs to bring back some of the mojo of earlier days, combined with new possibilities in connecting the sport to the public. I think its better to listen to Mouton than to Neuville.
Couldn't have agreed more. Perfect analysis.

The fans are behind you Mouton, don't give in to the pressure from drivers.

[rallyace]

I side with Mouton. However, regardless of who's "right" and who's wrong, it's quite disrespectful of Neuville to make such comments.

"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip..." Very condescending if you ask me, bordering on arrogant. Quite "displeased Ogier"-like comments, to be honest.

[janvanvurpa]

Couldn't have agreed more. Perfect analysis.

The fans are behind you Mouton, don't give in to the pressure from drivers.

Or the whiners (jag tänke säga gnäll-pellisar o tänke va fan är pluralis av en gnäll-pelle? Hjälp!)

It IS precisely the lack of BIG ADVENTURE! and the lack of unpredictability, coupled with pampered nature of EVERYBODY at the highest level which has made rally "a mere contest of speed".

[Grundo Farb]

Great summary Lundefaret and I agree Rallyace, irrespective of who is right or wrong Neuvilles comments are terrible. And besides, when was the last time Neuville fought for 10ths of seconds?

I liked Paddons comments about it in the Rallysport mag "The end of leg night stage was a nice challenge, and while there was some hanging dust, I enjoyed it."

Dust is dust, it doesn't matter if you car was from the 70's, 80's or 2015. The drivers from all eras needed to drive as fast as they can in the conditions with the technology they have.

[Grundo Farb]

In fact the drivers of old had to deal with spectators in the road in a way the current group don't. By no stretch am I saying they should be it must have been very difficult.

http://motormavens.com/2012/06/rally-spectators-risk-their-lives/

The more I have thought about this the more annoyed I am at these modern drivers.

[bassist]

Forgive me if I am wrong here, but wasnt Rallying initially about endurance in adverse conditions coupled with navigation from point A to B? Yes speed came into it, and i am the first to take my hat off to the current string of WRC drivers, who control their mounts with remarkable skill and bravery. I seem to remember a term used in the 80`s that Group `B` were referred to as `Forest Racers`, and rightly so for the spectacle that they provided. Wernt most events longer, both in duration and stage mileage? Didnt the teams compete in all corners of the globe,and experience all that worlds weather and terrain could throw at them? Didnt drivers have to be hosed down in places like San Remo, because of the sheer physical effort and dehydration of driving in intense heat? Wasnt the Safari a Care Breaker, and a total lottery to predict the result? Wasnt Monte Carlo a mix of speed and caution on ice, coupled with weather breaks that decided the outcome?
Well as far as i can see, the conditions havnt changed much for the current crop of drivers, but the events are less arduous, and yes, the margins are closer. But really for all this whining and grizzling about Dust/cleaning roads etc, is surely taking away the ethos of the sport. Grow up boys and just get on with peddling your half million pound vehicles as fast as possible, whatever conditions you face. You will all be more highly thought of if you do. This is not Formula One , it`s about the `the big outdoors`and getting `stuck in`.

[BleAivano]

Michele Mouton is getting a battering from Neuville and several others of the modern rally drivers because she advocates night driving and other aspects the modern crop of drivers dont like.

This is from Autosport:
Hyundai's Thierry Neuville said drivers wanted Mouton - the 1982 WRC runner-up - to experience first-hand what the current field were facing.
"Things have changed since she was competing," said Neuville.
"When she was driving, it was with half-speed, old tyres without grip and they were fighting for minutes, not for tenths of seconds.
"The invitation is not only coming from me to sit in the car, it's from all of the drivers - every one of us would like the chance to show Michele how is it today compared with when she was driving."

Well, I would like to comment on all these statements made by Neuville. But in stead of it being only personal and subjective comments, I would like to use Junnkas (juwra.com) incredible WRC archive to see if Neuville is on to something, or not.

"Things have changed since she was competing,"

Well, lets see if they have.

Sweden 1983 vs 2015
Total distance: 1.499,1 vs 1.441,7
Days: 3 vs 4
SS distance: 470,1 km vs 308,0 km
Fastest stage: 135,9 km/t vs 117,65 km/t
Slowest stage: 90,16 km/t vs 57,49 km/t


There is no way you can claim that Rally Sweden 2015 is 4 days long. More like 2 days plus 1 SSS on Thursday plus a 3-4 stages on Sunday.

[Simmi]

Forgive me if I am wrong here, but wasnt Rallying initially about endurance in adverse conditions coupled with navigation from point A to B? Yes speed came into it, and i am the first to take my hat off to the current string of WRC drivers, who control their mounts with remarkable skill and bravery. I seem to remember a term used in the 80`s that Group `B` were referred to as `Forest Racers`, and rightly so for the spectacle that they provided. Wernt most events longer, both in duration and stage mileage? Didnt the teams compete in all corners of the globe,and experience all that worlds weather and terrain could throw at them? Didnt drivers have to be hosed down in places like San Remo, because of the sheer physical effort and dehydration of driving in intense heat? Wasnt the Safari a Care Breaker, and a total lottery to predict the result? Wasnt Monte Carlo a mix of speed and caution on ice, coupled with weather breaks that decided the outcome?
Well as far as i can see, the conditions havnt changed much for the current crop of drivers, but the events are less arduous, and yes, the margins are closer. But really for all this whining and grizzling about Dust/cleaning roads etc, is surely taking away the ethos of the sport. Grow up boys and just get on with peddling your half million pound vehicles as fast as possible, whatever conditions you face. You will all be more highly thought of if you do. This is not Formula One , it`s about the `the big outdoors`and getting `stuck in`.

Lovely post. Agree with you on a lot of levels.

Really this current night/dust flashpoint is just the latest issue in a sport struggling for its identity. It's something countless promoters and an FIA where Group B stalwarts hold influence still can't figure out.

You could literally write a thesis on the whole debate. Making the events shorter, more formulaic and 'for TV' hasn't really seen the championship gain any extra exposure. But the manufacturers are here.

You could move away from the current model, expand the rallies, increase the running, (all of which increases the cost) and hope you develop more stories and displays of heroics. The VIPs won't be as happy and the Hyundai mechanics might have to work outside.

I don't have the answer as to how you infuse the old school and new school. And clearly neither does anyone else.

[rallyace]

It's great to see so many brilliant points made. It makes for some great reading and you begin to reflect on what the WRC is, used to be, and what will be in the future.

Neuville's comments not only seem to be his own personal opinion, but could be seen as a general view shared by many other drivers as well. His comments towards night driving (and Mouton) can be viewed almost as a "modern rally driver's" view on the current state of the WRC, and that's a shame. Perhaps I'm alone in the following opinion, but to be a top-level athlete in any sport, especially one as diverse and rich in history as the WRC, you need to have a proper understanding of its past. The road to success not only includes cutting tenths of seconds through corners in the darkness of Col de Turini, it's also about understanding the glorious nature of the sport and why you put yourself in that driver's seat to begin with. How can a works driver (and one who thinks so highly of himself) see the glorious group B era as cars that were "driving at half speed" with rubbish tires? It's true that the modern WRC car is a way more complete and "better" car than the old group B monsters, but surely that's a point of view that is too scientifical. It's a mentality of "if it's faster, it's better" whilst overlooking a main aspect of rallying: Pure passion.

There's no denying that the WRC wouldn't be what it is today if it had not been for all of the championship's past, for the better and worse. By uttering such negative comments regarding Mouton's rallying heyday, all Neuville is doing is demoting the history of the sport. Not only is this classless (and pointless), but perhaps more importantly, it's missing the point of the sport.

Take Jari-Matti Latvala for instance. This man breathes rallying day in and day out. He not only has world-class skill, but he has a knowledge of the sport's past like no other. What does this make him? A true character in the sport of the WRC. And sadly, we need more of those. The sport used to be littered with them: Mäkinen, McRae, Solberg, Grönholm, Sainz... people who had "rallying" written all over them. You'd ask someone like Juha Kankkunen after a stage which tyres he'd been using and he'd say "round and black". These were true characters in their own way, and that's very appealing to fans worldwide. Everyone seems to speak of lengthening rallies, adding locations to the caldender etc., but as long as the WRC consists of characters who are similar-minded, politically correct (except for a few Ogier-like moments, of course) the sport won't appeal to anyone. Rallying isn't a "team sport" in the same way as football, ice hockey or rugby. So if you, as a potential fan of the sport, don't like these individuals driving in the WRC complaining about night stages and hanging dust, what are the chances of becoming a devoted follower of the sport?

[Rallyper]

Or the whiners (jag tänke säga gnäll-pellisar o tänke va fan är pluralis av en gnäll-pelle? Hjälp!)

It IS precisely the lack of BIG ADVENTURE! and the lack of unpredictability, coupled with pampered nature of EVERYBODY at the highest level which has made rally "a mere contest of speed".


En gnäll-pelle, flera gnäll-pellar. Just to let you know :)

[Lundefaret]

It's great to see so many brilliant points made. It makes for some great reading and you begin to reflect on what the WRC is, used to be, and what will be in the future.

Neuville's comments not only seem to be his own personal opinion, but could be seen as a general view shared by many other drivers as well. His comments towards night driving (and Mouton) can be viewed almost as a "modern rally driver's" view on the current state of the WRC, and that's a shame. Perhaps I'm alone in the following opinion, but to be a top-level athlete in any sport, especially one as diverse and rich in history as the WRC, you need to have a proper understanding of its past. The road to success not only includes cutting tenths of seconds through corners in the darkness of Col de Turini, it's also about understanding the glorious nature of the sport and why you put yourself in that driver's seat to begin with. How can a works driver (and one who thinks so highly of himself) see the glorious group B era as cars that were "driving at half speed" with rubbish tires? It's true that the modern WRC car is a way more complete and "better" car than the old group B monsters, but surely that's a point of view that is too scientifical. It's a mentality of "if it's faster, it's better" whilst overlooking a main aspect of rallying: Pure passion.

There's no denying that the WRC wouldn't be what it is today if it had not been for all of the championship's past, for the better and worse. By uttering such negative comments regarding Mouton's rallying heyday, all Neuville is doing is demoting the history of the sport. Not only is this classless (and pointless), but perhaps more importantly, it's missing the point of the sport.

Take Jari-Matti Latvala for instance. This man breathes rallying day in and day out. He not only has world-class skill, but he has a knowledge of the sport's past like no other. What does this make him? A true character in the sport of the WRC. And sadly, we need more of those. The sport used to be littered with them: Mäkinen, McRae, Solberg, Grönholm, Sainz... people who had "rallying" written all over them. You'd ask someone like Juha Kankkunen after a stage which tyres he'd been using and he'd say "round and black". These were true characters in their own way, and that's very appealing to fans worldwide. Everyone seems to speak of lengthening rallies, adding locations to the caldender etc., but as long as the WRC consists of characters who are similar-minded, politically correct (except for a few Ogier-like moments, of course) the sport won't appeal to anyone. Rallying isn't a "team sport" in the same way as football, ice hockey or rugby. So if you, as a potential fan of the sport, don't like these individuals driving in the WRC complaining about night stages and hanging dust, what are the chances of becoming a devoted follower of the sport?

+1

Very well written!

Here is a movie from Monte in 1983, seems flat out to me :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFi8NgnNd90

[tommeke_B]

The sport has changed a lot. In positive and negative ways, only negative ways for the nostalgic people among us. :) Sure the sport was much more adventurous in the 70s-80s... But the sport became much more professional throughout the years. How would people react now if Ogier were to say "I don't like Finland, not going to drive it"? Fact is that Walter Röhrl, one of the great heroes of the old days, multiple world champion, never ever competed in Finland. Some claim that he knew he wasn't quick enough, and didn't want to ridicule himself... Other facts are that drivers could make huge differences much easier than they can now. If someone went "big attack" in the old days, let's say 80s or even 90s, they could gain up to half a minute on one stage... Does it mean they were supernatural for a moment, or does it mean that the drivers kept more margin most of the time? ;)

I heard and read many interesting opinions throughout the years. One of the most interesting is from a former national driver in Belgium, someone who was active in 80s and 90s. He said that what the current generation of drivers is doing is crazy, and they couldn't imagine it 20 years ago. How drivers now do 2 passes of recce, watch the onboards from it a couple of times and then go flat out on it to fight on seconds (or tenths of seconds) is stunning. 20 (and more) years ago drivers did a lot of training, there wasn't really any official recce, just weeks of training before the big events. Drivers had very simple pacenotes they probably only used for their own orientation, to remember where they were. Remember the onboard from Vatanen in Manx '83, where the notes didn't tell much more than "easy left easy right, K-left, flat right". This is very different from what we are seeing/hearing in onboards nowadays. Nowadays drivers make much better/more detailed notes with fewer runs on the stages.

I think it's correct, what Neuville said. Things have changed and the gaps are much smaller, drivers are closer to the limit (but in cars where it's probably easier to find that limit). Anyway it doesn't mean Thierry was doing the right thing by what he said, there were better ways to express his thoughts this time... No true sportsman should ever criticize/minimize the achievements of others, especially when they were made in a time before he himself was even born...

[danon]

http://s5.postimg.org/5pboofzd3/Nvs_M.jpg

[bowler]

Neuville's comments were made out of frustration.
He had a bad stage time
he was having a bad rally
He's having a bad season
following another bad season

and it has to be someone's fault.

The problem is that he should be looking into the mirror for a solution, not attacking others.

[Karukera]

Less arguments and more weight on the right foot, Thierry.

[Rally Power]

Nice posts regarding rally roots! No one can really love this sport without knowing and respect its past!

This "old vs new" dispute reveals the lack of rally knowledge from young generations, but it also points out how the older ones, that are at the FIA wheel, are unable to put WRC in the right course!

Maybe we don't have to go back to the old marathons rallyes and it's possible to embrace today's almost sprint rally mode, but there's an urgent need to sort out a competitive compromise over the sport definition, simply because WRC won't cope another long abnormal domination from one make and one driver!

[Mirek]

Maybe we don't have to go back to the old marathons rallyes and it's possible to embrace today's almost sprint rally mode, but there's an urgent need to sort out a competitive compromise over the sport definition, simply because WRC won't cope another long abnormal domination from one make and one driver!

These long-term dominations are nothing new in the sport. If You know the history You speak about You can find a lot of examples. Four titles of Makinen in a row, Lancia Stratos dominance in first half of 70', total Lancia dominance in early gr.A seasons replaced by total Toyota dominance in next few years. And finally Loeb and Citroën which took a lot longer than current VW-Ogier dominance.

[Rally Power]

C'mon, those were short domination periods, in witch there was an effective fight from other cars or drivers. Not an overwhelming nine years "one car/one driver" supremacy, now replicated in VW/Ogier days!

[BleAivano]

Nice posts regarding rally roots! No one can really love this sport without knowing and respect its past!

This "old vs new" dispute reveals the lack of rally knowledge from young generations, but it also points out how the older ones,
that are at the FIA wheel, are unable to put WRC in the right course!

Maybe we don't have to go back to the old marathons rallyes and it's possible to embrace today's almost sprint rally mode, but
there's an urgent need to sort out a competitive compromise over the sport definition, simply because WRC won't cope another
long abnormal domination from one make and one driver!

IMO there is room for long medium and sprint rallies. I also think the conformity / genericness is one of the issues. Previously each rally had
their own identity/uniqueness, now each rally is just a carbon copy of the others except for the surface type. Imo they should allow
the WRC rallies to have and grow their own concept. Allow them to be unique. The FIA dudes in Paris are too much control freaks.

[RAS007]

These long-term dominations are nothing new in the sport. If You know the history You speak about You can find a lot of examples. Four titles of Makinen in a row, Lancia Stratos dominance in first half of 70', total Lancia dominance in early gr.A seasons replaced by total Toyota dominance in next few years. And finally Loeb and Citroën which took a lot longer than current VW-Ogier dominance.

The long term dominations are not new, you are correct, but the total lack of competition is a relatively recent phenomenon. When Makinen won his four titles in a row, he was facing Sainz, McRae, Auriol, Kankkunen et al, all ex-world champions. What competition did Loeb have after Gronholm retired? None. What competition has Ogier faced since Loeb retired? None, except from his own team mate.

[Grundo Farb]

The long term dominations are not new, you are correct, but the total lack of competition is a relatively recent phenomenon. When Makinen won his four titles in a row, he was facing Sainz, McRae, Auriol, Kankkunen et al, all ex-world champions. What competition did Loeb have after Gronholm retired? None. What competition has Ogier faced since Loeb retired? None, except from his own team mate.

That's what happens when you go from toyota, subaru, mitsubishi, ford, peugeot etc down to only ford and citroen. The pool of talent dries up and it takes some years to bring it back.

[tommeke_B]

The long term dominations are not new, you are correct, but the total lack of competition is a relatively recent phenomenon. When Makinen won his four titles in a row, he was facing Sainz, McRae, Auriol, Kankkunen et al, all ex-world champions. What competition did Loeb have after Gronholm retired? None. What competition has Ogier faced since Loeb retired? None, except from his own team mate.

Total lack of competition??? In Australia, after 2 legs we still had 8 cars within +- 1 minute, the competition is probably closer than ever in WRC. In the recent years appearances of Hänninen, Lefebvre, Abbring, Breen etc have shown how difficult it is to fight with the top drivers. Those are drivers who were among the quickest in anything else they did (be it ERC/IRC/JWRC). The only problem we have/had with the Sebs is that they (and their cars perhaps) are too perfect. When you have the best car combined with a extremely quick driver like Loeb or Ogier, it's difficult to beat them... And if that driver is so good that he makes almost no mistakes, it's impossible to beat them... It's true that nowadays it's not as entertaining as in "the good old days" where more unpredictable things happened (more mistakes from drivers and more mechanical issues), but to say that there is "total lack of competition" is going way too far. If that's your opinion you have no idea of what's happening.

[dimviii]

i would like to see the ratio starts/dnf among the two Sebs and old champions like Sainz,KKK,Gronholm,Auriol,Rohrl etc.
Who is less lazy than me?

[Simmi]

Total lack of competition??? In Australia, after 2 legs we still had 8 cars within +- 1 minute, the competition is probably closer than ever in WRC. In the recent years appearances of Hänninen, Lefebvre, Abbring, Breen etc have shown how difficult it is to fight with the top drivers. Those are drivers who were among the quickest in anything else they did (be it ERC/IRC/JWRC). The only problem we have/had with the Sebs is that they (and their cars perhaps) are too perfect. When you have the best car combined with a extremely quick driver like Loeb or Ogier, it's difficult to beat them... And if that driver is so good that he makes almost no mistakes, it's impossible to beat them... It's true that nowadays it's not as entertaining as in "the good old days" where more unpredictable things happened (more mistakes from drivers and more mechanical issues), but to say that there is "total lack of competition" is going way too far. If that's your opinion you have no idea of what's happening.

It's all relative. You have tighter margins nowadays but just because the rallies are generally shorter and closer doesn't mean that it's suddenly more competitive. It's just that the boundaries have shifted.

You can look at any individual rally or set of results and get it to make the point you want to make. You can say "well Evans ended the events this year closer on average to Ogier than Auriol did to Kankkunen". Did Evans begin any single rally this year with a realistic chance of winning the event?

I judge lack of competition by, on pace, how many guys go into a rally with a chance to win. That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

[Mirek]

i would like to see the ratio starts/dnf among the two Sebs and old champions like Sainz,KKK,Gronholm,Auriol,Rohrl etc.
Who is less lazy than me?

This will be quite hard work as You shall count also retirements in events where they finished thanks to superally.

[Lundefaret]

Total lack of competition??? In Australia, after 2 legs we still had 8 cars within +- 1 minute, the competition is probably closer than ever in WRC. In the recent years appearances of Hänninen, Lefebvre, Abbring, Breen etc have shown how difficult it is to fight with the top drivers. Those are drivers who were among the quickest in anything else they did (be it ERC/IRC/JWRC). The only problem we have/had with the Sebs is that they (and their cars perhaps) are too perfect. When you have the best car combined with a extremely quick driver like Loeb or Ogier, it's difficult to beat them... And if that driver is so good that he makes almost no mistakes, it's impossible to beat them... It's true that nowadays it's not as entertaining as in "the good old days" where more unpredictable things happened (more mistakes from drivers and more mechanical issues), but to say that there is "total lack of competition" is going way too far. If that's your opinion you have no idea of what's happening.

Do You understand that You contradict Your self?

It cant be both the best competition in the WRC ever, AND two champions that are so perfect that no one can touch them :)

To see why so few have been able to challenge the Sebs one have to look at the WRC from 2003 onwards.

Before 2003 there was a steady competition with a lot of factory drivers all the way back to the Group A and Group B era.

- From 2003 and onwards the number of teams got fewer.
- Citroën was the only one of two teams left with a real factory effort.
- Peugeot did a lot of crazy things developing their cabriolet leading to their demise.
- A lot of crazy things happened at Prodrive taking Subaru and Petter Solberg out of the equation.
- Ford was not a real factory team, hampering the progress of drivers like Grönholm and.
- And maybe the most important thing, after 2003 the only drivers that was recruited in to the sport - for a long time - was pay drivers.

This ment that we not only had two "perfect" Sebs, but the drivers that could challenge them was either in slow or fragile (or both) cars with no real factory effort.
This kept on until now, where we again see a change in that talent is recruited. This has "just" started to happen, so it will take time to see the changes, and by it currently being only one serious factory effort (VW), where the others have either toned down (Citroën), almost gone out (Ford) or are still in testing (Hyundai).

But with Toyota coming in, hopefully the new Hyundai being better, and maybe Citroën quitting WTCC to focus on WRC, things can change.

But it was a harder competition in 2003 and before. More factory teams, more factory drivers, more rally winners during a season.

[Lundefaret]

It's all relative. You have tighter margins nowadays but just because the rallies are generally shorter and closer doesn't mean that it's suddenly more competitive. It's just that the boundaries have shifted.

You can look at any individual rally or set of results and get it to make the point you want to make. You can say "well Evans ended the events this year closer on average to Ogier than Auriol did to Kankkunen". Did Evans begin any single rally this year with a realistic chance of winning the event?

I judge lack of competition by, on pace, how many guys go into a rally with a chance to win. That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

You make a VERY good point Simmi.
How many drivers on the start line with a realistic change to win is a very good parameter for judging how hard the competition is/was.
And harder competition will off course lead to more offs, retirements etc.
Modern day rally cars, with their low power and extreme suspension - is also much, much easier to drive, and You dont get the same time differences anymore unless the conditions are extreme like in teh Monte.

[Simmi]

Like you say Lundefaret there needs to be a re-building process.

For me the absolute best situation for 2017 would be to allow three cars to score manufacturer points again - but ensure that the third car is reserved for drivers who have made maybe 10 WRC car starts or less on WRC rounds before the start of that given season.

Then you are encouraging the manufacturers to bring in the best-possible young (or at least new) drivers as they can score them points. Plus you could bring in specialists on tarmac etc to make up the third car. It would also stop mediocre drivers remaining in prime manufacturer seats after a few years.

Citroen, Hyundai, Toyota and Ford all either have or will have R5 programmes (VW have Skoda in a sense) - you could set something up to give top customers a chance on a WRC round(s). There are lots of possibilities and the ladder system to the top becomes clearer.

[Rally Power]

In Australia, after 2 legs we still had 8 cars within +- 1 minute, the competition is probably closer than ever in WRC.

Like so many times before, that potential competitiveness didn't bring any overall classification switch in last day! Positions were (again) frozen by team orders...but even Meeke recognize that his earlier lead was due to the starting order.

[Rally Power]

i would like to see the ratio starts/dnf among the two Sebs and old champions like Sainz,KKK,Gronholm,Auriol,Rohrl etc.

It's easier, and perhaps more significant, to get a ratio between number of rallys and rally wins in each season, to understand how overwhelming those french guys are dominating WRC.

Before Loeb, and since the beginning of WRC in 1973, only Makinen was able to get 50% or more rally wins in a year (56% in 1996).

Loeb did it 7 times: 63% in 2005; 50% in 2006 and 2007; 73% in 2008; 58% in 2009; 62% in 2010 and 69% in 2012.

Ogier has already did it 3 times: 69% in 2013; 62% in 2014 and at least 54% this year.

Also in pre Citröen/Loeb era no manu got over 2 consecutive titles with the same driver. The Citro/Loeb combination provide 5 of them (from 2008 to 2012). VW and Ogier are now in their 3rd consecutive year win, and probably they won't stop soon...

[AndyRAC]

Like you say Lundefaret there needs to be a re-building process.

For me the absolute best situation for 2017 would be to allow three cars to score manufacturer points again - but ensure that the third car is reserved for drivers who have made maybe 10 WRC car starts or less on WRC rounds before the start of that given season.

Then you are encouraging the manufacturers to bring in the best-possible young (or at least new) drivers as they can score them points. Plus you could bring in specialists on tarmac etc to make up the third car. It would also stop mediocre drivers remaining in prime manufacturer seats after a few years.

Citroen, Hyundai, Toyota and Ford all either have or will have R5 programmes (VW have Skoda in a sense) - you could set something up to give top customers a chance on a WRC round(s). There are lots of possibilities and the ladder system to the top becomes clearer.

I'd love to see 3 car teams. I'd also like to see the return of the 'specialist'. It added a new twist to the event/ season. Mats Jonsson/ Thomas Radstrom, etc in Sweden, then on Tarmac we'd see Saby, Liatti, Panizzi, etc

I remember somebody ( I think it was a team manager, and former rights holder) complaining that you wouldn't bring in a specialist in for a particular circuit in F1, so it should no longer happen in the WRC. Another wrong decision aping F1.

[Gregor-y]

You could encourage more privateers and support for them by allowing any car from the maker to score manufacturer's points. Great for those odd races where your top manu drivers all manage to drop off the leader board.

[rallyfiend]

If 'specialists' were likely to actually perform better than the existing drivers, the teams would be using them now.

Only one of the drivers in any Team is fixed.

I think the days of 'specialists' are over. It's just not possible to get into one of these cars on a rare occasion and beat these guys who are in them all the time. Even with testing.

[Simmi]

If 'specialists' were likely to actually perform better than the existing drivers, the teams would be using them now.

Only one of the drivers in any Team is fixed.

I think the days of 'specialists' are over. It's just not possible to get into one of these cars on a rare occasion and beat these guys who are in them all the time. Even with testing.

Yep I'm inclined to agree with you rallyfiend. But whether you have specialists or not we need to get more guys into WRC machinery. This should be what the FIA is concentrating on instead of some stupid super license.

[AndyRAC]

If 'specialists' were likely to actually perform better than the existing drivers, the teams would be using them now.

Only one of the drivers in any Team is fixed.

I think the days of 'specialists' are over. It's just not possible to get into one of these cars on a rare occasion and beat these guys who are in them all the time. Even with testing.

Thats true, I just wish that wasn't the case. The sport was better for having a joker/ wild card who could upset the regulars. Another facet of the sport that has been lost.

[tamasuperstar]

Lovely post. Agree with you on a lot of levels.

Really this current night/dust flashpoint is just the latest issue in a sport struggling for its identity. It's something countless promoters and an FIA where Group B stalwarts hold influence still can't figure out.

You could literally write a thesis on the whole debate. Making the events shorter, more formulaic and 'for TV' hasn't really seen the championship gain any extra exposure. But the manufacturers are here.


Clearly it didn't help it gain ANY extra exposure - it actually made things much, much worse and decreased its exposure massively.

World Rallying had lots of world wide TV exposure before the 'greedy' people who thought they knew it all intervened and destroyed something that already worked well.