Unwelcome Guests
I am really surprised about which direction the support for the 107% qualifying rule is coming from. Ferrari yes, we’re quite clear on the fact that they’re not exactly best friends with the riff raff down at the other end of the pitlane. Similarly, I can easily understand why other front running teams might not like having to repeatedly lap slow backmarkers. Fans will have their opinion one way or another, personally I’m against the idea but what is really surprising is that the FIA is so keen on the idea.
The FIA, admittedly then under Max Mosley, invited teams to submit entries to join the grid in an effort to expand the field. Then, even before a wheel was turned in anger, the FIA are talking about preventing teams from taking part. Welcome to the ‘Piranha Club’ indeed!
“You must have respect for a new team who is arriving in this particular economic crisis period and to invest money to be in F1. I don’t think it is a time to criticise but to support and help, and to help them, and it is in the interests of everybody.” - Jean Todt
Amid concerns about the pace of the new teams racing this year, Jean Todt declared that “we are very in favour of reintroducing the 107 percent limit”. He then went on to state that it was the time to “support and help” the new teams. Support and help? How does preventing them from taking part in the race support and help them? Sponsors clearly want exposure and they don’t get that by having the team packing up to go home on a Saturday evening. As Mike Gascoyne said: “There’s no testing. So how are HRT meant to get on the pace if you say ‘no you can’t race’?”
It’s not clear exactly how a 107 percent-type system would work – when it was last used it preceded the current three session format so which time do you use to work out the cut-off? It would also require approval from all of the teams in order to be allowed this year. To be introduced for 2011, 70% of teams would have to be in favour meaning the three new teams would need support from one of the existing outfits to block it – not necessarily an unlikely happening. Still, the fact that the FIA want such a rule is sending out all the wrong messages as the new teams try to survive. It also sends out the wrong messages to potential sponsors for the thirteenth team that the FIA are supposedly keen to add next year.
For good or for bad, the FIA have new teams – now can it at least show them some love?
If this idea is only mooted because the new teams are off the pace then why not allow them additional testing time?
It could be in the form of allowing them exclusive new team testing in between events or because the fly away races don’t really allow that, why not give them the Tursday to test at the track. There would be little extra expenditure for the teams as the cars would already be there, the drivers are also there for media access and it could make a huge difference to them. saltire(Quote)
There is a minor issue with re-introducing the 107% system. The qualifying system makes it impossible. It was fine when everyone had an hour to set a time but now you have fast teams in Q1 running hard tyres because they know they will make the cut against slow teams on softs so if someone is 106% in that situation do they make the cut? Do you take the actual pole time as was done before as the base time? Of course now that is set with only 10 cars on a track that may have changed drastically from when the slow teams ran.
It’s fine saying they will re-introduce the 107% rule but if a team fails to make the cut a few times they will end up withdrawing from the sport and someone else with no more chance of making the cut will get in.
Ferrari are complaining about the lack of manufacturers for only one reason. By and large the manufacturers were useless and Ferrari enjoyed their greatest period of success with a field of manufacturers. In the previous 20 years when the opposition was privateers Ferrari won nothing. Steven Roy(Quote)
Ever since this was suggested as an idea it’s been rediculous;
1. As Steven said, it’s impossible to implement – All cars need to be doing 100% during the first session which clearly won’t happen, why judge where HRT can race based on whether Alonso’s feeling like pushing a bit harder in this session?
2. The testing thing annoys me too, yes it was their own stupid fault for not getting sorted in time, but in reality, you bring in that rule and you’re not just saying develop and keep up, you’re saying develop, keep up, and close the gap, but with 4 hours less running! It’s totally insane.
3. The longer tracks are going to have a bigger 7% gap, if i’m 5 seconds off the pace, how come I can race at a short track, but not Spa?
I wouldn’t be against bringing it in for 2011 but even then you’d hope it would be irrelevant by then, Virgin and Lotus are within the 107% and they’ve had minimal testing and a new car, so all they have to do is not be 4 seconds off the pace by next year. Dosen’t seem like a hard ask to me. Jon Waldock(Quote)