Posts 
Atom Date: November 24 2009
Currently: Reading F1 Magazine (December 2001 edition)
Mood: Thoughtful O=:)
Joe Saward's blog has a very interesting entry today, quoting Carlos Ghosn's perspective on F1. It is not exactly sweetness and light. Charles seems rather annoyed about a variety of things.
Firstly, he is unhappy about unequal treatment in F1. Renault of all F1 teams should know, since it's experienced that unfairness from both sides. On the one hand, Renault has benefitted from a surprisingly lenient decision with regard to its acquiring McLaren information in 2007, alongside a relatively light (if logical from a certain point of view) penalty from the Nelsinho Defence. On the other hand, Renault has lost out on such matters as the mass damper case in 2006 (where the justification for the technology ban implicitly banned all F1 cars which have ever raced) and has also seen other teams - notably Ferrari - receive concessions that could be deemed unequal.
After Crashgate, Renault must know that at the Bank of Luck (or at least the Bank of FIA Leniency) it's hit the credit limit. As a racing team and a business, Renault naturally looks for advantage wherever it can find it. If there is zero possibility of special favours coming its way, then it can call for the cessation of special favours to others and advance its cause that way. Whether the bartering of special favours is appropriate behaviour for a racing team is for those of us who worry about ethics to debate, but from a strictly logical point of view, it makes sense for the Renault team to fight this particular battle despite the inevitable accusations of hypocrisy.
Part of that battle is internal. This is made clear from the strong emphasis on the environment that Carlos placed. The only reason I can see for casting doubt on the FIA's environmental policies is if the team's controlling influences doubt the possibility of their success soon enough to help Renault out of recession. A F1 racing team may be an attractive accessory for a broader company but ultimately it is only an accessory. If Renault has decided that the environment is the next big selling point that will convince people to buy cars, then they will insist that their marketing aligns with that concept. If F1 is seen as a waste of time, energy and fuel, then it will be jettisoned. After all, it's not like Renault can point to recent success as justification to stay.
After three years of struggle in the mid-field, slipping down the table despite talisman Alonso coming back to aid them, Renault need a strong justification to avoid having their funding cut by the board. Worse still for them, Alonso is leaving again, implying that something is seriously wrong with Renault (else why would someone so successful and determined leave it for Ferrari?) If it can't be found, Enstone and Viry-Chatillon will face an uncertain future. F1 has become known for cheating and dodgy behaviour - ironically due to scandals including the Nelsinho Defence - and perhaps being seen as part of the reason for the improvement of F1 will help Carlos justify to the rest of the board why Renault should stay in F1.
Carlos came into Renault with a reputation for being "The Cost-Cutter" and for a long time there was concern that the F1 programme would be cut. Then came the championships and everyone stopped worrying. However, Renault could easily have walked away last year and didn't, despite Honda doing so. This gives me a certain amount of hope that Carlos has become pro-F1, even if other members of the Renault board are anti-F1 and could out-vote him.
However, this outburst probably won't help Carlos get the answers it wants. The FIA is perhaps the only body able to answer these questions and it is likely to keep its silence until Renault leaves it with implicit permission to gloat at the folly of manufacturers who believed its words and then leave despite contracts when they are proven wrong. It will probably say this means commitment, development and competition mean nothing to manufacturers. What it really means is that sensible rule-making, protection of the sport and the needs of other stakeholders mean little if anything to the FIA.
I want Jean Todt to prove me wrong. Time will tell.