|
I agree , and some of the trouble with less informed fans is that they view F1 as just another motor-based TV entertainment . Hence they make spurious comparisons with entirely different disciplines , such as NASCAR and Moto GP.
BUT ...that doesn't mean I have to accept that whatever dish F1 cooks up I will like more than its previous ones.
What is key is this , I think -
- overtaking need not be frequent , but it must happen, on track and not in the pits , nor with the intervention of artifice like DRS. One car needs , with driver skill, to be able to overtake the one it has caught. And to do so without every move then being at the risk of being protested and (for Chrissake ) 'investigated'
- penalties need to be reserved , not for mistakes , nor engine blow ups but only for cases where the motive for a move is to push the other guy off
- cars need to be spectacular enough in looks , speed , noise and body language to be a thrill to watch , and for the driver's skills to be apparent , even if a car is running by itself and not in a fight for position
- cars need to be diverse , especially in looks and noise. That points to different engines being used and more freedom being given to exploring different approaches to the same problem
- budgets become absurd when car manufacturers are involved , especially when they are teams in their own right as opposed to funders, or makers and sellers, of engines. They show no interest in the sport's long term objectives , have far too much leverage but can walk away on a whim
- F1 has proved itself incapable of showing any understanding , or interest, in what the people who ultimately pay their wages (you and me ) want. They think we think that tyre compounds are fascinating , they think we agonise about pit stop strategies and they think it isn't just them who care much about constructors. We don't , not really , we care about the drivers
I could go on ....
|