The last thing that oil company Castrol would have thought when it agreed to sponsor a ranking of drivers from different motorsport series was that it would become embroiled in controversy. Nevertheless, this is exactly what has happened following last month's revelation by Pitpass that press material distributed by Castrol about the rankings contained statements which were wide of the mark to say the least.

The press release sent out in January to announce the launch of Castrol's world driver rankings described it as "the world's first driver rankings system to measure and compare the performances of every driver across the world's major motorsport disciplines." The results are viewed on a website owned by publishing giant Haymarket and Castrol Senior Vice-President Mike Johnson adds that it is "a unique and extensive tool." However, as Pitpass pointed out, in the late 1990s the Champion Spark Plug Super Rankings website also compared the performances of all drivers across the world's major motorsport disciplines and word of Castrol's claims has clearly reached Champion's ears.

Writing in yesterday's Evening Standard, Pitpass' business editor Chris Sylt quoted Jean-Pierre Dejace, marketing services director of Champion's owner Federal-Mogul, who said: "In addition to a century old racing pedigree, Champion and Castrol are now sharing another common piece."

The Champion Spark Plug Super Rankings featured 23 championships with over 800 drivers compared to the 2,000 drivers and 43 championships on Castrol's system but Dejace says that the two have "exactly the same concept." Not exactly the world first which Castrol claimed it to be.

Castrol declined to comment on this surprising slip up but the similarities are plain to see. They stretch from the way that the two systems are calculated to the wording of the press releases with Champion and Castrol both claiming that their rankings enable fans to answer the eternal question of "who is the best racing driver in the world?"

Dejace also sounds a note of caution over the long-term interest in what ultimately amounts to a gimmick. "After three years of publishing, we decided to stop it as the coverage and the popularity of our rankings were fading out."

It is hardly surprising since the drivers on the rankings are not in the same series and so any comparison is purely artificial. Is say Sebastien Loeb really a better driver than Jenson Button simply because he is placed higher on the ranking? Given that the placements on the rankings are generated by applying an arbitrary figure to the points tallies no list is going to answer the question of which driver is better. If ever there was a reason for the rankings being redundant then this is it.