Whilst the new hybrid formula was still in its embryonic stage, Bernie Ecclestone was already critical of it, doing his level best to delay its introduction for as long as possible.

Whilst some aspects of the new formula, particularly the sound, not to mention Mercedes total dominance, have frustrated, the fact is that technologically the sport has done a magnificent job, producing, virtually from the outset, engines that are powerful, efficient and reliable.

Nonetheless, Ecclestone remains its fiercest critic, and recently claimed that the sport is the worst it has ever been and that he wouldn't (cough) pay to watch it.

Naturally, this has not gone down well in certain quarters, first FIA president Jean Todt calling on Ecclestone not to publicly criticise the sport and now Daimler's chief executive, Dieter Zetsche, admitting frustration at the Briton's constant carping.

"At the Geneva Motor Show I was not going on stage to say I would never drive a Mercedes and customers should better not do it," he told reporters at the Estoril circuit. "I don't understand how someone who is not only the CEO but partial owner of that product talks that way about this product.

"If he feels that way, it should be discussed internally how to change it, not as a sales pitch."

Ecclestone has since claimed that his comments were taken out of context.

"I wasn't talking down the sport at all, quite the opposite," he told Reuters. "I was trying to sort of explain that unless we did something that's the way we'd be going."

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by scf1fan, 07/03/2016 23:05

"@Ro - You can take my Scalectrix with a grain of salt. It took me a couple of additional readings before I could believe that you were actually comparing F1 to slot car racing, but, as you know, editing comments is something PP doesn't allow. Your comparison still leaves me stupefied though.
.
I think you totally underestimate the work and skill these drivers have to put in to make their cars perform, and I still think you statement insinuating that some of the teams are circumventing the rules is just flat out wrong. (At least in anyway more then what is nominally expected. Of course that doesn't include BE and his Brabham "fan car." - (And why did he do that? Because he couldn't beat Lotus in a fair fight! Sounds sort of familiar . . . At least he and Gordon Murray didn't whine about it.))"

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by scf1fan, 07/03/2016 17:44

"@Ro - Do I think it's great? Actually, I think it's F1! Which I do enjoy. But then again, what you or I think is "great to watch" has nothing to do with the sport. Golf, to me, is significantly more boring than any F1 race. So I don't watch it, yet golf is bigger than F1. Everyone has that choice tp make. I doubt the guys running the Masters are worring about changing the rules just to get me to watch.
.
I'm not quite sure which way to take your response, so I'll address your quips straight up. First, Scalectrix? (I would have no idea what you were talking about with out looking it up . . . ) Slot cars WERE popular in the US in the 50s. Some still like, but they aren't on TV, so what's your point?
.
I don't wonder at all! You think MB should be obligated to sell their technology to anyone who come's knocking? MB didn't violate the rules, and RBR were . . . to say the least, not very polite or business like about the whole deal. How about RBR exercising some leadership, (spending a bit more of THEIR money) and getting a number of the "lesser" teams together to develope a new engine package with say . . . Cosworth? Oh yeah, and when RBR were winning year after year, how willing were they to share their aero technologies?
.
You think everything has been "taken away" from the drivers? Eh, I would mostly disagree, though it has certainly become more technical. (If you think it's "easy" to drive an F1 care, then in that point I just think that you are very wrong!) But ok, they are all in the same boat now, which is as it should be; what do you want to change to make it "easier"? (Let's say "more competitive" . . . beats being louder, or easier, or cheaper.) Limit the number of buttons on the steering wheels to just two . . . fine; MB would still be winning at this point. You seem to be missing the majority of the last 20-30-40 years of history in F1. Which is that the best teams dominate! I do think the current rules tend to entrench that more (longer?) now, but I don't believe that any individual team adversely effects the rules for all the other teams. (Though they also might not "help" either.)
.
Lastly - so what's your answer?? (I've suggested two . . . making the cars louder isn't one of them!)
.
I'm looking forward to the new season, and I do hope Ferrari can step it up a notch. I world say I'm sorry if you don't/won't enjoy it, but then again, there are other things to watch."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Spindoctor, 07/03/2016 11:58

"Apologies for the typos in my post. I must learn properly to preoof-read."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Spindoctor, 07/03/2016 11:57

"Agree largely with scf1fan.
As someone who loves technology, I am very pleased with the current Engine\PU design. This stuff reaqlly is at the bleeding-edge where F1 out, in part to be.
I particularly dislike the way the current Formula is too heavily dependent on\influenced by aerodynamics. Once Hamilton or Rosberg was ahead of their teammate last season the die was, for the most part cast. No matter how fast the car was in clean air, in turbulence it wasn't that good.

Notwithstanding this, I can't see any simple "fix". Indeed bigger than the "aero problem" is the notion that there is a simple fix that can be applied like a sticking plaster (band aid). Having said that removing Bernie "Big Mouth" would help a lot!
A large-scale re-evaluation then re-write of the technical rules by an independent group of genuine experts charged not with "improving the spectacle" but serious simplification of what we have now would help a lot.

When RBR dominated it did so because they employed the best aerodynamicist, and spent lots & lots of money, that's not rocket-science, though what Newey & Co. achieved arguably was.
The new rules have turned the spotlight away from aero towards the PU, and Mercedes spent lots and lots of money....
There's a pattern here, and figuring it out isn't rocket-science.

It's looking like the emphasis on PU power might be lessening, Ferrari's effort last season was looking strong, and there's still a couple of years to go before Mercedes equals RBR's 4 years of near total domination. It's highly likely that at least one other supplier will reach parity with Mercedes before then. When that happens it'll be switcheroo time again, and Mr Newey's black arts will shuffle to the fore, and the music goes round....."

Rating: Negative (-1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by Ro, 06/03/2016 20:24

"@scf1fan Im sorry mate but do you really think F1 is now great to watch? All I can compare it with is Scalectrix. the cars are far too complex and technical, so much so that almost everything has been taken away from the drivers. Do you wander , sometimes, why MB vetoed Red Bull getting their engines? Cos they knew that they would be beaten hands down...Keep watching TV mate, be happy!"

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by scf1fan, 05/03/2016 22:48

"@Ro . . . (and everyone else of similar mind) . . . I'm sorry, this is in no means critical of you personally . . . but, if you don't like the sport, go elsewhere! Jeeze! What do you all really want them to do? You will either need to spec the formula to death, or handicap (financially or physically as discussed previously) the competitors in some way; those are really the only two answers. PERIOD.
.
Supporting that, some questions and my views . . .
.
Will making the engines make more noise (seemingly a point in most of the complaints) make the competition better? NO!!! So why is that even an issue? You want more noise? Go to NHRA, or an unlimited tractor pull. Turn up your TV's! If they take the turbo's off F1 it will be louder, surely . . . but MB will still be winning at this point. They have built a better, and more powerful engine; that's what winners do. (They also have a very good car design and two of the better drivers. What do people expect to happen with that combination?)
.
Will changing any particular rule, technical or procedural, (assuming it's something that applies equally to all cars) improve the competition? NO! The best (and unfortunately the best funded) teams will always have an advantage here. Always have, always will. Perhaps this is what colors some of the "historical" views of the sport. In the past, people were only willing to spend so much; (a self enforced spending cap) and the time and resources available to institute more exotic changes were more limited. I will assume people would be happier to think of the times when almost everyone ran a Cosworth? Certainly the competition was closer in that the field was pretty much limited to a relatively narrow band of engine performance. (Of course then Colin Chapman came up with the ground effect cars and Lotus dominated! The more things change . . . well, not really.)
.
So this discussion could go on forever, but if closer competition is deemed to be THE goal, then all the talk I've heard from most quarters is worthless!! (Refueling. Please!! "Make the cars harder to drive . . . " Really? Despite how it looks, they aren't easy now. (Try texting on your cell phone on a roller coaster!!) Etc.!) Handicapping the cars relative to prior performance is/will be the quickest and easiest way to equalize the field. (I'd be (reluctantly) ok with that; everyone would have to work to the same rule, and the teams could still innovate to overcome the handicap. The best teams should still win . . . but maybe by not quite as much.) If you just want a show, perhaps the teams need to employ cheerleaders. (Hey, it works for the NFL! ;-)
.
I will make one last comment specifically about Ro's last comment . . . Who is "circumventing" the rules in F1? I understand some of the frustration you express, and "cheating" has and will happen in almost every sport, but the current state of F1 has nothing to do with anyone circumventing any of the rules."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

7. Posted by Ro, 05/03/2016 11:30

"Its about the only thing BE has done that a lot of people would agree with. The sport is now BORING to watch. This is what comes out if the competitors and entrants create the rules just so that it benefits them. F1 needs to change, and soon or a lot of fans will go elsewhere. Thank goodness for MotoGP at least there, there is RACING, not who has the best way to circumvent the rules"

Rating: Positive (6) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Daimler boss unhappy with Ecclestone's criticism of F1

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page