The impending row over prize money will make the weekend's spat between Renault and Toro Rosso appear like a tea party at the Ritz, for when teams are told they are not only going to lose their various bonuses but that that the basic split will more equal also, the gloves will be well and truly off.

Red Bull's Christian Horner sums it up best, almost paraphrasing George Orwell's Animal Farm as he says he will be delighted to see the likes of Sauber, Force India and Haas receive more money, ‘just don't expect to use our cut to fund it’.

Of course, the desire to level the playing field is at the very heart of Liberty Media's vision for the sport, a dream that one day we might see the likes of Sauber or Toro Rosso winning the occasional race and even if that isn't possible at least regularly scoring points.

The American company believes the key to this is to not only cap the amount of money teams are allowed to spend, even to the point of dictating where they spend it, but also ensuring that the prize pot is more evenly divided. Again, turning to Mr Orwell, we all know how that turned out.

While Ferrari president, Sergio Marchionne, has used the proposed engine rules as cover as he fired his first warning shot across Liberty's bows, three-time world champion and owner of 10% of the Mercedes team, Niki Lauda, has admitted serious concern at Liberty's plans.

At the other end of the pitlane, the arguments are just as heartfelt and convincing, though in favour of Liberty's vision rather than against it.

"Look at the gap between the teams," Paddy Lowe tells The Guardian. "It is like the Premier League and the Championship. There are two completely different races going on.

"I am not one to moan or give up," he continues. "We hope to make significant inroads at Williams into the two-second gap between the leaders and the rest, based on being extremely efficient without resources.

"But it is not about engines," he insists. "It is nothing to do with engines, those leading cars all have three different engines. The big problem in the sport in terms of making a wider range of competitive cars at the front is not about engines. It is about the huge disparity in the funding made available to some teams against others. Everybody knows that, not least the owners of Formula One."

While one accepts that Lowe has a point, one has to wonder why, much like another fierce critic of the disparity - and the man charged with actually doing something about it - Ross Brawn, neither made such demands for change when they were with the likes of Mercedes and Ferrari, enjoying the dominance that only the sport's Premier League teams can enjoy.

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by Uffen, 19/11/2017 2:56

"The fans have known about this two-tier system for quite some time now. Surely Paddy did as well. "

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

2. Posted by mds167, 16/11/2017 9:39

""... one has to wonder why, ... neither made such demands for change when they were with the likes of Mercedes and Ferrari, enjoying the dominance that only the sport's Premier League teams can enjoy"

The answer lies therein - the vested interest at the root of the sport. Both are / were working for whomever paid the bills at the time.

Where to historic payments fit into a 'sport'? I think Max argued elsewhere for lower historic payments and higher overall retainer for each team and I think that would be a good compromise tohugh I firmly believe they have no place in the 'sport'. Do such payments exist in any other motorsport category?

To continue the football analogy, Ross Brawn wants a ‘Leicester scenario‘ (if my knowledge of recent English football history is correct) and Paddy Lowe argues that the payments mean this is unlikely. However, rather than budget disparity, perhaps it is the lack of design innovation that limits change? Where is the next double diffuser, active suspension or fan car?. (Yes, I know they all got banned)

The teams will work together against anyone ruling them to obtain their best ‘advantage’. F1 has previously cowed to needing Ferrari by giving them their historical payment and veto. Removing both would level the playing field and risk losing the biggest ‘name’ in the sport. I hope Chase and Ross are working on their poker faces…."

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

3. Posted by bfairey, 14/11/2017 20:13

"I like that "ban wind tunnels""

Rating: Negative (-2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by nonickname, 14/11/2017 16:51

"Maybe it is time to say to the top teams... fit in or fxxck off.The days when F1 was the top end of motor sport are gone. It is an entertainment channel that either pulls a paying audience or dies. Forget the history etc. it is not relevant any more.
Perhaps they go for a Can am set of rules... 4 wheels, min weight and maximum fuel limit and let the creative designers win.
The biggest problem is the use of wind tunnels. Don't worry about a budget cap, just ban them"

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

5. Posted by TokyoAussie, 14/11/2017 13:48

"The man is only right. "

Rating: Positive (2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Lowe bemoans funding gap

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page