|
The motivation underlying the new rules for 2003 has been officially reported as a need to reinvigorate Formula One racing. There has been concern regarding public interest in the racing events, television audience, maintenance of sponsors, as well as drawing new ones to the sport, and so forth. The motivation, as reported, includes commercial and popularity related issues.
Changes of such caret as the ones initially discussed, and those currently underway, have likely been spawned also as some sort of counter-action in view of Ferrari's and Michael Schumacher's highly successful performances, these corroborated by Rubens Barrichello's thriving Season, which culminated with his securing the runner-up honors, yet before the Season was over.
It is obviously frustrating to strain oneself over and over in the attempt to match competitors that look unbeatable for a given time. But sweat and devotion rarely fail to bring their sweet pay-off for keeping heart through adversity. Has not this been the case with Ferrari, itself? Moreover, whichever outstanding tallent may be attributed to Michael Schumacher, the exceptional success he currently enjoys is not only due to inspiration but to perspiration as well.
Michael Schumacher is known always to be ready to test the Ferrari cars, even though the Team counts on two full-time development drivers, Luca Badoer and Luciano Burti. Ferrari's Five-time Champion is in fact known to enjoy testing, in contrast to other drivers, who'd rather race as exclusively as possible. Eddie Irvine, for one, has reportedly commented on tests as a wearying burden on those who have been racing over the weekend and on the consequent need for the Jaguar team to employ development drivers as much as possible.
Teams other than Ferrari (Lotus, McLaren, Williams, to cite a few) have had their glorious periods. Nonetheless, no action seems to have been taken as an aid to countervail their success. As all else in life, their golden days eventually waned and other teams and drivers rose to the top. In none of these other instances, there was ever suggestion that public interest had waned, as there was now.
The seeming counter-action in view of Michael Schumacher's dominance might have been partly instigated not only by controversial, fabricated results (as in Austria and the US), but also by a lack of tact now and then. For example, during the Austrian Grand Prix press conference, the German Champion stated "I told him (i.e., Barrichello) that I hope that the championship is soon finished, so we can go for real racing, and I'm sure he's going to win lots of races." It is not difficult to imagine that statements of this sort help foster resentment outside the realm of Ferrari.
Whereas counter-action in any area is historically understandable, racing fans are likely to have been more pleased with a chance of watching the competing teams and drivers strive out of their own efforts and resources to level up for a head-to-head fight with Ferrari and their drivers, rather than out of a political move altering the rules and indirectly lowering the standards of excellence (by raising the recognition granted to fair to middling performances -- please see In- or deflation? for details).
Will the current changes mean the intended boost for the sport, and be capable of settling the commercial and popularity issues currently under concern? What do you think?
On the other hand, it seems relevant to ask: has Formula One changed? And in which ways? After all, what we have witnessed at the closing of the 2002 Season has been unique, when placed in contrast to eras in which other teams and drivers have been dominating.
|
Net
The 2002 Season F1fan-eBook 
Grand Prix & Auto-Racing Image Gallery 
Pictures + Posters:
