by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
GP Week : Issue 40
>>GPWEEKOPINION t-envy’! one too many blow-ups. Rider and manufacturer will each lose ten points. Why not rather give a racing penalty – a pit-lane start or some such, suggested Burgess? Then at least people could try to race away the disadvantage. The weirdest rule of all has been devised entirely in favour of private teams, and somehow piggy-backed through with the cost-cutters: that a class ‘rookie’ may not ride for a factory team. It’s a rule that would have disadvantaged some of the greatest names in the sport … (see separate news story). Burgess is well-placed to point out the nonsense, for in Rossi’s first year in the premier class he rode in what might have been described as a non-factory team, in that his one-rider Nastro Azurro squad was separate and independent from the official Repsol Honda team running Alex Criville, Sete Gibernau and Tady Okada. But Burgess and crew were Honda factory men, and Rossi’s bike the full deal. And he came close to winning the title on it. A factory team in all but name. Within the new rules? Why not? Or shall we have a feast of protest and counter-protest to enliven the whole issue … Seems like at least one new rule too many. A symptom, as Burgess said, of the general malaise, of a MotoGP industry lacking any clear vision or serious business plan. “We’ll never get any better, when the back of the ship is steering the front,” he said. Well, that is how ships work, but never mind the missed metaphor. We all see what he meant. Burgess – well-placd to comment! bate really about who runs rallying mean that the FIA will accept their recommendation at all...” It is easy to underestimate the task of changing the status quo. As long ago as December 2007 the FIA listed the events in the 2010 calendar. Previous attempts at turning the sporting calendar into a football season have already been thrown out by the World Council and yet the teams feel their wishes deserve to be taken seriously. Will the arrival of a Promoter make changes easier or more difficult? For the present I am still unsure how the decision to have an atmospheric formula in the world championship in the immediate future really came about. In their demand for a turbo formula of one form or another, did the manufacturers demand more than they could deliver, or did the FIA admit it was all too complicated and costly and they could not handle it? How much is the FIA, and the ISC as Promoter, concerned that there are only two manufacturers active in the WRC and worried about the increasing commercial interest in the rival IRC championship? Was the decision to ‘go atmospheric’ a strategic political withdrawal? If we knew who is really afraid of what, then we might know if the Winter Calendar will ever get off the ground. Or whether it is a trivial dream in times which are far more serious … 27 Mark Deans – wants to re-engage with customers