Is F1 in danger of scoring an own goal?

New FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem (right) seen here with world champion Max Verstappen, has caused a rift with F1 owners. Photo / Don Kennedy

Thanks to the Netflix TV series Drive to Survive, together with new rules and regulations introduced last year to create closer racing, F1 has probably never been more popular.

Forbes magazine recently wrote: “Formula 1 had a banner 2022, averaging 1.21 million viewers across the ESPN family of networks, the highest on record for the series, and signed a new television deal in June reportedly worth at least $75 million a year, 15 times its previous deal.”

The popularity of the sport that manufacturer teams like Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault may treat as a business to sell more cars, is even helped by controversial seasons like 2021 when Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen took a no-holds-barred approach to their racing, colliding at least twice.

And then we had the dramatic season finale in Abu Dhabi where the FIA race director allowed only lapped cars between race leader Hamilton and Verstappen, to unlap themselves and for racing to resume for one lap after a safety-car intervention. That produced a last-lap shootout, which Verstappen won because he had fresher tyres, giving him his first world championship, and preventing Hamilton from becoming an eight-time world champion.

Last year, with Hamilton struggling with a Mercedes car that was only the third-best car on the grid, while Red Bull gave Verstappen a rocket by comparison, the latter won 15 races out of 22 held and literally drove away with his second title. This year’s schedule was for a record 24 races, but the ongoing Covid issues in China have meant the Shanghai race is cancelled and will not be replaced.

The first race will take place in Bahrain on March 6, while the first team to reveal its 2023 racer was Haas on January 31, followed by Red Bull on February 3, and Williams on February 5.

All set then for another scintillating and fascinating season. Not quite, as Liberty Media, the commercial rights owners of F1, and FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem, have in recent weeks become embroiled in spats about the future of F1 that have gone public .

The FIA is the governing body of the sport but doesn’t have a say in the commercial side as such, so when Ben Sulayem made remarks of an “inflated” $20 billion price that has apparently been offered to Liberty Media for the commercial rights, they took exception to what they perceive as FIA interference. The Saudi Arabian Public Investment Fund (PIF) recently purchased Premier League team Newcastle United for $410 million and is understood to be keen on purchasing F1.

Historically, the FIA and FOM (Formula One Management) have worked cohesively together, with the exception of the early 80s when Bernie Ecclestone, and FIA president Jean-Marie Balestre, clashed over the ownership of F1.

Former F1 owner Bernie Ecclestone made his F1 exit in 2016. Photo / Don Kennedy

Ecclestone, assisted by lawyer Max Mosley, had moved from being the owner of the Brabham team, to asserting that he was the team’s representative. In reality, nobody at that time owned the F1 rights but Ecclestone appeared to have seized control of the sport when he formed the Formula One Constructors Association (FOCA), which was made up of the F1 teams. Even though Ferrari, Renault and Alfa-Romeo were not part of FOCA, Ecclestone scored a major coup by securing the television contracts for the Grands Prix. At the time he gave 47 per cent of revenue to the teams, 30 per cent to the FIA, and 23 per cent to FOPA (Formula One Promotions and Administration) owned by Ecclestone of course.

Balestre tried to prevent Ecclestone taking over the commercial rights by changing the technical regulations, knowing that Ferrari, Renault and Alfa Romeo were not in Ecclestone’s group.

The change was to outlaw ground-effect aerodynamics, which the smaller teams had mastered in the Turbo era. It was war: FOCA v the FIA. Balestre would issue fines to teams and drivers, while Ecclestone would threaten to boycott races.

To cut a long story short. Ecclestone eventually won and the Concorde agreement was signed to protect the rights of drivers and teams while leaving the control and administration of races in the hands of the FIA. Mosley would later succeed Balestre as FIA president and grant Ecclestone 100-year rights to F1. Together they would control F1 for 16 years.

Ecclestone had started out as a car dealer. Fans of the 80s TV series Minder had a main character, Arthur Daley, with similarities to Ecclestone, although there is no evidence to suggest the character was based on him. When Ecclestone bought Braham for £100,00 his rival car dealers questioned where he’d got the money from. In the book No Angel, by Tom Bower, written with Ecclestone’s co-operation, there is mention of the rumour that Ecclestone was the brains behind the 1963 Great Train Robbery, but Ecclestone put that rumour to bed.

“There wasn’t enough money on that train; I could have done something better than that,” he told the Independent.

Bower’s book also recounts the story from the 1979 Argentine GP. Lotus boss Colin Chapman offered Mario Andretti $1000 to push Ecclestone into the hotel swimming pool in Buenos Aires. Andretti approached Ecclestone sheepishly and then confessed Chapman’s plot, to which Ecclestone replied: “Pay me half and you can.”

Arthur Daley to a T, but Ecclestone is real and is a multibillionaire who finally left F1 for good in 2016. He had sold most of his rights in F1 to CVC Capital Partner, who in 2016, sold to Liberty Media for $4.4 billion, and there was no real role for Bernie.

The row that Ben Sulayem has started with Liberty Media naturally also relates to money. He took to Twitter: “As the custodians of motorsport, the FIA, as a non-profit organisation, is cautious about alleged inflated price tags of $20 billion being put on F1,” he wrote.

“Any potential buyer is advised to apply common sense, consider the greater good of the sport and come with a clear, sustainable plan — not just a lot of money. It is our duty to consider what the future impact will be for promoters in terms of increased hosting fees and other commercial costs, and any adverse impact it could have on fans,” he added.

Sky Sports UK says a spokesperson for the F1 owners described the comments as “a major overstep, short-sighted and an unnecessary intervention”.

F1 has reportedly sent a strong letter to Ben Sulayem stating any sale is a legal and contractual matter, and the FIA was interfering with its commercial rights in an unacceptable manner. Is this Ecclestone v Balestre all over again?

Liberty Media as F1 owners have a 100-year agreement and exclusive rights to exploit the commercial rights of the World Championship.

The interference by the FIA president is not the only issue they have with him. He wants to welcome the likes of Andretti — yes, including Mario, who didn’t push Ecclestone into the pool — to join the other 10 teams, who are opposed to it because it will reduce their slice of the cake. F1 has reminded the FIA that “any new entrant requires the agreement of both F1 and the FIA”.

Ben Sulayem says that although the FIA assigned the right to use “Formula 1″ to Ecclestone back in 2000 in a 100-year deal, which he subsequently sold to Liberty Media, he has made it clear “the championship is ours, we have only rented it out”.

There were some race incidents last year where the FIA was criticised for the red flags at the Italian GP, and a recovery vehicle on the track at the Japanese GP that brought back memories of the fatal accident Jules Bianchi had there in 2014.

On a personal level, the FIA has had to issue a statement noting that sexist remarks attributed to its president in a Times article “do not reflect his beliefs”.

The Times reported his likes and dislikes were “basically simple”, adding “I love the desert and I love meeting real people” but does not like talking “about money, nor do I like women who think they are smarter than men, for they are not in truth”.

It seemed like a throwaway comment, but the FIA has gone defensive.

“He has a strong record of promoting women and equality in sport, which he is happy to be judged on. It was a central part of his manifesto and actions taken this year and the many years he served as vice-president for the sport prove this,” the FIA statement reads.

As indicated at the beginning of his article, F1 has seldom been in a better place, and the recent comments and actions of its president can only be seen as a clumsy attempt to score an own goal. There will be personnel from F1 and the FIA who will be hoping this season is about the racing on the track and not the politics being played off it. Perhaps someone should give Bernie a call to obtain his view on what to do next.

On second thought, maybe not. After all, his showdown with Balestre at Jarama, Spain, resulted in Ecclestone asking the police to remove FIA officials, including Balestre, at gunpoint during a heated negotiation over whether the race would go ahead. Not diplomatic, but nearly shooting yourself in the foot.

– Sources: F1.com, Sky Sports F1, No Angel by Tom Bower.