The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Eroding the status of constructors is saving Formula One

Are Romain Grosjean's outbursts genuine or exaggerated? (via Haas F1)
Expert
29th March, 2016
16

When you’re looking for positives to come from the Australian Grand Prix, it’s hard to go past the impressive debut of the Haas F1 team and Romain Grosjean’s sixth-place finish.

Although helped by the red flag, it’s the kind of fairytale result that Formula One sometimes gives us that make it worthwhile being a back-marker team.

Historically when these unlikely results come our way they are cherished; Mark Webber’s debut for Minardi and Jules Bianchi for Marussia at Monaco come pleasantly to mind (although it goes without saying that the latter is bittersweet).

It’s hard to imagine anyone having a problem with the result, especially back in the good ol’ US of A.

“I think it resonated in a very positive way in all of racing in America,” Haas team principle Gunter Steiner beamed.

“Even those who don’t follow F1 considered it a big achievement for a new team to finish in sixth place and to be from America, which hasn’t had a presence in F1 in 30 years.”

With another Ferrari customer in Toro Rosso enjoying a performance advantage on the rest of the midfield at the moment, even knocking on the door of the senior Red Bull team, it’s clear that aligning yourself with an established manufacturer is the way to go.

Predictably, not everyone thinks this is a good idea.

Advertisement

“The status of being a constructor has been gradually eroded,” Williams technical director Pat Symonds said.

“What Haas has done is good for him, but I don’t know if that is really the way F1 should be going.”

There are lots of problems with the way Formula One is going (most of us writing for The Roar are having trouble covering them all) but at the moment we’re seeing one of the strongest line-ups of drivers and teams in recent memory. That’s all down to the fact that teams can distribute the financial burden by selling and buying parts between themselves.

“When we had the original listed parts, the long list, it was quite pragmatic I thought,” Symonds offered. “It allowed you to sell a few sensible things like transmissions which are high value, low performance impact.

“But it got whittled away. Some want it whittled even further. I would prefer F1 to have more of an emphasis on constructors.”

For the record, I have never really considered Williams as a constructor when they purchase engines from other manufacturers, so his moaning falls on deaf ears.

But it’s no wonder Mercedes have shown a keen interest in the model that Ferrari and Haas have established, with Manor waiting in the wings to become a Mercedes ‘junior team’ in all but name.

Advertisement

At the heart of this problem is the inequitable distribution of prize money in the sport. It wasn’t too long ago that we were on standby for an announcement that teams would have to run three cars with the impending collapse of no less than three back-marker teams.

Running in Formula One is expensive, usually prohibitively so. Some have pointed out that Haas won’t receive any financial remuneration this year whatsoever, although we need to remember that teams are awarded their bounty in the year following, regardless of their position.

Having Haas in the sport is a fantastic achievement, but finding owners with their financial security, technical know-how and passion for motorsport is becoming increasingly difficult. Far from discouraging their achievement, Formula One needs to play the role of the gracious host and ensure this rarest of lodgers maintains their residency for many years to come.

close