So who makes the rules?

[ISLAMATRON]

With all these rule changes and Max Mosley nowhere in sight I'd like some of the many forum members to tell me who actually makes the rules in F1.

What the hell is TWG & SWG?

Who are on these groups?

And how long have they been around?

And why do they make all these new rules every year that costs the teams millions?

[xpensive]

The FIA’s World Motor Sport Council makes the rules.

[autogyro]

Technical Working Group
Sporting Working Group

I believe the teams hold sway now in these groups, thanks to FOTA so most decisions will come down from the big car manufacturers who continue to control things.
They have found a convenient way to use budget cuts to restrict and delay technological development in most areas other than aero, aero works as a smoke screen so as to keep the fans in ignorance.

[Pup]

Yes, today's WMSC was no more than a rubber stamp of the FOTA proposals, so it should be pretty clear I guess that the teams have the upper hand - for now, at least.

But I wouldn't automatically equate that with the manufacturers, since FOTA is a simple majority organization.

I'm sure they have their influence, but if it were fully in their power, we'd have Michelin tires right now, wouldn't we?

[ISLAMATRON]

Yes, today's WMSC was no more than a rubber stamp of the FOTA proposals, so it should be pretty clear I guess that the teams have the upper hand - for now, at least.

It has been this way for the better part of 25 years, since the FISA/FOCA wars.

The ban of turbos, single car qually, the switch to V8's, all moves by the teams and all huge mistakes... and there are much much more

[Pup]

Someone tell Islam that WB has stolen his login.

[andrew]

The way it should be is that the teams make the rules seing as they have to abide by them BUT this is done in conjunction with the FIA who approve the rules. A combination of the two with the FIA rubber stamping them is how it should be.

[WhiteBlue]

Yes, today's WMSC was no more than a rubber stamp of the FOTA proposals, so it should be pretty clear I guess that the teams have the upper hand - for now, at least.

It has been this way for the better part of 25 years, since the FISA/FOCA wars.

The ban of turbos, single car qually, the switch to V8's, all moves by the teams and all huge mistakes... and there are much much more

You can add a few things to the list:

• DDD loop hole
• extremely wide front wing
• wierd looking rear wings
• restricted KERS
• push to pass KERS gimmick
• useless adjustable front wings
• push to pass adjustable rear wings
• moratorium on KERS
• re introducing KERS again with restrictions
• refusing to limit downforce
• not introducing a fuel budget

All of these "innovations" have been brought to us by the power of the teams. The FiA only asks them to follow some guidelines and puts in a veto if they think it is bad for the sport. Usually the guidelines (for cost reduction and fuel efficiency) are happily ignored.

[xpensive]

My oh my, did the "teams", FOCA or FOTA, decide the turbos to be banned, the wooden plank underneath, the 3.0 engines,
the cut-out in the scoops, the grooved tyres, the narrow tracks, the 2.4 V8s, the...whatever?

[ISLAMATRON]

yes actually they did, thank you for your first useful post in months x

all the FIA ever says is "slow the cars down to this time constraint" and then the teams battle it out(with Ferrari holding a veto ax over everybodies head), and come up with the dumbest and most restrictive rules F1 has ever had.

[WhiteBlue]

My oh my, did the "teams", FOCA or FOTA, decide the turbos to be banned, the wooden plank underneath, the 3.0 engines,
the cut-out in the scoops, the grooved tyres, the narrow tracks, the 2.4 V8s, the...whatever?

All the rule making under the Concord agreement since 1981 was essentially controlled by the teams. The FiA never (except 1.1.2008-24.07.2009) had the right to initiate things except for safety. And they always had a veto if something was considered seriously bad for the sport. Even such things as narrow tracks and grooved tyres were proposed by experts at the time and were implemented in the F1 commission by team voting.

[xpensive]

Not correct, most of what I mentioned was forced upon the teams by MrE for "safety reasons", no engineer would come up with such stupidity as the grooved tyres and open scoops. "Safety reasons" or "bringing the sport into disrepute" was the pervert's equivalent to
"un-american activity" or "counter-revolutionary activites" in other dictatorial situations.

[autogyro]

With the latest raft of garbage rules, they would be better off letting some arcade game maker draft the next lot.
I doubt I shall bother to watch next year, pointless.

[andrew]

With the latest raft of garbage rules, they would be better off letting some arcade game maker draft the next lot.

I thought they had done that already?

[WhiteBlue]

Not correct, most of what I mentioned was forced upon the teams by MrE for "safety reasons", no engineer would come up with such stupidity as the grooved tyres and open scoops. "Safety reasons" or "bringing the sport into disrepute" was the pervert's equivalent to "un-american activity".

Bullshit, grooved tyres were proposed by a tyre company in order to reduce the contact patch without having to make the tyres smaller. It was a cost saving measure. In the nineties we had the same situation as today. The aero mafia kept pushing the performance and sabotaged most rules that would restrict downforce. So safety cuts to performance were often applied at the wrong end. They should have limited downforce or fuel instead of limiting mechanical grip.