Printable View
This is how manufactures want it to look like...
Permanent events:
Argentina
Italy
Finland
Germany
Great Britain
Japan
Monte Carlo
Spain
Rotating events:
Australia - New Zealand
Greece - Turkey
Ireland - France
Mexico - Jordan
Portugal - Poland
Sweden - Norway
I like it :)
May not happen according to this
http://www.rallybuzz.com/rally-gb-no-wrc-2010/
Id prefer for Australia to be a perminant event, but thats only becasue in biased.
Otherwise, it looks fine to me :)
PS. Its kinda obvious which markets the manufacturers want to target.
Does anyone else think Spain is boring?
I watched some of the rally last year and it had me catching z's!
monte, finland, germany, japan need to be perm. otherwise... eh.. i love argentina tho.......
I like it.....but i dissagree with argentina since their organisation is totally unacceptable for WRC standards. i think france will eventually be permanent as well.....
our Organisers had the best event of 2005 in the WRC as voted by the manufacturers and they changed its location so the guys from the capital could be reacher....this is the result.
Argentina needs to be premanent because it's the oldest rally in the Americas, but for rally fans in North America that kind of leaves us put :(
And what about Poland? I thought the WRC was going to start visiting them? After all it is the birth place of rally, and one of the most participated events in Europe.
Yes, me. That is more a circuit race than rally.Quote:
Originally Posted by gloomyDAY
I think there should be 2 snow rallies every year, OK eventually it could work against spectator numbers to have Sweden and Norway "back to back" weekends every year, but what the hell - I love snow, MUCH better than tarmac, personally I would not care if any tarmac was in the championship.
The list of permanent events looks ok, agree with not about that the greeks screwed up by moving the rally, if they would not have done that i think it should have been one of the permanent ones.
I'd prefer France instead of Spain and New Zealand instead of Argentina for permanents. Otherwise ok.
I agree Wim, it has nothing to do with rally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wim_Impreza
Permanent events I would like to see
Monte
Sweden
Portugal with a day of tarmac
Acropolis
Finland
New Zealand
Sanremo with two days on gravel in the Tuscany hills
GB
Though the manufacturers list is fairly well balanced and pretty sensible given the current WRC climate.
I would only change it to have Germany/Spain rotating, otherwise pretty much agree with it :up:
Greece should be along the permanent events. It has a great tradition and usually great rally. Otherwise it looks good.
I'm really confused with rallybuzz (great site ;) ) news about 2010 and beyond calendars...Quote:
Originally Posted by c4
The August-April series scheme that was suggested some years ago (to begin at 2008 if i'm not mistaken) wasn't it dropped ???
With Mr. Mosley president until the end of 2009 (at the case he didn't reminds to make himself perpetual), the FIA 12 events 2009/2010 calendars will be changed ???
I don't like the 24 "rotational united nations" scheme, but this constant changes on the WRC structure it's a major contribute to the "dispromotion" of the series... :mad:
My dream calendar (disputed in the convencional civic year format) would be a mixture of charismatic permanent events (including the return of the Safari), alongside other traditional or "marketing purposes" rotational rallys:
6 Permanent: Montecarlo, Great Britain, Kenya, Finland, Greece, New Zealand.
8 Rotational: Sweden/Norway, Argentina/México, Australia/Japan, France/Spain, Italy/Portugal, Germany/Irleland, Turkey/Jordan, Poland/Russia.
Ok, 14 events it's a little over the limit, but 13 it's not a recomended number to a rally series... :s tareup:
I'd personally prefer to have either all rotating or none, otherwise it's a bit unfair on those not in the European continent (as these events will always be considered more suitable for a permanent spot).
It's a nice idea to have some classic events retained as permanent; to me this would be Monte Carlo, GB and the Acropolis. But on the other hand, it's nice to see what these rallies do on their off year, as Monte Carlo looks to be particularly interesting this year, what with night stages over the Col de Turini and all.
Everyone has normal its own preference, unfortunate enough this is not possible to make it to everyone its sense.
How does the rally organisers and sponsors see the calendar?
What is important for the manufactures?
Who are we to say our opinion here, the fans finally?
Here nevertheless comes my opinion. :p
According to me some classic events are certainly ready to disappear or go in the rotation system.
Personally I would change in some countries the date, I like to see some classic rallys in another season. :s mokin:
I also think Catalunya is boring, I prefer Corsica for tarmac or even Mossel's countryside!
I really despair, every month a new system gets spoken about. As already said, this August - April season has reared it's ugly head again, Please, NO!!
The constant changing is doing the sport no favours at all, and in fact just proves what a mess it is in.
Is it really too hard to have a 12 round Championship with the 'Classics' permamaent ( Monte, Acropolis, 1000 Lakes, GB), and the rest rotated. With the mess the sport is in, I can't believe they're even thinking of dropping the 'Big' events. What planet are they on?
As for the point about Rallies in the year out - next years Monte looks interesting - though not as much mileage as I was expecting, but Col de Turini in the dark. GREAT!!
Reading this weeks Autosport, Rally GB isn't definately going ahead in 2010 if it is not in the WRC. I can't say I'm surprised, though it would give them the opportuity to run an 'oldish style' Rally GB with 'Mickey House' stages.
I think it's important that the calendar is balanced between - on one side the sporting and historical interest - and on the other side the marketing value for the manufactures.
I personally don't think that the historic events should be kept in the calendar every year. This sport desperately needs to reach more countries, so I am all for 24 different events over 2 years. But if 4 permanent events should be considered (Tour de Corse, Monte, 1000 Lakes and Rally GB) then I think the calendar should be expanded to 14 rounds per year. 12 rounds are too few for my liking!
Regarding the marketing values, then I cannot understand why China isn't on the list, since all manufacturers are asking for it. While I think FIA clearly is on the right path with their new way of thinking, then they still need to have a little better understanding of the marketing values in this sport - otherwise new manufactueres won't enter WRC.
The list on the first post is what manufactures currently in WRC have asked, it's not something created solely by FIA.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeD
Permanent events is not fair to the others. But if we have permanent events on the calendar, then i agree with Monte Carlo, GB and Finland. Why Spain? And Germany? And Japan with few WRC cars every years? And Italy? :eek: in Sardinia???
Monte Carlo, GB and Finland have something unic, the others don't.
Norway deserves a place on WRC, as Ireland with his unic roads.
Why is that? And who others do you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
I believe he means the other rallies that are not permanently on the calendar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
And this would be, I think, because they don't get to run each year, which is disruptive to the entire event in general.
all permanent calender would be offcourse better, but some countries dont want or dont have economical resourses to run the rally every year.Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicpanda
I would throw out all the events that dont attract spectators, japan, jordan would be the first to go on my list also corsica.
The only thing unic about GB is that it's a mud bath and the amount of fans that show up every year. If I'm not mistaken mud is one of the reasons they used to stop running the rally of Portugal in 2003. GB shouled be a permanent event because of the fans but it should be held on tarmac.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAM
Norway is to new to push aside older events, as is Ireland and it's to close to GB to have two permanent events. They need to spred the regular events around using traditional rally's.
You have an interesting point of view. Do you not think that the historical background to the event, classic stages and fog (in addition to rain) add to the uniqueness of Rally GB? Also they were only the second event last year to have proper night stages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saabaru
If it were run on tarmac it would lose its character and become rather similar to Ireland, I think. I like GB the way it is.
Occasionally there used to be snow and ice on the old RAC Rally, since it moved to South Wales there hasn't been any. Plus the lack of 'Killer Kielder' - none of the current drivers will have driven there in the WRC. They don't know what they're missing.
I have a feeling that the Monte may well not come back to the WRC unless the restrictions are lifted. Next year they have an interesting route which isn't 'WRC - suitable'. What will happen next? A WRC without the Monte? NASCAR without Daytona, F1 without Monaco - just doesn't happen, but in Rallying it does.
I think that the FIA would allow the route in 2010, since by then they're supposed to have more flexible rules. They might ask the Monte organisers to make it a bit longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Martin Holmes in GPWEEK, incidentally, has an interesting editorial discussing the need for rallies like Safari and Monte.
But the TV audience is much bigger than the spectating audience, and the variety that these countries add is good on TV. Admittedly the TV coverage is often bad and doesn't always include the interesting aspects of the rally we hear about in the live coverage - for example in the 2006 Rally of Turkey there was a thick covering of hail on a stage that Atko said was incredible, but we didn't get to see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi
Struggling for snow in Sweden these days too. Who knows what Sweet Lamb in December is like, maybe we get a "winter" in the UK in 2008/9, the summer is cold enough here this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyRAC
Agree about the GPWEEK online magazine - it's worth subscribing. Good points raised by Martin Holmes. You don't get rid of your prestige events - unless it's the WRC - and the people running it are clueless.
I would like to see New Zealand instead of Japan, Corsica instead of Catalunya, and Acropolis as a permanent event but I understand the manufacturers suggestion. With Oz and NZ rotating, they'll have at least one event in down under every year while two manfacturers (which is sadly half of manufacturer entries right now) wants home event in Japan. Two permanent event in France probably doesn't work out in the World Championship, so if you have to pick one, Monte would be the choice. And having a visit to South America would be good from the promotinal perspective.
Yes, fans have different opinion but I rather give manufacturers what they want right now.
All I am saying is don't stop running one event that is one of the most spectated events on the calendar and use an excuse that you hold as a unique quality for another rally. Personally I don't like Rally GB the way it is and would rather see it run on tarmac. Those muddy roads of Wales can be just as distructive as the dry rocky roads of Greece, but we all have different opinions. I know there are other reasons they used to stop running Rally Portugal but they could have been addressed very easily. But in the end it's all political and has nothing to do with the motor sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmicpanda
I have got the impression that an Australian Rally wont happen because noone wants it for some reason. :confused: There was rumblings of a QLD rally but the company responsible for that collapsed or something im not sure. I think they should do it my home state of South Australia (biased i know) there is heaps of places i would imagine and the ARC has a round already which has being going for years so we can host such events.
I think they should cut the crap and either have a 12-16 round WRC season or have a 20-24 round season which includes all the rallys that get dicked around now.Don't leave people who have invested money into having this rally there in the lurch.
They should have a permanant rally fixture with no other rounds on a rotation list.Its a crap idea that just dicks the promotors around and makes WRC a less attractive thing to invest in because people dont know whether they are going to have a race at all next season.
I agree about some permanent rallies. I'm thinking to Monte Carlo, Finland, Acropolis, Corsica. But it's necessary to go to important markets like Russia (it has been rumoured Novorossysk, in the Black Sea), Japan, USA, China and, maybe, in Abu Dhabi (there are lots of potential sponsors). I agree to have the rotation for the other rallies: Corsica and Catalunya, Italy and Ireland, Norway and Sweden, Portugal and Turkey, Poland and Cyprus, and to do so...
I think there should be a set of core rallies which should be run each year due to there importance in the history of the World Rally Championship such as the Monte, Sweden, New Zealand, Corsica, Finland, Rally GB etc then have a certain number of events which rotate each year giving new counties a chance.
I would reduce the amount of events to ethier 10 or 12 so you could have eight core events and two rotational events or ethier eight core events and four rotational.
Hopefully by reducing the number of events more teams will join up!
The length of events also need to be increased its just a sprint now with a few stages run twice each day. Thats not how rallying should be is it?? Obviously they cant be as long as they used to but lets have at least 10 stages a day and only one or two stages run twice a day make it more of a challange and get the excitment back to the world rally championship!!!!!!!!!
Listening to Midweek Motorsport tonight on RadioLeMans.com, and Andrew Coe - Chairman of Rally GB was still hopeful that it will run in the WRC in 2010, and that the Manufacturers are still not happy about the calendar. He was hopeful that it would take place whether in or out of the WRC - as it's a popular Rally with fans, media, etc. I just hope he realises, it's nowere near as popular as it once was, with both fans and media.
As for Monte Carlo, haven't they signed up with the IRC for 3 years?
I don't think that the rotation system will last. Some rallies will find that they can't cope with it and will withdraw from the WRC, and then the rotation will be unnecessary. Of course, to get back to a 16 round calendar from 24 events will require eight events to withdraw, so it could take a while.
I think that if three or four events are withdrawn then we'd begin to see events run on consecutive years again.