2013 Lessons identified

[Sulland]

We are in to the latter part of the First ERC season in the new format.

What has been good, and what not so good - and which of the lessons identified are so important that something should be made lessons learned, and by that lead to change for 2014?

[kober]

Lesson one: Teams' championship is crap - bring back manufacturers' championship, a la IRC.
Lesson two: A rally every two weeks is way too often - Croatia was the obvious casualty.
Lesson three: Live TV is good - expand to the majority of rallies.

[Mirek]

Lesson one: Teams' championship is crap - bring back manufacturers' championship, a la IRC.

AFAIK it's going to happen.


Lesson two: A rally every two weeks is way too often - Croatia was the obvious casualty.

Agree


Lesson three: Live TV is good - expand to the majority of rallies.

I'm sure Eurosport would like to have all rallies live but it costs hell of money so I expect the coverage to stay about the same like always.

Some another points from me...

Lesson four: Never change rules during the running season (tyres before Corsica).

Lesson five: There are too many events in the calendar.

Lesson six: Simplify the point system in regards to the events from which the points are counted. Average spectator must be totally lost in the standings during the season.

-> L5+L6: Reduce calendar and count all or almost all events (I'm sure this is not going to happen).

Lesson seven: It's not needed to call everybody a star. The articles on the website looks ridiculous sometimes. That brings a lot of good work away.

[kober]

I'm sure Eurosport would like to have all rallies live but it costs hell of money so I expect the coverage to stay about the same like always.
If on some rallies they skipped helicopters, but had a live stream on a website, with quality commentary, on-boards, and a camera at the end of the stage, then it would be good enough for me. Splits would need to be available too.
It'd like watching night hours of 24 Heures du Le Mans on TV, when they only have cameras along pitstops, and the rest of the feed is filled up with on-boards.

[liposh]

French WRC round showed us it is possible to broadcast all stages of rally without bigger problem. Eurosport could do that technically too, they have got enough staff. But no need for that. I agree with skipping the helicopters and broadcasting just onboards on official FIA ERC website. Moreover Eurosport can cooperate with some local TV in this point. I think many TVs from many countries would buy the rights for such coverage (like they did it during french WRC round)

I personally would prefer more simulcams and onboard comparisons during rally reviews.

[WUff1]

I agree with much less rallies, but I´d sure this won´t happen ....

Obviously ERC didn´t gain more attractivity by abandoning IRC - that´s the real problem, but I don´t know how it could be solved.

[Mirek]

French WRC round showed us it is possible to broadcast all stages of rally without bigger problem. Eurosport could do that technically too, they have got enough staff. But no need for that. I agree with skipping the helicopters and broadcasting just onboards on official FIA ERC website. Moreover Eurosport can cooperate with some local TV in this point. I think many TVs from many countries would buy the rights for such coverage (like they did it during french WRC round)

I personally would prefer more simulcams and onboard comparisons during rally reviews.

How do you think You can transmit the signal from cars without helicopters or planes?

[miniwintz]

The running cost of live TV could be greatly reduced with :
- small scale drones instead of full size helicopters
- good video compression algorithms such as H265
- wifi / wimax / 4g instead of very costly uhf transmissions

I think live video from onboard cameras is very much possible, but it would require some investment in r&d from the promoters. Unfortunately nowadays, investment is the word that everyone fears so it's very likely that they will stick to technology from the past and that they cannot really afford.
I agree that helicopter footage is unnecessary (aside from showing off the sponsor stickers) and GPS data would be sufficient to make the real time timing comparisons that we saw at rally France.

[shaperzrally]

Broadcasting costs are high for bicycle races too but there are many races live on eurosport. I'm not talking about the TdF, Giro or the Vuelta but there are several smaller races on tv live. The broadcasting method is almost the same. Helicopters and ground cameras are the same only change the motocams to onboard cameras. Looks like there are far more money in cycling than rally...

[AndyRAC]

The money in cycling is peanuts compared to even Rallying.....


I’d say the new relaunched ERC has been a bit ‘hit & miss’ – some events have had good entries, good TV coverage, others not so. Ideally, the top ERC events should be live on TV; Ypres, Sanremo, Zlin, Corsica.....sadly, most of them haven’t been.
Also, in an ideal world the best European events would be in the ERC – not those who can pay the fee – but that is just a fact of modern life.

[Mirek]

The money in cycling is peanuts compared to even Rallying.....


I’d say the new relaunched ERC has been a bit ‘hit & miss’ – some events have had good entries, good TV coverage, others not so. Ideally, the top ERC events should be live on TV; Ypres, Sanremo, Zlin, Corsica.....sadly, most of them haven’t been.
Also, in an ideal world the best European events would be in the ERC – not those who can pay the fee – but that is just a fact of modern life.

Agree but on the other hand... how do You define the best? There are things we see like the tradition, stages, entry list etc. but there are also things we don't see like the organization level, safety, communication with promoter and FIA, relation with local authorities, financial backing etc.

[shaperzrally]

The money in cycling is peanuts compared to even Rallying.....

How come then almost every cycle race is on live for hours and hours... With all the doping scandals they still able to find sponsors for broadcasting live. I simply don't understand it.

BTW Eurosport is planing six rallies (ERC) for 2014 with live broadcast. The format will be the same, four stages live per rally.

[Mirek]

How come then almost every cycle race is on live for hours and hours... With all the doping scandals they still able to find sponsors for broadcasting live. I simply don't understand it.

I'm pretty sure the audience of major cycling races is much bigger than of ERC. Personally I also don't understand how somebody can find watching cyclists for hours interesting but it is like that. For example in a village where I'm originally from there is nobody going to rallies but quite a lot of people who go to cycling races like Tour de France or Vuelta...

[shaperzrally]

How come then almost every cycle race is on live for hours and hours... With all the doping scandals they still able to find sponsors for broadcasting live. I simply don't understand it.

I'm pretty sure the audience of major cycling races is much bigger than of ERC. Personally I also don't understand how somebody can find watching cyclists for hours interesting but it is like that. For example in a village where I'm originally from there is nobody going to rallies but quite a lot of people who go to cycling races like Tour de France or Vuelta...

Don't get me wrong! I am not against cycling at all, but In my opinion there are a lot of common between a road cycling race and a rally broadcast. The cost of one hour live must be the same. How hard can it be to find a title sponsor to the ERC itself with a budget wich covering the live broadcast fee... If cycling federation (or the races) can do it...

[Jarek Z]

I'm pretty sure the audience of major cycling races is much bigger than of ERC. Personally I also don't understand how somebody can find watching cyclists for hours interesting but it is like that.

Exactly. Major cycling races are followed by much bigger audience than ERC or even WRC. Which is a proof that a sport discipline doesn't need to be exciting to be shown on TV. Another example is golf. It is also not exciting, but is watched by thousands of viewers.
The constant stupid changes made by FIA in recent years, that are supposed to make rallying "more attractive", do nothing good for our sport. It is not followed by more fans and it is not becoming more popular. Cycling and golf hasn't changed for years and they are followed by millions.

[Sulland]

As many have commented, one big issue is Cost for total series.

When a team sits down these days to plan 2014, they look at cost of National series, ERC and WRC2/3, and what they get for their budget.
Very few will then end up with that it is better to drive medium size rallies around Europe, in a championship that is still trying to find its form, compared to the WRCircus, when the total cost btw ERC and WRC is not that different.

If they are to make a good reputation, they need to get down to aprox 8 rounds, and 5 counting. Then ERC will be a good alternative to start to get international experience.


If FIA also start using their head and see that they need to let organizers alternate btw ERC and WRC, to keep the organizations alive and kicking, then ERC will get a boost !

[shaperzrally]

I'm pretty sure the audience of major cycling races is much bigger than of ERC. Personally I also don't understand how somebody can find watching cyclists for hours interesting but it is like that.

Exactly. Major cycling races are followed by much bigger audience than ERC or even WRC. Which is a proof that a sport discipline doesn't need to be exciting to be shown on TV. Another example is golf. It is also not exciting, but is watched by thousands of viewers.
The constant stupid changes made by FIA in recent years, that are supposed to make rallying "more attractive", do nothing good for our sport. It is not followed by more fans and it is not becoming more popular. Cycling and golf hasn't changed for years and they are followed by millions.

Agree but I think not only those watching the golf and/or the cycle broadcasts whom are enthusiasts of that sport, but also those whom like to travel but can not afford it. For example with the Tour de France they can virtually travel across France, see castles, rivers and everything. It is a cheap roadtrip... :) This could be the same with rally broadcasts.

And speak about interesting sport broadcast... What about snooker? That sport(?) has huge live broadcast time on Eurosport and you watching two penguins with sticks, trying to sink some coloured balls for hours.

[Mirek]

As many have commented, one big issue is Cost for total series.

When a team sits down these days to plan 2014, they look at cost of National series, ERC and WRC2/3, and what they get for their budget.
Very few will then end up with that it is better to drive medium size rallies around Europe, in a championship that is still trying to find its form, compared to the WRCircus, when the total cost btw ERC and WRC is not that different.

If they are to make a good reputation, they need to get down to aprox 8 rounds, and 5 counting. Then ERC will be a good alternative to start to get international experience.

I don't agree. WRC2/3 is more expensive than ERC (per event definitely - higher entry fee, more traveling, longer events etc.) and what You get back? Where is any footage from WRC2/3? Where is Your car and result shown? I just checked videos from Alsace on wrc.com and there is none dedicated to supporter championships. PC/2WD and ladies always have at least some short footage in videos from ERC. in WRC You fight somewhere down the field and nobody seems to care about You. In ERC You fight in overall results. No WRC driver doing superally will pass You when You stay on the road.

In my opinion ERC despite some mistakes is much more privateer friendly than WRC. WRC on the other hand is prestigious, that's clear.

[RS]

I agree with Mirek^^

That is not ERCs problem. A few years ago in IRC we had factory or quasi-factory teams from Skoda, Peugeot, Abarth, Proton competing.

And 'FIA ERC' arguably has more kudos than 'IRC'

For me, this years ERC has been some way off the heights of IRC, but much better than recent years of ERC. In other words; a good start but I hope one day it will get back to IRC levels.

[miniwintz]

The money in cycling is peanuts compared to even Rallying.....
If you look at the big picture, I don't think this is true.

Of course team budget in cycling is nowhere near team budget in rallying, but sponsors are much more keen on financing bicycling (and its broadcasting) than they are for rallying. Despite all the doping scandals, cycling is still a "noble" sport, like athletism, running, etc. Rally cars (in the mind of marketing specialists) produce tons of CO2, destroy our roads and annoy people with their insane engine sounds. Of course it is biased, but we're not here to debate that.

Cycling is more socially acceptable, that's why it gets all the attention from the broadcasters. And if rallying doesn't make efforts into becoming that (i.e. with limited emissions, limited noise, etc.), the situation will not change. The other solution would be to look into alternative broadcasting methods that cost less for the promoters and that are more interesting to the fans and rally amateurs.

[Mirek]

Cycling is more socially acceptable, that's why it gets all the attention from the broadcasters. And if rallying doesn't make efforts into becoming that (i.e. with limited emissions, limited noise, etc.), the situation will not change. The other solution would be to look into alternative broadcasting methods that cost less for the promoters and that are more interesting to the fans and rally amateurs.

This is a very dangerous two-blade sword. Both of those points directly affects spectacle and the second one also safety.

Less emissions - if You remove anti-lag You lower the consumption and emissions by half but You remove a big part of spectacle, anyway something in that direction was done with R5 cars which have different (weaker) anti-lag.
Less noise - noise is part of safety in rallying and its maximum values are actually already regulated. Remember that in rallying people can get on the stage. Noise is an important warning for them that the car is coming. Remember what it's like when you are spectating a rally in a strong wind and a diesel car is coming?

This summer I have been spectating a race of electric formula cars. Believe me that it was boring as hell no matter how fast the cars go. Rallying as a sport is hard to understand for many people and large part of it's audience go to watch rallies because those are spectacular and somewhat crazy. Would You go to spectate a distant (or even a close rally) to watch cars with no sound and going like on rails? I wouldn't, definitely and I wouldn't even watch it on TV.

[miniwintz]

I'm 100% with you, and I'd be surprised to see a fan who isn't. I'm just pointing out what "could" eventually be done to reconciliate mass media with rallying.

[Jarek Z]

And speak about interesting sport broadcast... What about snooker? That sport(?) has huge live broadcast time on Eurosport and you watching two penguins with sticks, trying to sink some coloured balls for hours.

Yes, you are right. But you have to take into account, that this sport is very easy and cheap in broadcasting. Everything happens at the same place.

[RS]

Remember what it's like when you are spectating a rally in a strong wind and a diesel car is coming?

Or a turbocharged Ford..

[AndyRAC]

Remember what it's like when you are spectating a rally in a strong wind and a diesel car is coming?

Or a turbocharged Ford..

Yeah, on the Pirelli in May Elfyn ran the Fiesta R5, and on the Sunday, it was windy - that car is too quiet!!!

[Sulland]

As many have commented, one big issue is Cost for total series.

When a team sits down these days to plan 2014, they look at cost of National series, ERC and WRC2/3, and what they get for their budget.
Very few will then end up with that it is better to drive medium size rallies around Europe, in a championship that is still trying to find its form, compared to the WRCircus, when the total cost btw ERC and WRC is not that different.

If they are to make a good reputation, they need to get down to aprox 8 rounds, and 5 counting. Then ERC will be a good alternative to start to get international experience.

I don't agree. WRC2/3 is more expensive than ERC (per event definitely - higher entry fee, more traveling, longer events etc.) and what You get back? Where is any footage from WRC2/3? Where is Your car and result shown? I just checked videos from Alsace on wrc.com and there is none dedicated to supporter championships. PC/2WD and ladies always have at least some short footage in videos from ERC. in WRC You fight somewhere down the field and nobody seems to care about You. In ERC You fight in overall results. No WRC driver doing superally will pass You when You stay on the road.

In my opinion ERC despite some mistakes is much more privateer friendly than WRC. WRC on the other hand is prestigious, that's clear.

We rarely seem to agree Mirek, and that is fine - it creates good debates in here!! :smokin:

But if anyone are able to put aprox figures to a 10 round series in National series, ERC and WRC in a R5. Just the running costs, not buying the car, what will those figures be like?

[Lousada]

The money in cycling is peanuts compared to even Rallying.....
If you look at the big picture, I don't think this is true.

Of course team budget in cycling is nowhere near team budget in rallying, but sponsors are much more keen on financing bicycling (and its broadcasting) than they are for rallying. Despite all the doping scandals, cycling is still a "noble" sport, like athletism, running, etc. Rally cars (in the mind of marketing specialists) produce tons of CO2, destroy our roads and annoy people with their insane engine sounds. Of course it is biased, but we're not here to debate that.

Cycling is more socially acceptable, that's why it gets all the attention from the broadcasters. And if rallying doesn't make efforts into becoming that (i.e. with limited emissions, limited noise, etc.), the situation will not change. The other solution would be to look into alternative broadcasting methods that cost less for the promoters and that are more interesting to the fans and rally amateurs.

This is a fair bit of overreaction. Cycling is not at all considered a noble sport. Ask ordinary people about cycling and you will more often than not hear the word doping in the first sentence. German TV networks even censor cycling races because of all the doping scandals. Thank the lord that that never happened to Motorracing.

How the news media operates is very simple. They ask themselves: 1. is one of our own winning? 2. if we don't broadcast this, would our viewers know it even happened?
The thing with the Tour de France and other cycling races is that they compete over 200 kilometres per day with no laps and no repeat stages. Enormous areas of the country get covered. That in itself makes it newsworthy. Since rallies have adopted the cloverleaf format they are tucked away in some corner of the country. For dumb media reporters it looks like the event is just local. And they don't cover local events because those are not important for their nationwide viewers.
If the Tour de France set up HQ in Paris or some other town and did the same 3 stages for 3 weeks, the race would be dead within two years. Yet in Rally this is somehow acceptable...

And if the rally is suddenly silent and 100% emission free the media still won't report on this. Because they don't think their viewers want to know about rally...

The media needs to understand the storyline of the rally. If they don't understand this they either won't report on it, or they will go by standard formats, like crashes or green psychos.

[Jarek Z]

The media needs to understand the storyline of the rally. If they don't understand this they either won't report on it.

That is very true. I agree with you. But normal people do not understand rallying at all. A few years ago I wrote a small atricle for a magazine about IRC. I sent it to the office by e-mail and on the next day I had a phone call from the editor. I don't know how you call such person. He reads all the articles that are about to be published, checks them for errors, shortens them, tunes them, is sometimes something like a censor. Is it a proof-reader? Let's call him an editor. He called me because he couldn't understand a thing about this IRC:

1. He had no idea why IRC even existed. He said that we have WRC for the best drivers in the world and ERC for the best drivers in Europe. So for whom is the IRC?
2. He could not understand why there are certain cars that cannot score points in IRC. If you had FIAT or Peugeot than you could score points. But when you were driving Subaru or Suzuki, then they wouldn't even show you in the TV report. I took me much time to explain him that manufacturers were obliged to pay the organizers in order to be present in the TV show.
3. Then he could not understand why certain drivers were driving Suzukis or Subarus when those cars could not score points.
4. Then he could not understand how it is possible that a Subaru driver wins Safari Rally, but on TV and in the standings they show someone else as a winner.
5. Then he could not understand why there were rallies that didn"t count for the championship (the 8 best results out of 10). Why organize 10 events when only 8 count?

There were also many other questions and all of them were reasonable. After this phone call I realized how many idiotic rules there are in the rally world. What do you think he will publish in his magazine next time? Another report, from a sport that nobody understands or a report from Tour de France?

[shaperzrally]

What do you think he will publish in his magazine next time? Another report, from a sport that nobody understands or a report from Tour de France?

Fair enough... Eurosport Events should simplify the rules of the ERC. Even if this means less rallies in the calendar. Just pick six or seven well established rally as an ERC counter and put a good live tv coverage behind them. I bet there will be six or seven ERC rallies with fantastic entry list and great fight for every single points because more privateer pilots and team working on extra budget for a full ERC campaign. I am not a big fan of the two "halftimes" and also don't like the bonus points...

[Mirek]

Since ERC joined with IRC it's not only about Eurosport but also about the whole political machinery in FIA which makes the things even more unpredictable.

[Sulland]

:)
Since ERC joined with IRC it's not only about Eurosport but also about the whole political machinery in FIA which makes the things even more unpredictable.

Very true, as with all large orgs with breaucrats!

But hopefully the ERC planners see that it is better to start out small, and with full entrylists, and build reputation, and then grow once the european title mean something.

Privat Teams should use ERC as a stepping stone for WRC, to learn the "trade"!

Cost must down, and they need to attract "Nordic" teams and drivers, that as of today see ERC as a waste of time and money!

[WUff1]

...


Cost must down, and they need to attract "Nordic" teams and drivers, that as of today see ERC as a waste of time and money!

You´re absolutely right! Maybe with the new Winter Cup there´s some more attraction for Nordic teams and drivers.

[Mirek]

I share Your hopes. Now three pure winter events are planned (with possible snow in fourth - Valais if that is run in it's November date). There will be also Estonia as a new gravel round. It could take attention of some Nordic teams and I strongly hope so.