Has the WRC missed its opportunity?

Eight seconds. Not much, but enough. In all honesty, more than enough. With less than six miles to run, Sebastien Ogier was safe. Risk and reward once again stepped in to make an irrelevance of the powerstage on last week's Rally Australia.

Sitting in the press office watching Ogier go off the line and onto the final stage in Wedding Bells, I pondered the ramifications of the last few days. Flanked by some of the championship's most conservative and cynical hacks, I couldn't resist a moment of devilment.

"This one's in the bag then..." I ventured as the number one Polo was powered into the stage. "Jari-Matti's got no hope of doing eight seconds in here."

I got a bite.

"Might as well turn the box off," was the offering from my left. "Been the same all day."

I nodded firmly in agreement and gave it a moment.

"Shame," I said, "it's not as close as Finland, or even better - imagine if that gap was less than a second. I'd stop typing for that..."

Hook.

"We'd all stop typing for that. Now that would be worth watching."

Line.

Had the World Motor Sport Council accepted WRC Promoter's proposal for next season, I ventured, Ogier would have dropped the clutch with eight tenths of a second in hand over Latvala. And he'd have lost. By four tenths of a second.

My colleague looked exasperated. "But it's not real!"

"Granted. But would you watch it?"

"Well... yes. Of course I'd watch it.

Sinker.

The FIA rejected the WRC's requested revamp, which included a single-stage shootout to decide victory © McKlein

When the World Motor Sport Council decisions came out of Beijing last Friday, I'll be honest, I was delighted. A victory, I thought to myself, for common sense. I make no bones about being the most traditional of traditionalists, but the next couple of days down under went some way to change my mind. As you can imagine, the on-stage action took a very definite back seat as the service park went into political overdrive.

The latest chapter of the great debate had begun.

Just like Scotland this week, the WRC had its own very defined two-sided argument. All we were missing was the badges, loudhailers and a version of Nicola Sturgeon to shout at.

Saying yes to change were the majority of championship stakeholders - the events, the teams and WRC Promoter, although I understand the vote in favour wasn't unanimous.

The vote for no was unanimous and came from the crews. When asked, not one driver or co-driver wanted a second to be slashed in value to mean a tenth of a second (the latest thinking is that the dividing factor is 10 - a driver winning a stage by 10 seconds would actually be credited with a one-second lead).

To a man, the crews trotted out the DNA argument. I know this one well. Their words were my words. Until I thought even deeper into it. And had some breakfast.

Jet lag was doing its thing last Friday morning, which is how I found myself waiting impatiently for the restaurant around the corner from AUTOSPORT's apartment to open and cook me some scrambled eggs at six in the morning.

Twenty minutes or so in and a fellow time zone-challenged European joined me; WRC Promoter chief Oliver Ciesla sat down for a coffee. And stayed for a sandwich and two coffees. We talked for a long time through the evolution of this plan and, much as I advocated the devil, he came right back at me.

Would rallying lose its essence if the proposals became reality? © McKlein

The sport, he reckoned, would stay the same. It's still man and machine racing the clock from point A to point B. Nothing's changed. The roads are still the toughest on planet Earth and the fastest will still be the fastest. Somebody's just had a bit of a tinker with the stopwatch.

Ciesla takes exception to the continued use of the word "shootout". He's not keen on connotations of luck or sudden death, but the fact that only a driver in the top four positions can win the rally supports the shootout principle. And the idea of grouping the drivers into fours (1-4; 5-8; 9-12, etc) is my only issue with this plan.

The promoter wants drivers to push as hard as possible throughout the rally to make it into the top four, but surely with a tenth of a second worth a hundredth; a second worth a tenth and 10 seconds worth just one, the crews will be driving harder and faster anyway. Does the top four thing not just complicate matters?

Maybe it's our own version of devo-max that we're after.

If WRC Promoter convinces the FIA's political hierarchy of the virtues of its proposal then it's hard to imagine a world championship round ending on anything other than an absolute cliffhanger - the kind where a missed gear (if sequential gearboxes allowed for such a thing) would mean the difference between first and second.

What's not to like about that? WRC Promoter gets to show the new world what a cool and hyper-competitive sport the WRC. He sells his telly, so the wolf is kept from the promoter's door, and the standing of the WRC is inevitably raised. Win, win, I think we call that.

The drivers and co-drivers won't agree with any of that because we are changing the sport fundamentally. Wrong. The original plan was. This one's just tightening things up a little. And anyway, a winner will still be a winner, be it by a second or a tenth of a second. What will disappear is the opportunity to plan an attack. Ogier admitted he was a little cautious on the first run through Wedding Bells on Sunday. His lead was 10 seconds and he gave three away. Caution would surely have been cast windward had he risked three tenths of a single-second advantage.

The WRC Promoter is striving to make the sport more appealing to a wider audience © McKlein

Victory will mean the cars being on their doorhandles from the start of the first stage to the end of the last. Yes, yes, I know the drivers do that already. But as our world champion pointed out, they don't.

The DNA argument simply doesn't stand up, I'm afraid. How can it? I'm not saying this doesn't falsely close the field up, it does. And that bit's not real. But it still offers the richest reward to the quick and the brave. And, like I said, the consistently brave. And always perfect.

But isn't that the level demanded of a world champion? Taking a title must be about striving for perfection? Not perfection until the comfort zone, then the measured approach.

In defence of the WRC Promoter, I have been consistely told: "We need to do something..."

There's no doubt we need to do something. The WRC's not where it should be. But what we have to do is promote, promote and promote.

I was fortunate enough to drive through some of the stages in Australia, then go back and watch as our heroes passed down the same stretch of road. It takes your breath away to see these boys on the limit between the trees. And some of the trees in that part of New South Wales have clearly been there since the dawn of time. Those trees were not for moving. But still, the best in the world pulled sixth and sliced past them without inches to spare.

There's nothing wrong with the action. It's good and getting better. But what use is it if nobody knows? It's time to let the rest of the world in on our secret. And it's also time to give WRC Promoter a break. Ciesla might not have touched down on planet WRC knowing Hannu Mikkola's inside leg measurement or the merits of the viscous coupling, but he's working at it.

Australia served up a great event, despite bickering behind the scenes © McKlein

WRC Promoter, backed by Red Bull Media House and Sportsmen Media, has upscaled its investment radically for the next couple of years and it's time we got behind them. It wouldn't be so hard to back them if only a few more people had an idea of how they are trying to do the job of promoting the series with one arm tied behind their back courtesy of FIA constraint and control. The analogy of taking a 10-year lease on a shop, only to be told not only what you can sell but also at what price you can ask holds truer than most would imagine.

The most important thing now is that the bickering has to stop.

The atmosphere around Rally Australia was horrible, courtesy of a ceaseless stream of arguments. That started with a meeting between Michele Mouton and the crews on Thursday night. We're told this was at Jean Todt's behest, to gauge opinion before World Motor Sport Council the next day.

This made absolutely no sense for me. The drivers voted unanimously against change in a poll that had absolutely zero impact on the outcome of the situation. Beijing decisions were not put on hold merely to wait for the opinion of Mr Mads Ostberg. Understandably, that only served to wind up the already overlooked drivers even more. So they lost their tempers with Mouton before walking out, bound for bed and the start of a WRC round just hours later. In terms of good prep for a WRC round, this was simply insane.

The drivers and co-drivers should have a voice and that voice has to be listened to. The television product remains a real bone of contention with all the drivers and now's the time for them to get together and voice those concerns with the people that matter.

But, at the same time, they have to put their faith - as we all do - in those striving to raise rallying's profile above that of tiddlywinks. If they don't want to put their faith in those folk, then maybe the time has come for a career change. The WRC's older than any of them. And it will outlast all of them.