Gimmicks aren't the answer for Formula 1

Given the massive financial and constitutional divides between the privileged Constructors' Championship Bonus teams - who sit on Formula 1's rule-framing Strategy Group, and share bonuses annually running to tens of millions in any currency - and the rest, who enjoy no such rights regardless of performance, it is perhaps fitting to consider the wisdom of award-winning anti-apartheid writer and activist Alan Paton.

"You ask yourself," he wrote during South Africa's most troubled days, "not if this or that is expedient, but whether it is right [or wrong]".

Paton's words resonated after news broke of a meeting of team bosses called by F1 CEO Bernie Ecclestone on the Friday of the Malaysian Grand Prix. According to sources he urged them to "consider all options [to improve F1]; nothing should be off the table...", as he desperately sought to halt F1's popularity slide, be it a 30 per cent drop in TV ratings in five years, plunging live audiences, waning sponsor interest or looming team administrations.

To compound matters, Red Bull threatened withdrawal earlier in the week despite its commitment to compete through to 2020, while its engine partner Renault admitted to reviewing its campaign in the wake of negative publicity created by its disastrous turbo campaign.

Indeed, the FIA's Friday media conference was thick with accusations. At one stage, Renault Sport F1 chief Cyril Abiteboul fired shots across the bow of RBR and Bob Fernley of Force India, replying to a question posed by this writer, accusing Red Bull of initiating the "downside of Formula 1".

Cyril Abiteboul and Christian Horner faced the press together in Malaysia © LAT

"Unfortunately - and I say that because obviously Christian [Horner, RBR team boss] is here - Red Bull felt the need to take the 40 pieces of silver [offered by the commercial rights holder to the major teams], and that was the downside I think for Formula 1 and I don't think we've recovered from that particular action."

Horner was indignant, responding by commenting that Ferrari - not represented in the conference - had been the first to "cut its own deal", with McLaren (ditto) being in "dual discussions" before the team "cuts its own deal". With such rancour abounding during the weekend, Ecclestone still hoped to foster consensus about a new direction for Formula 1?

During the meeting the concept of an all-women Formula 1 championship - comprising races held on Sunday mornings - was aired, as were suggestions that selected events enjoy 'Grand Slam' status - at an additional fee. Then, that some races should be run on tracks watered artificially, much as Pirelli sprinkles circuits for during wet and intermediate tyre testing.

"I thought it would be a good idea to give [women] a showcase," Ecclestone subsequently told the media. "For some reason, women are not coming through - and not because we don't want them. Of course we do, because they would attract a lot of attention and publicity and probably a lot of sponsors." Note the overriding reasons...

Not surprisingly the concept of Female F1 received cool receptions from the FIA's Women in Motorsport Commission downwards, not least because modern women wish to compete on equal terms and not be patronised through curtain-raiser events cynically staged in toned-down cars.

Now in NASCAR, Danica Patrick became IndyCar's first female winner in 2008 © LAT

Of course, had Ecclestone not twice in the last ten years suggested that "women should be dressed in white... like all domestic appliances" after American star Danica Patrick qualified and finished fourth in the 2005 Indianapolis 500, the response may have been somewhat warmer.

But, apart from discriminatory comments made a decade ago, let us examine how a woman who took on men on equal terms in top-line motorsport, and won, feels about the suggestion. Michelle Mouton, president of the FIA's Commission for Women in Motorsport and a WRC star in the 1980s, when she finished a narrow second in the 1982 world championship, was blunt in her response.

"Maybe when [Ecclestone] sees the F1 audience decreasing he thinks about solutions and about women only for the show! I am annoyed and very disappointed!" she told news agency AP in her private capacity.

The Frenchwoman's official FIA response was more tempered, but hardly enthusing: "The idea of an all-women competition is not something we would dismiss without proper debate and research.

Michele Mouton won three WRC rallies in 1982 with Audi © LAT

"But from my own experience as a competitor, I truly believe women want to compete on an equal level with their male counterparts. They have proved through the decades that it is possible, even if only a few.

"Motorsport is just one of three sports, including sailing and horse riding, where men and women compete alongside one another with the same rules and classifications. This level playing field provides a real indicator of performance and pushes athletes to be the best in the world, regardless of gender.

"We have to continue promoting the fact that motorsport is open to all, with the same prospects and potential to succeed."

Mouton has support from recent Formula E driver Michaela Cerruti, whosaid that she would not wish to compete in a womens' championship created "basically, to attract attention" and which would be "much less interesting than seeing women racing against men".

"It is really absurd that there's not a woman (racing) nowadays in Formula 1," she said. "In the past two or three years they could have taken one of us." Pretty clear-cut comments, then.

That said, Ecclestone protege Carmen Jorda, a middling Spanish GP3 driver now contracted to Lotus, did support the concept - in the very paddock in which she had her pass confiscated for refusing to wear it around her neck as per protocol, preferring to stick into her jeans pockets.

However, setting aside the FIA position, just how much commercial support would or could such a series generate?

Simona de Silvestro's Sauber deal appeared to offer a direct pathway to Formula 1 © LAT

For the answer look no further than the plight of Simona de Silvestro. The Swiss IndyCar podium finisher last year signed a deal with Sauber, during which she would be an "affiliated driver and undergo a year-long training programme with the team, with the objective of racing [in F1] in 2015".

She completed various tests that entitled her to a superlicence; however, after six months the programme was suspended due to what the team referred to as 'contractual issues', an F1 euphemism for non-payment.

This begs the question. If an established star with a European and US pedigree on her CV cannot generate the funding for a test programme with a team headed by a woman, what chance a full grid? Indeed, over the years many women have attempted to gain a foothold in F1, with a lack of funding invariably proving the stumbling block even before they are given cockpit opportunities.

As for 'wet races', one of the attractions of the sport's various venues is that their weather is generally unpredictable. Bahrain has been known to experience unseasonal drops, while it never ceases to amaze that Singapore hasn't had a wet race in its seven events to date - and introducing artificial moisture smacks of Dubai's 'ski' run, complete with its plastic reindeer. Would the IOC stage Winter Games in the Emirates?

One would have expected the sport to have learned from the almost universal derision the introduction of double points for the 2014 finale received, but, no. Discussed by F1's top dogs was a more controversial format, namely 20 points awarded per race - divided 10 each for victory and pole position. Since when does topping qualifying equal winning grands prix, particularly given the importance of tyre strategy?

Nico Rosberg's mistake in Russia essentially put him in his own reverse-grid race © XPB

However, not content with artificially 'spicing up' the show through anaemic measures that smack of sheer expediency, the best brains in the business added a further twist, namely the 'pole' driver should start 12th - in Australia that would have entailed lining up on the penultimate row - with the grid being equally jumbled 'so you're going to get a whole bunch of decent guys starting in the middle of the field'.

Talk about tax on human performance in an endeavour that was until just a decade ago - prior to F1's commercial rights falling into the grip of venture fund CVC Capital Partners - arguably the most meritocratic activity on the global sporting calendar, one able to dub itself the "world's largest continuous sporting block" on account of a truly global following.

The absolute irony is that while F1 ponders further team exits, a 15-car Melbourne grid and all-women races, the World Endurance Championship celebrated recent success in attracting an additional manufacturer (Renault's alliance partner Nissan) to its outright ranks, also announcing an increase in the number of garages at Le Mans to 60, and a total ban on grid girls at future events.

Porsche, Audi and Toyota are joined by Nissan, but no grid girls, in the World Endurance Championship this year © XPB

"For me that is the past," said WEC CEO Gerard Neveu.

"The condition of women is a little bit different now," with the series adding - rightly, believe many - that "the cars themselves are the beauties." Not even F1 designers dare say that about their current crop of creations.

Five years ago, the WEC hit rock-bottom, having just Audi as stalwart standard-bearer. Rather than seeking to reinvent itself through gimmicks, the series worked with the FIA in adopting high-tech regulations and visiting pastures new, all while respecting tradition and history.

Melbourne's promoters prove that F1 can attract capacity crowds by offering full-on, value-for-money packages without resorting to on-track gimmicks - even when just 15 cars take the start. However, as one race organiser in Australia "to learn how to do it", lamented to this column shortly before the race, "we're hamstrung by Bernie's contracts. Whatever we want to do he wants us to pay extra for."

Indeed, a source in Australia explained the reason for the event's V8 Supercars support races having non-championship status: "Simple really, Bernie wants a million bucks if the races run as part of our championship. So the result is non-championship status."

F1 faces two choices: take heed of the world around it, or continue bearing the consequences of its inequality and downright greed, which simply cannot be papered over through simple expediency.