MPH: Mark Hughes on...

Inevitably, as we arrived in Bahrain, the big questions weren't of motor racing, but of Max Mosley's extra-curricular activities. And because this is sanitised Formula 1, the drivers had all been briefed about how to respond to the inevitable questions.

Jarno Trulli, Nick Heidfeld, Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton sat in the Thursday press conference as the question was asked. Nick and Jarno refused to comment. So far, so bland and so typically modern F1. A drama of Shakespearean proportions was unfolding and the sport's leading representatives, its public face, had nothing to say.

Climate of Fear

Usually it's corporate interests that get blamed for the dullness. But actually it's more than that. It's a perceived climate of fear that has instilled this in the sport's participants and media over the years. Step out of line and the fear is that reprisals could be swift and harsh, and Max is one of the key arbiters of what that line is.

But then the question was asked of Nico. His reply was very smart in that he made his position very plain without specifically referring to Max's situation. "If you're a figure, like us... you've got to try to set a good example in general because a lot of people are watching you and looking up to what you do... I'm just talking about my situation."

As Lewis was listening to this you could see him agreeing and he duly concurred when it was his turn to answer: "We all, especially the young people, are looking up to someone to show us the way."

In the fear-filled climate of modern F1, that's as close as any driver is ever going to get to voicing a heartfelt opinion about a controversial subject. And the subject of role models was an interesting one. Drivers have always been role models - but I much preferred it when they were role models of anti-authority, not of compliance to The Man.

Can you imagine Mario Andretti, Gilles Villeneuve, Patrick Depailler, Jody Scheckter, James Hunt or Niki Lauda 'preferring not to comment' on any matter they had an opinion on? They were the stars of the show, beholden to no one. The current crop of drivers are actually no less personable and opinionated than those guys, but operate in a very different environment.

They are very much beholden. They have become employees in the widest sense, whereas their predecessors were that only on paper. They risked their necks to a far greater degree than now and the shadow they cast as they flew so close to the flame was very long. As heroic figures, they answered to no one.

The more money the sport generated, the more those who marshalled the sport sought to control it. The logical conclusion has been Mosley's iron-clad fist and along the way the drivers - and the press - have been neutered.

It's come at some cost to Max too. His need for absolute authority has led to apparent vindictiveness unworthy of someone of his intellect. Take the matter of McLaren's garage position in Bahrain. For reasons of logistics, Bernie Ecclestone had them lined up in fifth place in the first two races. For Bahrain Mosley told Ecclestone to move them to the bottom "for reasons of consistency" because they were last in the constructors' championship. But was this just another attempt at humiliating Ron Dennis, given that McLaren is partly owned by the Bahrainis?

This sort of thing comes back to bite. A few months ago the big story was Max's attack on Sir Jackie Stewart. Where did Jackie stay during the Bahrain GP weekend? At the royal palace of course. From where the prince sent his message to Max not to turn up in light of the newspaper story.

Love of Power

Max has done many good things for the sport. But it's difficult not to feel that his love of power - and the level of control necessary to maintain that power - has led him to create the very environment that's entrapped him. If the sport had continued to be a game for pirates rather than corporate monkeys, if it had spurned the big money to keep its purity, if technically outlandish cars wildly different from each other, built by specialist constructors, and driven by outspoken heroes, did battle on the track, then who would have cared what the sport's president got up to in his spare time?

He would not be representing entities that for reasons of commerce needed to project a squeaky clean image. He would not need to concern himself with what constituted 'bringing the sport into disrepute'. He would have no need to be dealing with heads of state. He would not have needed to have to have been so absolute in using his power to retain control, and there would not be a long line of people with every reason to want to dig up dirt on him.

A certain disrepute would in fact be central to the sport's appeal. It would be a sport that was a refreshing antidote to the clean and non-believable mores of commerce. But it would be a minority interest sport. We'd love it. It wouldn't be compromised to favour the monied interests, and enthusiasts wouldn't have to tolerate their sport being simplified and blandified for the mass market.

But it would be a sport that wielded no clout in the world. It wouldn't measure its audience in billions. And where, for Max, would be the fun, the power, in running that?