Playing off the WRC

Imagine using two balls in a soccer match. Imagine allowing 20 players per side in a rugby team. Imagine holding a two-hour Grand Prix only to then decide the winner by a one-lap race between the podium finishers.

Although the essence of the 'sport' remains unchanged, with these fake scenarios the fundamental dynamics dramatically change.

But if Ford have their way, something like this could actually happen to the World Rally Championship.

At last weekend's Monte Carlo Rally, Ford Team RS director Jost Captio firmly nailed the Blue Oval's mast to a radical plan to have a televised and meaningful superspecial stage to end each rally.

There are various ideas being suggested, but one variation on this 'meaningful' format means that a driver could enter the final stage with a comfortable two-minute lead in his pocket, yet still lose the rally.

The idea would be to line up the ninth and tenth placed runners in the superspecial to decide the ninth placed finisher in the rally. This would then be followed by match-ups for the seventh and eighth-placed drivers and so on, until the ultimate shoot-out - a play-off between the top two for the overall rally win itself.

There are other variations on that theme, but the idea is seriously being looked at. Radical? Yes. Bad idea? Not necessarily.

The idea of having play-off matches in a superspecial stage to decide rallies surfaced last September, but this was the first time a manufacturer has come out so strongly in favour of a format based on such an idea.

"It is important we increase the coverage of our events, and the only way to get an exciting live finish is to organise a superspecial with meaning to end the event," Capito says.

"There must be some decision rather than drivers just cruising round at the end. We need to find a way that respects rallying and keeps the sport of rallying as an endurance event, but it is important we change and have live television coverage on a Sunday."

Captio admits the practicalities of the idea have yet to be worked out, but any driver going into the superspecial with a lead could have it turned into a headstart in a superspecial.

"We need to work on the details and find a solution that people are happy with and the sport is respected," he adds. "But if the WRC is to survive as a top-level manufacturer and professional sport, then this idea is the only way for it to survive. We need exciting ends to rallies.

"What we can't do is make it too complicated to understand for the viewers. If you had a two-minute advantage over 200 km then that could equate to 0.6 seconds over 1km. Then over a 2km superspecial the green light for the second competitor could go on 1.2 seconds after the other one.

"Other ways could be to use brackets of time - say, between 30 seconds and a minute and the one and two minutes or whatever, and allow simply half a second advantage for every bracket they cross.

"I'm confident that something will be introduced at some time in the future. Maybe 2007 is too fast and we would need some trials this year, but maybe it is the right time to introduce it when it becomes a winter series in 2007/2008. But I think it will happen eventually."

Rallying will always survive on the world stage but with manufacturers dropping out like flies, now is a crucial time to decide whether the WRC continues as a professional or privateer sport.

The way other global spectator sports have grown in the modern era puts rallying in the shade. Multi-million dollar contracts are negotiated worldwide for the televising of soccer matches and Formula One. The World Cup and the Olympics are the most viewed events on television around the world.

WRC events, spread out over three days and many kilometres of stages, make it extremely difficult to cover and be a viable commercial proposition for television. Despite relatively recent switches to centralised service parks and the soon to be introduced winter season, the WRC just doesn't generate the worldwide media attention in the same league as other top league sporting world championships.

It can be argued that if the WRC ever has ambitions of coming close to the worldwide audience of these sports, then radical change must be made.

A superspecial play-off idea could alienate a handful of hardened rally fans, but that would have to be weighed up against the benefits of the live coverage and drama that would be created, bringing more fans and therefore manufacturers and prestige into the sport.

NASCAR offers one recent example of how radical change, despite initial fears, has helped increase television viewership and interest. In 2004, the American racing series tried something just as radical to decide how its title was won over 36 races.

There was unrest in 2003 when the consistency-rewarding points' system meant that Matt Kenseth (with one victory) cruised to clinch the title early rather than Ryan Newman (with eight victories). So series organisers changed the rules for 2004, to guarantee an exciting title race.

With ten races to go, the top ten drivers now have their points reset and compete in a mini series - called the Chase for the Cup - to decide the overall champion.

There was public outcry when the idea was first suggested. Many thought the sanctity of the sport had been broken by the then-new sponsor Nextel. The system meant that a driver with a seemingly unassailable championship lead could have it wiped out with ten races to go and be beaten to the flag by someone who scraped into 10th place.

But it turned out to be a success. Viewing figures went through the roof, and interest was formed at the usually quieter parts of the season when people were switching off. There now was a Chase 'qualifying' element to the first 26 races, and everyone was interested in who would make the final ten. Then there was the Chase itself, which went down to the final lap of the 2004 season.

Because of Sebastien Loeb's dominance, there were many WRC events last year when anyone could switch off and lose interest. But a superspecial on Sunday afternoon could, just like the Chase did with NASCAR, provide interest where they isn't any.

David Lapworth, Capito's counterpart at Subaru, urges some caution with the play-off idea, however.

"A live TV spectacle would be good for the sport," Lapworth says, "but there are still a lot of questions to ask. This idea is such a radical one that it will need careful thinking and regulation, otherwise we will have cars built purely to run on that superspecial, which would push the costs up. It would require special tactics and tyres.

"If we could get a sponsor to put up a trophy and a cash prize for the best driver over the year on the televised superspecials, then that is an idea worth looking at.

"The play-off idea is extreme and doesn't fit with the sporting purity of rallying. If we are going to use the play-off idea, then an idea of only having the play-offs for drivers within certain timeframes is worth looking at.

"If a driver had a lead of more than a minute then they could keep that win, but if they were only out front by ten seconds, then the other driver behind had earned the right to play off against them.

"You can't deny that a play-off would provide drama, and people want to watch drama on television. We may hate penalty shoot-outs (in soccer) but nobody goes to turn the kettle on during them. But penalties are not used when someone has won by 4-0. They are only used to settle draws, and I like the idea of that being true in rallying."

Whatever the sport decides to do about this, the drivers need to be onside. The last thing the WRC needs is a revolt from its biggest stars who don't want to change how they compete on a Sunday afternoon.

When the play-off idea was first suggested, back in September 2005, Sebastian Loeb said: "This is not what the sport is about. There would be zero reason to fight on the proper stages if the rally is going to be decided on two kilometres in a stadium or something like that."

Marcus Gronholm then also publicly denounced the idea, but now as Ford driver, his opinion has changed, according to Capito. "Marcus didn't like the idea initially but we have spoken about it now and he also sees it as a necessity," Captio adds. "I explained it all to him and he went away to think about it and he agrees that this is the leading solution to increase the value of the championship."

To implement such a meaningful superspecial will be brave and will require the unanimous support from all factions of the sport.

But to dismiss the current wave of ideas would be unwise. The purists will still have three days of regular rallying to enjoy, and it is just a question of how such an idea devalues the nature of the competition.

A live superspecial shoot-out for victory is not exactly rallying as we know it, but who would be turning their television off?

We want to hear from you!

Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.

Take our survey

- The Autosport.com Team

Read and post comments