PR or not to PR

In a world where less manufacturers enter motorsport to try and cut costs, Motorsport relies on sponsorship and big money deals to keep the drivers driving. So, it is only natural then that teams that do manage to get sponsorship deals or works drives, try to get value for their backers. A current tend at the moment is to blame parts of the car failing that the team hasn't made.

Picture the scene. You have millions of pounds of sponsors behind the racing team. Maybe you have a few company chiefs visiting the circuit and eating pasta in your hospitality tent. Then the car breaks down. Disappointingly so. The inevitable TV, trackside and website interviews happen, so what do you say? Clearly, your investors are number one priority.

See that wing flapping? Alan Gow's personal fault that is..

So, what has been said in the BTCC of late goes something along the lines of this. "Well, we showed strong pace in practice with the Morrison's Bargain Bananas Mazda so I was really looking forward to the race, I think we had a good shot at a podium. What a shame that one of the TOCA supplied common components, that the Morrison's Bargain Bananas team have nothing to do with at all, failed. It's something that we have no control over and something that we are forced to use, forced to use I say, so a real shame that our hands were tied" etc etc...

You see. Crisis avoided. Wasn't the teams fault, blame it on the regs. Sponsors happy. Or are they...? Here's the rub. Things break. Fairly often. Especially in racing. It is part of the game. I don't think anyone would really begrudge a team and their backers if once in a while the car broke down as fans expect it to happen a few times in a season. So firstly, to blame specific parts failures on the governing body so quickly puts everyone's back against the wall. You certainly wouldn't here something like "well, the Brembo brakes broke and we didn't make them so it's not our fault. Honest". There are thousands of components in a racing car, a lot of them made by outside companies. Do drivers signal out Xtrac by name every time there is a drivetrain problem? No, of course not.

But more prominent is that all this finger pointing is negative for the series and the set of NGTC regulations as a whole. These are newish rules. Most teams are new to the rules. Lets go to MG as a case study. At Croft, they had an electrical problem that appeared at the end of qualifying and for the first race of the day on one car. A certain driver was then understandably upset. In an interview it is fair to say that the TOCA supplied electrical components we heavily critised.Thus shifting blame from the team and hopefully pleasing the representatives of MG, who were visiting the race meeting from China. But, if you point the fingers at the TOCA parts, this is ultimately undermining the regulations and you could see the case of Tesco & MG thinking their money could be taken to another series. Mention TOCA parts and problems too many times and it damages the reputation of the series, potentially making it harder for sponsorship deals. Not just for your team, but others in the championship too.

Will impresses his sponsors

It is, of course, a hard line to balance. I'm not suggesting for a moment never to pass the buck, but there is a point where things could quite easily actually be a negative thing. On at least 3 occasions his year, the MG drivers have "passed the buck". A similar thing has happened (and arguably still happening) in IndyCar of late. It is clear to see that there are underlying problems with the cars, engines, regulations and governing body. But a public spat never, ever, helped anyone. Not the drivers, not the teams and not the championship. We all enjoy racing and a healthy debate is always interesting, but sometimes I wish the taste wasn't so bitter.