Personal View

Surely something must be seriously wrong within the corridors of power at MSA Inc when it is able to create a scenario in which major manufacturers involved in UK rallying are at loggerheads both with each other, and the MSA itself, over the future of the British Rally Championship.

But the background, which I am sure will become the foreground (or should that be battleground?) in the not too distant future, is even more disturbing. For we find that apparently the MSA totally disregarded the views of its long-time manufacturer supporters (namely Vauxhall, VW and Peugeot). And if that's not bad enough, apparently it didn't even the courtesy to discuss its plans with anyone else – and by anyone else I mean the other senior UK rally championship organisers.

Why should they? Because, to put it simply, the MSA is the ruling body for motor sport in the UK, and this must confer on it a certain care and duty to protect the interests of all who organise, sponsor and participate in the sport.

So let's look at how caring and dutiful it's been in this particular situation.....

For some months now, the stated MSA line has been that F2, and perhaps Group N, should form the basis of the BRC for the foreseeable future – with maybe F3 (or whatever the junior formula is to be called) if and when it appears. This allows the other championships and events to decide what classes and categories they will allow (and in most cases this is arranged so as not to clash with the BRC) to guarantee their own long-term futures. These other championships do, of course, look for long-term stability – they're not in the business of instant, knee-jerk reactions.

Then what does our illustrious ruling body do? The biggest U-turn in its history. It allows World Rally Cars and class A8 into the BRC for 2001.

Where does that leave everyone else? In a massive quandary, that's where. Do ANCRO or the BTRDA, for example, now go F2 for their future, or will the MSA now dream up another way of seeming to try to wreck these fine championships?

And what of the manufacturers? Will Vauxhall, VW and Peugeot now decide to organise their own F2 rally series? And, if they do, what events will they choose? Can the UK stand another series? Will Vauxhall and Sony still sponsor their two rounds of the BRC? If they don't, is the MSA going to underwrite the inevitable losses on these events?

Why has all this happened? Simply because the MSA has taken a purely selfish approach to protect its vested interest in its own championship.

Talking of vested interests, the MSA must also be held up for critical scrutiny because of its decision to run a glorified single-venue event as a round of the BRC 2000. How can the man who is heading the MSA team possibly be the same person who has observed other events for inclusion (and in some cases rejection) in this year's series? How can he be fair and objective?

At the same time, we might also ask a darker question with regard to the MSA's own regulations. Have a look at MSA regulations B3.2.1 and K2.2 in the 'Blue Book' and ask yourself: how can an event that has never previously been run suddenly attain international status without any form of observation?

And how about this little nugget, hidden away on page 17 of the 15 March 2000 issue of Motoring News? It tells us that the Forestry Commission is waiving the cost of re-using stages on the Vauxhall Rally of Wales and the Rally of Scotland (two rounds of the MSA BRC championship!) which will enable "amateur" drivers to take advantage of discounted entry fees.

Let's consider this. On two rounds of the MSA's own rally championship, the organisers will be able to save some 40% of their forest hire costs if they run stages more than once – and hence give their competitors cheaper entry fees.

Superb! Excellent! Hurrah! But wait....every other forest event in the UK, in which all the drivers are amateurs, will now be at a disadvantage because the organisers will have to pay the full Forestry Commission rate for the second use of stages.

Can someone please explain how this helps anyone except drivers on two of the BRC rounds, and therefore the MSA itself?

All these activities look like a monumental example of rule-bending, or even blatant flouting of the regulations to achieve the MSA's own aims – financial aims which are not compatible with its own primary role as the sport's governing body.

This most serious set of circumstances demands a thorough independent review (independent of the MSA that is), although the MSA may, of course, be called upon to give evidence along with all the other interested parties.

Over the last few years, several informed practitioners of UK rallying have called for a complete overhaul of the structure of all UK rally championships. They have also called for a review of the qualifications of drivers; their vehicles; and the status of events they can enter – i.e. the logic of World Rally Cars in the hands of wealthy but inexperienced young drivers on single-venue events; or a rank novice skill-wise finishing last on four lower-grade UK events, and then being allowed to do the Network Q Rally of Great Britain in the same WRC car!

What's been the response? A sage nodding of heads at Colnbrook, surprised intakes of breath, and murmurings about 'restrictions of trade'. Apart from that, absolutely nothing.

Ultimately, the case for an independent review, or a think-tank of non-aligned experts who have the long-term future of the sport at heart, is the only answer. But – and it's a big but – the MSA will have to accept that, as the ruling body, it has a duty to care for all and not just itself.