Warning: long rant ahead.
A few days ago, Curt Kavin from the Indianapolis Star made a mid-season review and gave grades to each team. He gave KV Racing an "F", stating that the teams' results were relatively poor, considering its huge ressources. Kavin then received some critics from mail and Twitter for his negative comments.
Then, later, in his
"Trackside" radio show(brilliant stuff, if I may add), he apologised, saying something like(paraphrasing): "I'm sorry if I offended anyone. Sometimes when you write things, it is hard to match your thoughts exactly. You only realise that when you re-read yourself. I didn't mean to write such negative comments. If I had to do it again, I would have given KV a better grade, and turned things into a more positive way".
The reason why I took this example is, I thought this was a brilliant quote, and I belive it applies to this thread very well.
I'm sure all of us in this thread would approve of the new managements' actions,
overall. I'm sure that all of us think the series is going the right way since the reunification. And last thing - I'm sure everyone would agree that since March 2012, we have witnessed some of the finest American Open Wheel races for a long while, and one of the best Indy 500 of recent history.
The thing is, as race fans, we are perfectionists. We tend to take the things that are going well as "granted", and focus instead on the things that could be improved.
As race fans, we are also traditionalists. Most of us think that
at least some aspects of yesterday's racing was better... And are affraid of changes that could drive today's racing even further than what it was yesterday.
When you think about it... Many mainstream sports such as soccer, basketball or else, have had a similar ruleset for decades, and very few changes since then. In motorsports, especially in Indy-style racing, mostly due to the changes in terms of technology, aswell as different standards in terms of safety and "entertainment", we are changing rules year after year. Sometimes, even race by race.
When it is introduced in order to kill a bad and well known problem, this kind of sudden rule changes are perceived relatively well(ie: aero fixes before the latest Texas race, in order to kill the potential risks of "pack racing").
On the other hand, when it comes when many feel like there is no
problem to cure, this kind of rule change can become unpopular.
Maybe bringing back push to pass was a good idea. Maybe it wasn't. Time will tell.
Now thing is, the street and road course racing product has arguably never been this good under IRL/IndyCar sanctionning, since the first ever IRL street course - St Pete 2005. In those conditions, is the "gamble" of messing with the racing product worth it? Is the very slight decrease in terms of power worth to take - while drivers and fans alike want to go the other way and have
a lot more power?
But you're right Jack. Those things are just mere details, and don't influence IndyCar's situation in the big picture. From one's point of vue, the reaction they created could be perceived as "over-the-top".
Now, I don't think the fans are annoyed by the (re-)introduction of push to pass itself. In fact, they are mostly getting tired by the endless rule changes - sometimes with arguable, and "unknown" motivations behind them. And those are hurting the sports' stability.
And, while it's still recovering from the wounds of a terrible, destructing 12 years long split, this is one of the things American Open Wheel Racing needs the most: stability. It is one of the most important elements it needs to get, if it wants to get its former credibility back.
Sorry for the long post
(I missed the whole race on a run to the store