After the recent rally, the debate surrounding the new points system resurfaced, particularly fueled by the frustrations of the Toyota driver, who finished second behind his teammate. Despite his commendable performance, Evans felt the system didn’t adequately reward his efforts. He garnered 19 points over the weekend, matching his title rival Thierry Neuville’s tally, but still trails Neuville by six points in the championship standings.
A peculiar outcome of the points structure was Ott Tanak’s accumulation of 20 points, one less than the rally winner, Sebastien Ogier, despite finishing fourth. Tanak’s points distribution showcased the nuances of the new system, with 10 points from Saturday, six from Sunday standings, and four from the Power Stage.
Evans expressed his dissatisfaction, citing instances where substantial efforts seemed to yield minimal rewards under the new system. He highlighted Adrien Fourmaux’s scenario, where despite spending significant time repairing his car, Fourmaux earned only 13 points, raising questions about the fairness and effectiveness of the current scoring method.
Andrew Wheatley, the FIA’s road sport director, acknowledged the ongoing monitoring of the points system but emphasized the difficulty of altering it mid-season due to the requirement of unanimous agreement among all competitors. Despite some criticisms, Wheatley noted the system’s success in achieving its primary goal of enhancing Sunday’s action.
Alongside his discontent with the points system, Evans lamented a tactical error regarding tire choice, which contributed to his spin in stage 18, ultimately dashing his hopes of victory. Reflecting on the decision to opt for more hard tires than his rivals, Evans acknowledged it as a significant mistake, as the conditions turned out to be worse than anticipated, leading to the costly spin.
The rally’s aftermath witnessed a blend of exhilaration and frustration among drivers, with discussions revolving around the points system’s impact on reward mechanisms and strategic decisions. As the season progresses, stakeholders continue to evaluate the system’s efficacy and fairness, aiming to strike a balance between incentivizing competitive performances and maintaining the integrity of the sport.