Australian drag racing is in crisis. The guest editorial penned by Willowbank track manager Dennis Syrmis in DRAGSTER No. 500 was the first public shot in a campaign by the Australian drag racing promoters that appears to put an end point on the life of ANDRA as it's become known, and in the meantime race tracks and the sport from North Queensland to the West Coast are hurting. The general opinion of many racers around the country is that effectively ANDRA is already dead.

Before the 1998 ANDRA Annual General Meeting there was much talk but no confirmation that the Australian Drag Racing Promoters Association had issued an ultimatum to ANDRA, that it either seriously altered its structure and operational methods or the promoters would withdraw their support and form a new drag racing sanctioning body of their own.

Now there are no ifs or buts, and the campaign is out in the open. That campaign was boosted two weeks ago by the release from Syrmis of a much extended version of his DRAGSTER guest editorial. (Go to We Will NOT Let This Happen)

Clearly Australian drag racing has reached a watershed, and significant changes will have to be made, either by the promoters or by the racers, in the sport's administration.

The promoters are clamouring for a more businesslike organization, without the cumbersome ties to a club-based Divisional Council system, while the racers, mostly those who regularly attend and support the DC's, have been adamant that the system which theoretically gives them a democratic say in all activities of the sanctioning body should remain just as it is.

The rift between the promoters and the racers has remained as one of the constants of Australian drag racing since the sport's very beginnings. Racers have long argued that the promoters run the sport, not just at the track but also at Head Office level.

"The question of whether the promoters should be a part of the National Control Council has been around as long as ANDRA," said ANDRA CEO Tony Thornton. "Drag racing relies totally on this group to fund tracks and events for the sport. This is pretty much the case in other forms of motorsport but ANDRA was the only body with the foresight to directly involve this group in the administration from day one.

"The promoters have contributed greatly to the progress of the sport and ANDRA over the last 25 years. We could be forgiven for thinking it's backfired on us at the moment, but there have been other periods where the promoters and ANDRA have been at loggerheads."

Notwithstanding this view, the racers feel that the promoters act only in their own interests and regard the racers as expendable cannon fodder on the road to making unreasonable profits, and certainly there have been occasions when unwise actions by some promoters have seemed to support such a notion.

Drag racing is a complex sport, especially for something which is theoretically so simple: Racing between two vehicles from a standing start over a measured distance. The staging of a major event is an intricate undertaking, involving numerous opportunities for errors to occur. The bottom line is that the event has to go off and provide some sort of coherent entertainment for spectators and to provide the best possible result for the organizers and the mass of racers, all within fairly tight time constraints.

When errors do occur racers become irritated, and often see only their situation and demand it be corrected (usually involving reruns). If time does not permit this, the event manager has to make a call, and usually can only say, "sorry, but we don't have time", which is usually read as "we're not interested in your problem". The image grows that the promoter is only interested in himself.

There's little that can be done about such clashes, but they feed an image that is compounded by promoters sometimes seeming to manipulate racers or racing. There is a deep, in-built belief, fostered by apocryphal accounts of one racer being played off against another, or different offers on the table to different racers for the same event. On the surface, at least, all racers will pay lip service, at least, to the need for equality, even if all those who are offered bonus money never turn it down.

There are some logical reasons for feeling that the promoters are going to have the overall best interests of the sport in mind. Obviously if the sport fails, so do their business ventures, and a healthy sport means plenty of racers, big crowds and good returns.

At the moment all race tracks are under substantial financial pressure. An alarming level of rainouts and other difficulties beyond anyone's control, along with declining crowds in some areas, has left many struggling to cope. Smaller tracks are battling just to stay afloat; larger tracks are carrying debts, making substantial increases in charges, especially to racers (which is feeding the old prejudices), or contracting their services and options, while fighting to deal with the maintenance of sufficient operating capital.

But racers remain skeptical, and even hostile. One racer who expressed the opinions of many was Pro Stock racer Joe Polito.

"Every time I talk about this stuff I get so steamed up. If I abused a customer every time one came into the driveway I wouldn't have any customers left after a while, but every racer has had to wear abuse from a promoter at some time. If you have a difference with someone you don't stand up at a driver's briefing and tell them to f--- off. And I've seen that happen more than once. The philosphy of "the customer is always right" is always right, but their attitude is we don't need you, you need us, and that's wrong.

"It's alright to say times are tough, so let's chop this class or that class, but these classes were created by these guys. Every Division voted against the Top Doorslammer concept, but the promoters pushed it through. They created it. But if you add a bracket to the list it means you have to pay out more, so I'm not interested in hearing from them that they haven't got enough money now. ANDRA and the racers didn't create this situation, the promoters did.

"I've got half a million dollars tied up in my race operation and now I have to listen to someone telling me that I have to change everything. Pro Stock is still racing for the same $15,500 prizemoney package that came in in 1994. The year before last I won everything there was to win, and my total prizemoney take was $18,400. Last season I came close enough to almost win the championship, but I still didn't win enough money to pay for one cylinder head. I never expected to make money out of this, but it's getting a bit rich when I hear how the promoters have to keep their profit margins up while my costs keep going higher.

"These people ought to sit back and ask what's this business about, and what do we need to make it work."

A different view came from ANDRA's Thornton. "There's always been a perception that if you had just about anything with a big engine and slicks on the back (one or two), there should be a place for you to race. Over the years, driven by both promoters and racers, the ANDRA system has added brackets and classes without a great deal of thought for the long term problems. Some of these have been very good initially, but in the constant quest to please as many people as possible we've sometimes made adjustments and changes that have lost the original concept. Others have produced outstanding competition yet provided little in the way of crowd appeal.

"That's brought us to the point where the ANDRA system no longer provides what the tracks think they need. Whether they're right or wrong is not the issue. Hybrid brackets are being created and the fact that some get solid competitor support and generate spectator interest should tell us something.

"When was the last time ANDRA deleted a bracket? I don't think it's something we'd like to dwell on, but there are areas where it's necessary. Brackets like Top Comp are undermining ANDRA Championship eliminators at the local level . . . What we should be doing is asking ourselves why this is happening.

"The content of championship events used to be the same as other events during the season. Now they are almost the exception to the rule. In the same way that many members are resisting changes to the ANDRA structure, most racers feel very comfortable in their current situation. Unfortunately, the fact remains that change must happen can't be avoided. The 'product' that ANDRA offers to the promoters needs to be repackaged at least. It also has to be more 'cost effective'."

The prizemoney issue remains one of the hottest in drag racing today. This sport grew up paying prizemoney from gate takings with some measure of payment at all levels of competition. It's been a burden which race tracks have learned to live with in some way, and in fact, in past years there were many race events promoted over the level of prizemoney: the "$10,000 Nationals", the "$28,000 Grand Finals", and so on.

Promoters chose to make a big deal out of it, but now, with the rising interest in competing at Group One level and the addition of brackets which did not exist a decade ago the purse has ballooned out to figures approaching $200,000 for some major events, and the risk factor has multiplied enormously. As long as an event is promoted well and has a good reputation there should be more than enough in gate takings to pay for it all, but if it rains, even away in suburbia somewhere profits can evaporate.

The racers have come to live with the lack of sponsors and to depend on the prizemoney, but with the increasingly tough level of competition the cost of racing have blown out through the roof for many. It's a situation that's only been compounded by the reduced value of the dollar.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, there is a deep distrust of the promoters. And almost universally there is now at least a grudging admission that there should be changes to the way ANDRA operates.

The clubs that have traditionally been the kernel of drag racing membership and operational procedure, since the old Australian Hot Rod Federation was formed back in 1964 by two state-based clubs in Melbourne and Sydney, now form the core of the battle to modify the system.

Those in favour of change argue against club-based membership of ANDRA, and believe the clubs should be no more than social groupings with no special representation at DC (Divisonal Council) level. They argue in favour of racer-based committees structured around classifications of racing.

Thornton, however, has a different view.

"It was about 1991 when I first suggested that Divisional Councils be made up of one delegate from each ANDRA club. With the clubs as the first step, the Divisional Councils are supposed to refine and channel opinions and input at state level. Some Divisional Councils operate as little more than clubs these days. There's a turnover of delegates which means no continuity and in some cases just about anyone can take part in the meetings.

"There's too much focus on politics and personal attacks these days - the Divisional Councils have become a great place to have a go because they're closer to the top and give the comment credibility. Sometimes there seems to be more concern about what other Divisions are doing than where ANDRA is going, or just as importantly how it's going to get there. I think the Divisional Councils and ANDRA deserve more than that.

"Right now some Division Directors are not allowed to have opinions. The elections are too expensive to just find out who's going to 'carry the parchments' to the big meeting. If the Division Director can't operate with some flexibility there can be no debate and developments at NCC (National Control Council) level. We're actually doing what we criticize the promoters for - pushing the local opinions at the expense of the national interest. We need to know what racers, members and the sport need in each region, so we can tailor a single result that protects their interest as far as possible - we can't produce six (different) results.

"The system needed a change long before the promoters jumped on the bandwagon."

The contradictory history of plans for constitutional changes and operational changes to ANDRA highlights the lack of direction and purpose in the body in the past year. In August 1997 the annual ANDRA AGM recognized the need for change, and the NCC members went home with instructions to think about what might be necessary and to come back to a special NCC meeting the following May at which all the basic wrinkles would be ironed out, prior to airing the changes at Divisional Council meetings before the 1998 AGM. The matter was published at the time, through the media and the Divisions and clubs and hardly a submission was received.

The basis of the initially proposed changes was that there would be, according to a written summary of the issue from Thornton, "locally based technical groups representing the relevant areas of competition . . . working separately from the Divisional Council, which would focus more on the policy and support issues that are so important. An expanded National Executive was also proposed.

"Not long into the (May) meeting the subject of the club system was raised. With no clear support for the first proposal, discussion continued. The remainder of the weekend was spent developing a format that satisfied the NCC. Agreement was reached and the last step was to redraft the constitution. The changes were put on notice in June, and circulated in complete form in late July."

The amended structure was circulated, in varying levels of efficiency, through the DC's before the August AGM, which became, by all accounts, one of the most difficult in the sport's history. There was universal instructions from the DC's for the Divisional Directors to reject the proposals.

This they did, and it was only after a good deal of grudging argument that an amended version of the proposals was passed (see below the list of concessions agreed to). The vote was narrowly in favour of the amendments after several of the Divisional Directors changed their stand, but the divisions have responded angrily to what they see as a betrayal by their DD's, and a repudiation of the instructions from the delegates.

At the moment there's a brooding standoff with the divisions on one side and the promoters on the other.

ANDRA CEO Tony Thornton remains skeptical of any move by the promoters, and believes that ANDRA can adapt and fit the needs of the sport. He perceives the need for change, and is often frustrated by the lack of support from his NCC and the inflexibility now being demanded of the system by the Divisions.

"I'm staggered at the way in which people are prepared to grasp at rumour and innuendo. Every organization goes through its peaks and troughs. I think Australian drag racing needs to stand outside itself and take a look at what is needed to sort this out.

"The major problem is that drag raing has failed to adapt to changes in the marketplace. I remember when video recorders first came out, and everyone said this would kill the movie industry, but the movie houses adapated and now they've bounced back bigger than ever.

"Drag racing has so many opportunities. We can run with revised formats, three hour shows, finishing early on Saturday night, but nobody wants to change anything.

"I don't even know if the NCC even knows what it wants itself.

"I don't want to run drag racing with an iron fist, I just want to see it go forward, and I do think I have some of the answers. I want people to belong to ANDRA not because they want to but because it's worth it.

"Rightly or wrongly, the promoters do have the ability to do what they're threatening, which is forming another body, but in the same way that ANDRA couldn't function without the promoters and their tracks they can't function without the racers."

The cyclical history of drag racing's ups and downs (major peaks in 1965-66, 1969-70, 1974-75, 1980-81, 1990-1995, with often deep troughs between) imply a lack of long term planning and control. The failings in planning are eveidenced in the ad hoc addition of new brackets without any apparent willingness to consider removing others, the lack of structured targets and planned paths to achieve those goals, the apparent willingness to reinvent the wheel (for example, the decision to draft new rules on indexes even when the NHRA had a proven and time tested policy on the subject, which even if not perfect for the Australian system would have been much closer to the mark than what was first introduced), and the failure to understand the nature of the changing automotive marketplace, where fours and sixes, and electronic fuel injection - whether we like it or not - are playing an ever more important role, and carburetors and mechanical injection and V8's are daily becoming more vintage in their application.

"We are currently going through one of the most trying periods ANDRA has experienced," concluded Thornton. "Some of the challenges we faced in the late 80's are with us again . . .

"Other things are better. There are more racers. Drag racing's worth a lot more than it was, and ANDRA has a sound financial base and worthwhile assets . . . I believe drag racing is mart enough that it can identify the hurdles it faces and deal with them, or go round. Every member of ANDRA has a reponsibility to give their association everything it needs to recognize challenges and opportunities, react quickly and service its members and the sport with the efficiency people have come to expect in the 90's."

All of this notwithstanding, drag standing stands here today wondering what went wrong. Five years ago there seemed to be no limit, now there seems to be no obvious solution.

The failings are in the sport's apparent inability to read the signs, make the hard decisions and adapt. None of these failings are the fault of any one individual, they are the failings of the system. The lack of freedom and flexibility available to Divisional Directors locked into a system which chews up and spits out the capable has left us too often with people doing the job simply because nobody else wanted to. It's no way to manage a hundred million dollar a year business, and that's what drag racing's become.

Drag racing does have the ability to adapt, and as untidy as the next few months will be, there will be solutions found. We can only plead for a measure of flexibility and mature commonsense.