The biggest shock of the Canadian Grand Prix weekend thus far has been the discovery that within the paddock lurk a group of rational people able to come to a logical agreement on F1's labyrinthine rules and regulations.
The news that the team managers have unilaterally agreed to scrap proposals to bring back refuelling was incredible. For the first time in years, F1's team representatives found themselves in agreement. Not only that, but their decision was backed by not one, not two, but three rational arguments.
Self-interest was cast to one side when it emerged that not only was in-race refuelling more costly and potentially hazardous, but had also been statistically proven to have a negative impact on the number of overtaking moves seen on a Sunday.
For seasoned paddock observers, the simple fact that all ten teams had managed to reach an accord on something - on anything, including which day of the week it was - proved to be a bigger shock than Fernando Alonso announcing that he was leaving Formula One for a life as a professional street mime, or a budget-conscious Lewis Hamilton confessing that he prefers to buy his bling from Claire's Accessories.
Given that the team managers were able to succeed where their team principals had failed, perhaps a new approach to F1 decision-making should be considered. All and sundry now appear to be in agreement that the F1 Strategy Group is not fit for purpose as it is currently run, so why not abdicate responsibility for discussing proposed regulatory changes to the team managers, expanding the group to include all ten?
The F1SG is supposed to be a discussion forum, not a regulatory body, although that argument holds little water when you consider the proposed regulation changes - not least the cost controls that were supposed to be introduced this year - that have been scuppered by the Strategy Group even after they had been announced to the world by the sport's regulatory body (also known as the FIA).
F1's team managers are uniquely positioned within the sport - the job involves pragmatic oversight of everything from budgets and logistics to personnel responsibilities. The human element of the role requires team managers to be able to balance priorities and competing interests without engendering any ill-will within the team itself, and it is that balance of priorities and competing interests that has proved to be so impossible for the F1SG to manage.
Pragmatism is not a quality in plentiful supply in Formula One. This is a sport which rewards envelope-pushing and split-second decision-making on both track and pit wall, and it is hard to find people with both the temerity to pull off feats of derring-do and the prudence to sit back and consider the greater good, the long-term consequences.
But every once in a while the few pragmatists in the pack do win out, as happened in Thursday's team managers' meeting. For F1 to reach the logical conclusion with ease should be celebrated, and those responsible should be afforded more opportunity to spread their pragmatism around the paddock.