Bizarre happenings ..

1. Ferrari sticking the knife into the FIA
2. I'm finding myself agreeing with them..

very weird.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80013

Mike P

On 4 Nov, 20:43, Mike P <priv... (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote:
Well... Ferrari was quite vocal during the "great standoff" earlyer
this year, so it's hardly surprising they keep the same line.

fantastic allusion, the Agatha Christie one

I'm not sure I agree entirely, though their point does seem to have
plenty of merit. These ridiculus cost-cutting measures, in particular
the test-cutting, I do find quite bad. a "plan" against manufaturers?
don't know... though it definitely seemed like there was some bad
blood between a few teams and the Top Brass.

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:01:28 -0800, emuLOAD hollered:

I just thought that was Anti-Max bluster really. I'm quite surprised at
this little outburst. I thought once JT was installed, everything would
be smooth sailing again.

Very dark. Brilliant. Makes it sound like some evil plot

It seemed like an anti-max thing from all the teams. I'm not sure if it
was him or the FIA they were against, or whether the FIA agreed with his
ideas and FOTA were against the organisation as a whole.

I think we'll just have to wait and see what, if any changes JT and FOTA
working together can make. For one, the testing ban has to go, it's
ridiculous.

Mike P

Mike P wrote:

Well, let's hope JT can talk the teams out of it, then. It was the
teams that wanted the test ban. Max thought it was a bit too strict,
but since that's what they wanted, then that's what they got.

-Webs-

On 4 Nov, 21:17, Mike P <priv... (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote:

parties do have some conflicting interests, and neither Ferrari nor
Todt can be said to be pushovers, especially when their interests are
at stake!

One interesting thing comes to light, however, when reading the
article carefully. the article quotes the Ferrari statement:

"In reality the steady trickle of desertion is more the result of a
war
against the big car manufacturers by those who _managed_ the
sport, than the effects of the economical that affected Formula 1 +
over the last years,"

I think the use of the past tense here is extremely relevant and
intentional, clearly calling Mosley into question, while not directly
attacking the -current- FIA administration. not just yet.

I think this was meant to reassert their unchanged position on the
matter, definitely sending a warning reply to FIA's (new management)
position on the Toyota exit
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2009/11/04/fia-warns-again-credit-crunch-will-win/
which does seem to be concerningly in-line with their position during
the Mosely reign.

doubtlessly they were interested in rules stability and all the other
nice things they threw around, though such unity -imo- can only be
found when something bigger and more universal is on the plate, and
that's team's revenue.

one can only hope, though just today Bernie has been quoted as saying
that nobody needed testing,
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/091104164054.shtml

"Nobody needs testing," he said. "It was always, in my opinion, that
testing costs money while racing brings money."

:S

Mike P <privacy (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote in
news:7le9alF3df4mpU2 (AT) mid (DOT) individual.net:

other reason for the strange regulations that have cropped up under Max.
Grooved tires, engine freeze and then detuning, complete mishmash of what
was once solid aero regs allowing only one front wing surface, wind tunnel
testing control, the testing ban and so on. Other than pure incompetence
and that standard management line - "If you don't know what you're doing
change things".

WebSlave wrote:
There has to be something us average fans don't understand about the testing
ban.

I don't think I can recall any team or driver criticising it despite so many
fans thinking it has turned out to be an obvious mistake.

--
Chad

"Mike P" <privacy (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote

It reads like a defense against Max saying, "Look, told you so. Ha ha ha".

Any one who looks at the losses of these companies and thinks that ponsing
about doing F1 is some how going to please share holders is living on a
different planet. Especially when they sell road cars and there are other
places to show case and develop them. F1 is ridiculously expensive, and that
has been caused in part by the manufacturers.

Funny that Toyota and BMW were a strong part of FOTA, opposed cost cutting,
then left. Perhaps Renault too. Way to go FOTA. Talk about poisoning the
well.

AC

Chad wrote:

Bernie got it half right. Testing doesn't bring in any money, racing
does. From a fan's point of view, testing doesn't improve racing, nor
does it provide much extra excitement.

With more testing, the big teams would correct their mistakes faster,
which means more predictable results. Not desirable, unless you want
you favourite team to benefit from it.

The only obvious drawback is the lack of testing for third drivers.
They are less prepared to step in, if needed. This was taken into
consideration with the test ban (young drivers only tests), but
apparently not enough.

Maybe Bernie's suggestion of monday testing will correct this, but I'd
rather see thursday testing. The media is already present, and all
testing is focused to do well at the races anyway. So why not test at
the very circuit they will race the next weekend? Why test on monday,
when the race has already been raced (and possible new parts
introduced on friday)?

-Webs-

emuLOAD <andreasassanelli (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in
news:cba289a3-fe6e-4eb3-8c0c-dd230cc74cff (AT) k4g2000yqb (DOT) googlegroups.com:

races? That's no gaps more than a week at all I think. Get your weekly fix
here folks <g>.