Ferrari and their Atitude
Discussion
egoboss said:
see www.pitpass.com - apparently the minardi's have PASSED scrutineering.
it so happened stoddart had 2005 spec aero parts with him ... all along.
what a pr*ck, honestly.
QED.
You sure that they have 2005 aero parts? Other reports I have read is that the cars have passed scrutineering on safety grounds. Which is not the same as they complying with the aero regs.
I know that Pitpass said they had 2005 aero kits but is that correct?
Think I'll wait and see.
chrisgr31 said:
see <a href="http://www.pitpass.com">www.pitpass.com</a> - apparently the minardi's have PASSED scrutineering.
it so happened stoddart had 2005 spec aero parts with him ... all along.
what a pr*ck, honestly.
QED.
You sure that they have 2005 aero parts? Other reports I have read is that the cars have passed scrutineering on safety grounds. Which is not the same as they complying with the aero regs.
I know that Pitpass said they had 2005 aero kits but is that correct?
Think I'll wait and see.
pipass is usually on the button. would be surprised if wrong in such detail.
also, one fundamental point we've all forgotten - wouldn't scutineering be a total and utter farce if 2004 spec aeros were allowed? i think horner at red bull has situation perfectly appraised. i argued the same a few days ago, so i am bound to agree with him(!).
;-)
seriously -
doesn't anyone recall when ferrari were nearly barred from a crucial race because their bargeboards (as i recall) were by some teams deemed to be some 25mm (as i recall, again) too "big" ... hmmm, much as i don't care for ferrari those past memories must rankle them years later - so, they now - fair enough - decide to be pedants about the rules. fair enough. rules is rules.
also, just as f1 is entering a new era of professional independent backing - eg red bull and midland (whatever you think of the acquisitions) - organisations who want to showcase their wares on the slick global stage of f1, stoddart's incessant whining and dumb politics must grate. he reminds me of peter sellers' character in that classic british comedy, "i'm alright jack" ...
if stoddart can't find even one semi-rich aussie business to back him - well, enough said.
would you want your business to be linked to him, commercially?
Stoddart has said he has the new aero kits in Melbourne. he says he has not had time to test them yet and wont run them. Red Bull have said they wont allow him to run without the new bits.
Cant blame anyone except staddart. Why did he even bother taking them to Melbourne if he said he cant use them? Sounds like complete BS and hes just trying to make a political point.
i hope he sits out the race due to his own actions.
This from Autosport:
"Minardi must play by the rules or risk exclusion from Sunday's season-opening Australian Grand Prix, Red Bull team boss Christian Horner said on Thursday.
Horner said Red Bull, which took over from Jaguar in November, could not support Minardi boss Paul Stoddart's request to be allowed to race last year's car with unmodified aerodynamics.
"I sympathise with his position but rules are rules," Horner told Reuters. "They are there for a reason and we all have to abide by them.
"My position and that of Red Bull is that nothing would be more frustrating for us in a debut race to finish ninth with a Minardi ahead of us and a point taken from us."
Stoddart had said earlier that all the teams except champions Ferrari had signed a document agreeing to his request.
Nothing would be more frustrating for us in a debut race to finish ninth with a Minardi ahead of us
Christian Horner
However others suggested his list of signatures dated from September and included those of former Jaguar boss Tony Purnell, dismissed by Red Bull in January, and Eddie Jordan who has since sold his struggling team.
Minardi do have their 2005 aerodynamics package in Melbourne but have not tested it, raising potential safety concerns. They plan to introduce their new car next month.
Minardi must either ensure their car complies with the regulations, with front and rear wings changed from last year, or secure a special dispensation from all the other teams before Friday's practice.
Horner's words suggested that would not now happen and undermined Stoddart's claim that only Ferrari boss Jean Todt was standing in his team's way."
>> Edited by Touringfan on Thursday 3rd March 16:03
Cant blame anyone except staddart. Why did he even bother taking them to Melbourne if he said he cant use them? Sounds like complete BS and hes just trying to make a political point.
i hope he sits out the race due to his own actions.
This from Autosport:
"Minardi must play by the rules or risk exclusion from Sunday's season-opening Australian Grand Prix, Red Bull team boss Christian Horner said on Thursday.
Horner said Red Bull, which took over from Jaguar in November, could not support Minardi boss Paul Stoddart's request to be allowed to race last year's car with unmodified aerodynamics.
"I sympathise with his position but rules are rules," Horner told Reuters. "They are there for a reason and we all have to abide by them.
"My position and that of Red Bull is that nothing would be more frustrating for us in a debut race to finish ninth with a Minardi ahead of us and a point taken from us."
Stoddart had said earlier that all the teams except champions Ferrari had signed a document agreeing to his request.
Nothing would be more frustrating for us in a debut race to finish ninth with a Minardi ahead of us
Christian Horner
However others suggested his list of signatures dated from September and included those of former Jaguar boss Tony Purnell, dismissed by Red Bull in January, and Eddie Jordan who has since sold his struggling team.
Minardi do have their 2005 aerodynamics package in Melbourne but have not tested it, raising potential safety concerns. They plan to introduce their new car next month.
Minardi must either ensure their car complies with the regulations, with front and rear wings changed from last year, or secure a special dispensation from all the other teams before Friday's practice.
Horner's words suggested that would not now happen and undermined Stoddart's claim that only Ferrari boss Jean Todt was standing in his team's way."
>> Edited by Touringfan on Thursday 3rd March 16:03
Touringfan said:
Stoddart has said he has the new aero kits in Melbourne. he says he has not had time to test them yet and wont run them. Red Bull have said they wont allow him to run without the new bits.
Cant blame anyone except staddart. Why did he even bother taking them to Melbourne if he said he cant use them? Sounds like complete BS and hes just trying to make a political point.
i hope he sits out the race due to his own actions.
16:03
well said.
i believe that stoddart is so thick, so egomaniac and deluded that all of australia will rebel if he doesn't get "his way" (whatever that is) that he hasn't seen that the other teams and bernie (he's a whily old bugger, bernie - whatever he says, he doesn't want the likes of stoddart sullying f1) - anyways, as i was rambling, stoddart hasn't heard of the old adage "give 'em enough rope ..."
i can see a queue of people to kick the box away from underneath him.
stoddart is being used as a stooge by the other F1 teams. they send him to fight their battles and create the issues so that it doesn't effect them.
he obviously hasn't realised it yet such is his ego.
of course if he was geneuine about running his cars then why doesn't he agree to not be eligible for any points with them? he wont because points mean income. so its not a technical reason its a financial one.
he obviously hasn't realised it yet such is his ego.
of course if he was geneuine about running his cars then why doesn't he agree to not be eligible for any points with them? he wont because points mean income. so its not a technical reason its a financial one.
egoboss said:
seriously -
doesn't anyone recall when ferrari were nearly barred from a crucial race because their bargeboards (as i recall) were by some teams deemed to be some 25mm (as i recall, again) too "big" ... hmmm, much as i don't care for ferrari those past memories must rankle them years later - so, they now - fair enough - decide to be pedants about the rules. fair enough. rules is rules.
An interesting take on the situation there. My recollection is that the rest of the grid were shouting 'they broke the rules, they should be disqualified like Williams were the race before', and Ross Brawn stood up and said sorry we're Ferarri, so Fcuk Off.
My take on the articles that are about at the moment is that the cars have passed Safety Scrutineering only - the 2004 parts are still on so looking increasing unlikely they will be racing.
Ferrari are PATHETIC, are they that worried that Minardi will beat them!!!! Ferrari really should pack up and go home they are ruining/ruined the sport. Even with all their money they have not managed to get a car ready for 05. They should have empathy towards Minardi, as it is they are just spoilt pathetic, whining idiot moronic bullying unsporting stupid ego mainiacs that would not know sport if it bit them. I am off to cancel my order for the 550, Ferrari buzz off. FOREVER the sport is bigger than you.
you seem not to have appreciated the fact that its not only ferrari that objected. red bull did too.
And they are right to do so. Never has a car been allowed to compete in F1 when it clearly and knowingly not complies with the regulations.
And to make matters worse, Minardi have the new 2005 aero package sitting in the back of their pit garage and refuse to put it on their car!
its simple. every car/team has to comply with the regulations otherwise complete anarchy would reign.
And they are right to do so. Never has a car been allowed to compete in F1 when it clearly and knowingly not complies with the regulations.
And to make matters worse, Minardi have the new 2005 aero package sitting in the back of their pit garage and refuse to put it on their car!
its simple. every car/team has to comply with the regulations otherwise complete anarchy would reign.
Ferrari have always bent the rules to favour themselves, they are obviously scared that Minardi may beat them or cause them trouble. I just find the attitude pathetic, red bull may have a point as Minardi maybe a real threat to them (anyway I thought red bull gave you wings something for the scrutineers to look at!!!), but if all the others are not bothered then so what. If Minardi go bust through lack of sponsorship and TV coverage then the sport will be a lot worse off, however I do not see any loss to the sport if the red cars pack up and go home.
>> Edited by PJS917 on Thursday 3rd March 19:45
>> Edited by PJS917 on Thursday 3rd March 19:46
>> Edited by PJS917 on Thursday 3rd March 19:45
>> Edited by PJS917 on Thursday 3rd March 19:46
A lot of people are missing the point I think.
You just cant have cars being allowed to race that are clearly not elgible. Where would it end?
The Minardi engine and aero do not comply with the regulations. Would Ferrari be allowed to race if the tables were turned on them? Of course not.
Its simple; The rules of the game were agreed by the teams. The teams have to comply or they dont race.
Otherwise it sets a very dangerous precedent and you will have other teams trying to race with cars that dont comply and ask for dispensation and anarchy will reign.
You just cant have cars being allowed to race that are clearly not elgible. Where would it end?
The Minardi engine and aero do not comply with the regulations. Would Ferrari be allowed to race if the tables were turned on them? Of course not.
Its simple; The rules of the game were agreed by the teams. The teams have to comply or they dont race.
Otherwise it sets a very dangerous precedent and you will have other teams trying to race with cars that dont comply and ask for dispensation and anarchy will reign.
Touringfan said:
A lot of people are missing the point I think.
You just cant have cars being allowed to race that are clearly not elgible. Where would it end?
The Minardi engine and aero do not comply with the regulations. Would Ferrari be allowed to race if the tables were turned on them? Of course not.
Its simple; The rules of the game were agreed by the teams. The teams have to comply or they dont race.
But of course some argue that the 2005 Regulations themselves are not valid!
Minardi might have the parts but they are not tested, so could be a problem. Other teams could have followed Minardis example to really test the issue!
So why would stoddart even bother packing them up and shipping them to Melbourne if he can't use them?
That makes no sense at all.
They have been tested and proved in the wind-tunnel otherwise they would not have made them at all...let alone take them to melbourne.
The guy is grandstanding.
That makes no sense at all.
They have been tested and proved in the wind-tunnel otherwise they would not have made them at all...let alone take them to melbourne.
The guy is grandstanding.
[quote=Touringfan]A lot of people are missing the point I think.
You just cant have cars being allowed to race that are clearly not elgible. Where would it end?
it certainly would not be the first time cars break the rules and get away with it, the Ben Elton cars of 94 spring to mind!!!!!!
You just cant have cars being allowed to race that are clearly not elgible. Where would it end?
it certainly would not be the first time cars break the rules and get away with it, the Ben Elton cars of 94 spring to mind!!!!!!
Alas, you have also missed the point.
Cars that are found to be illegal later on is a otally different thing.
We are talking about letting a team race with cars that even the team itself admit are not to the current regulations.
You really think that is an acceptable thing to do, regardless of who the team is? You really think that teams in any series should be allowed to compete with cars with which they acknowledge are a long way from complying with the regulations ?!
So if, say, McLaren turned up at the next race meeting with an engine that is 2 litres too big and said it is force-majeur as they couldn't test their new engine in time, and didn't have any old ones left....that would be ok would it?
I think not.
Cars that are found to be illegal later on is a otally different thing.
We are talking about letting a team race with cars that even the team itself admit are not to the current regulations.
You really think that is an acceptable thing to do, regardless of who the team is? You really think that teams in any series should be allowed to compete with cars with which they acknowledge are a long way from complying with the regulations ?!
So if, say, McLaren turned up at the next race meeting with an engine that is 2 litres too big and said it is force-majeur as they couldn't test their new engine in time, and didn't have any old ones left....that would be ok would it?
I think not.
egoboss said:
doesn't anyone recall when ferrari were nearly barred from a crucial race because their bargeboards (as i recall) were by some teams deemed to be some 25mm (as i recall, again) too "big" ... hmmm, much as i don't care for ferrari those past memories must rankle them years later - so, they now - fair enough - decide to be pedants about the rules. fair enough. rules is rules.
I remember it well - Ross Brawn stood up in front of the TV cameras, holding the offending barge board after the scrutineers (or whoever) had declared it illegal. Ross pointed out to the whole world (if they were paying attention) where exactly the barge boards were wrong and against the rules. When it then went to the FIA appeal procedure, the fact that Ferrari had not made them to the specification of their own drawings (the drawings depicting something within the required specification) allowed them to be let off the offence.
All Minardi need to do, therefore, is to produce drawings of 2005 spec parts and manufacture them incorrectly.
If you are going to quote, quote all the facts, not just those which suit.
I can understand Red Bull having a concern with Minardi racing last years car, it may be as fast as their 2005 car, but for Ferrari to have a problem on that ground - they must be very worried about the performance of their interim car (or not care what the world thinks of them and the sport they compete in).
Cut the crap Todt et al. Lets have a totally level playing field with identical financial contributions from Bernie and the FIA to all teams - surely Ferrari could manage on that. If they are really worried that a team with a total budget which is probably similar to the salary they pay their number one driver then maybe they should have cut his wages and invested the money in the design process.
>> Edited by andyps on Thursday 3rd March 21:54
andyps said:
doesn't anyone recall when ferrari were nearly barred from a crucial race because their bargeboards (as i recall) were by some teams deemed to be some 25mm (as i recall, again) too "big" ... hmmm, much as i don't care for ferrari those past memories must rankle them years later - so, they now - fair enough - decide to be pedants about the rules. fair enough. rules is rules.
I remember it well - Ross Brawn stood up in front of the TV cameras, holding the offending barge board after the scrutineers (or whoever) had declared it illegal. Ross pointed out to the whole world (if they were paying attention) where exactly the barge boards were wrong and against the rules. When it then went to the FIA appeal procedure, the fact that Ferrari had not made them to the specification of their own drawings (the drawings depicting something within the required specification) allowed them to be let off the offence.
All Minardi need to do, therefore, is to produce drawings of 2005 spec parts and manufacture them incorrectly.
If you are going to quote, quote all the facts, not just those which suit.
I can understand Red Bull having a concern with Minardi racing last years car, it may be as fast as their 2005 car, but for Ferrari to have a problem on that ground - they must be very worried about the performance of their interim car (or not care what the world thinks of them and the sport they compete in).
Cut the crap Todt et al. Lets have a totally level playing field with identical financial contributions from Bernie and the FIA to all teams - surely Ferrari could manage on that. If they are really worried that a team with a total budget which is probably similar to the salary they pay their number one driver then maybe they should have cut his wages and invested the money in the design process.
>> Edited by andyps on Thursday 3rd March 21:54
apologies for being a mere human and so, pathetic.
i wasn't being "selective" in citing the past, just recounting a casual memory. i don't masturbate in period archive f1 annuals to mark the pages for future reference.
(joke).
pedants and f1 = perpetual motion.
stoddart is an egotistical tosser. simple, really.
todt is an egotistical tosser. ditto.
bernie is loving it.
following stoddart's example, i am going to enter this year's london marathon and moan like buggery to all and sundry when i don't win.
it's not fair, sob!!!
;-)
Whilst Minardi are clearly on a very sticky wicket here, the bigger picture is being missed by some.
The idea that their 05 parts have been extensivly proven in wind tunnel tests is laughable - they may have done a bit of CFD, but the gulf between the front and back of the grid is really that big that the smaller guys really can't afford to do any development. Also, this isn't really the problem. If the part fails (and would could come as a connection failure under the complex loads generated by racing, rather than a simple to design against beam failure) then this would endanger both the driver of the black car, together with the driver of take your pick of colours car that is trying to lap him for the umteenth time.
Sure, if it don't meet the rules then it shouldn't be allowed in - but as I mentioned on the first page of this thread - this would give Bernie a problem as he needs 20 cars.
For all his faults, PS is still there - whilst at least Arrows and Prost have gone bust in the mean time, toether with Tyrrel, Jordan and Jaguar having sold out. Commercially, there is only the space in the world for about five teams to run with the hundreds of millions of dollars per season budget that gets you dreaming of the front of the grid. If there were room for more, then either the present incumbants would have grabbed some of the extra cash, or they would have been replaced by others.
So, in principle, I agree that in a world approaching fair, they should be excluded. There may however in this case be extenuating circumstances.
Final thought - the quote of the day came not from a driver, but one of the journalists at the main press conference.
MS:Would you let a football team play with an extra man, just because they were doing poorly and offered no threat.
Journalist:Yes, if all 11 players had to have both hands tied behind their backs!
classic.
Rich
The idea that their 05 parts have been extensivly proven in wind tunnel tests is laughable - they may have done a bit of CFD, but the gulf between the front and back of the grid is really that big that the smaller guys really can't afford to do any development. Also, this isn't really the problem. If the part fails (and would could come as a connection failure under the complex loads generated by racing, rather than a simple to design against beam failure) then this would endanger both the driver of the black car, together with the driver of take your pick of colours car that is trying to lap him for the umteenth time.
Sure, if it don't meet the rules then it shouldn't be allowed in - but as I mentioned on the first page of this thread - this would give Bernie a problem as he needs 20 cars.
For all his faults, PS is still there - whilst at least Arrows and Prost have gone bust in the mean time, toether with Tyrrel, Jordan and Jaguar having sold out. Commercially, there is only the space in the world for about five teams to run with the hundreds of millions of dollars per season budget that gets you dreaming of the front of the grid. If there were room for more, then either the present incumbants would have grabbed some of the extra cash, or they would have been replaced by others.
So, in principle, I agree that in a world approaching fair, they should be excluded. There may however in this case be extenuating circumstances.
Final thought - the quote of the day came not from a driver, but one of the journalists at the main press conference.
MS:Would you let a football team play with an extra man, just because they were doing poorly and offered no threat.
Journalist:Yes, if all 11 players had to have both hands tied behind their backs!
classic.
Rich
Good reply.
However apart from the fairness of allowing a car to compete that clearly doesn't comply....the question I cant get my head around is this;
If his new aero parts have not been tested and cannot be put on the car for safety reasons....why on earth did he paint them, sticker them, pack them up and take them all the way to Melbourne?
It defies logic to go to that trouble and expense to take major components to a GP, that just cannot be used.
There can be no other plausible reason for it, other than the fact that they are fully capable of being used. Otherwise they simply would not have taken them, would they?
However apart from the fairness of allowing a car to compete that clearly doesn't comply....the question I cant get my head around is this;
If his new aero parts have not been tested and cannot be put on the car for safety reasons....why on earth did he paint them, sticker them, pack them up and take them all the way to Melbourne?
It defies logic to go to that trouble and expense to take major components to a GP, that just cannot be used.
There can be no other plausible reason for it, other than the fact that they are fully capable of being used. Otherwise they simply would not have taken them, would they?
daydreamer said:
Whilst Minardi are clearly on a very sticky wicket here, the bigger picture is being missed by some.
Rich
good points.
but - and there's always one of them, isn't there? - the teams that have gone bust/been acquired - ie, prost/ligier, arrows, tyrell, jaguar, jordan, etc, all actually TRIED to compete at the top level and sometimes DID run at the front, at various times in their corporate careers. these teams all INVESTED as did minardi of old - by contrast, stoddart just grabs and whines. the way he chased the dead prost money was akin to grave robbing.
pitiful.
there is a big difference with the minardi/stoddart era of the "underdog" - he is a bad joke this guy - i wouldn't let him run a taxi company let alone an airline (which went bust anyway) and now a once noble f1 team.
i have just realised the perfect analogy - stoddart is the "eddie the eagle" of f1. without the charm.
even ski jumping had the good sense to change the rules so idiots like that - eddie e - couldn't compete at the top level any longer, just for their personal ego-trips. it made of a mockery of the sport - as he does.
and, as said before, i am in NO way a ferrari fan. on the contrary, the only team leaders i respect are williams/head - the way they ignore the ego tantrums of pratts like montoya is so refreshing. i dearly hope heidfeld beats montoya in every race this year. would be very apt & just.
minardi has always in the past, ie pre stoddart, been a respected and honourable sporting team - with integrity and spirit.
stoddart's dickhead regime is simply very embarrassing.
he's that thick and self-obsessed he doesn't even realize he is being set-up by the piranha club!
lol.
hi ho - roll on some real racing to discuss, rather than this silliness - we, myself included, are just pandering to stoddart's delusions by even discussing him!
:-)
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff