Mosley: "Ferrari most important team in F1."
Discussion
Well what a surprise.
Why doesn't he feel the same way towards other non-British teams like Honda (who were heavily punished in 2005), Super Aguri, Spyker, Renault, BMW etc.... Why must he single out Ferrari?
Crash.net said:
Max Mosley has finally admitted what many have suspected for a long time – Ferrari is held in higher respect by the FIA than grand prix racing's ten other teams. The president of Formula 1's governing body was asked in an interview with the official F1 site whether Ferrari was more important for the sport than other teams.
“Yes,” he replied. “Firstly, because it holds a historically important position, as the team has been involved in Formula 1 since 1950. The second point has something to do with existential orientation; imagine there were only one British team and all other teams were Italian, that the commercial rights-holder was Italian, as was the FIA President, the race director and his assistant and the sport's commissioner. Wouldn't it be understandable that this team would be very careful?”
Although there have long been many who consider there to be one rule in F1 for Ferrari and another for everyone else – as evinced only last week by former world champion Damon Hill in light of the punishments meted out to McLaren this year – Mosley insisted all decision were made from an entirely neutral standpoint, and underlined the importance of ‘protecting' Ferrari's vulnerability.
“I use my neutrality with a huge amount of responsibility and stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia' or cartel tries to take advantage of them,” he stressed. “But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, then Ferrari is treated like any other team. Should we find irregularities on a Ferrari – like the moveable floor after the Australian Grand Prix – it is removed and banned.”
In the same interview, Mosley also acknowledged the fact he has a very different relationship with McLaren boss Ron Dennis to the one he shares with Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo.
“[Ron and I] phone once in a while,” he said. “Personally I have no problems with Ron, but otherwise there are differing positions. With di Montezemolo it is different. He is chairman of Fiat and president of Italian business lobby Confindustria.
“I have known Luca longer and therefore better than Ron. Indeed I've known Ron since 1970, but I became really acquainted with him at the end of the eighties, whereas I have known Luca very well since the beginning of the seventies. My relationship with him is very personal.”
When are the FIA Presidential elections due? I'd like to nominate Charlie the Chimpanzee from Bristol Zoo as he's clearly not biased and has greater integrity than this old fool.“Yes,” he replied. “Firstly, because it holds a historically important position, as the team has been involved in Formula 1 since 1950. The second point has something to do with existential orientation; imagine there were only one British team and all other teams were Italian, that the commercial rights-holder was Italian, as was the FIA President, the race director and his assistant and the sport's commissioner. Wouldn't it be understandable that this team would be very careful?”
Although there have long been many who consider there to be one rule in F1 for Ferrari and another for everyone else – as evinced only last week by former world champion Damon Hill in light of the punishments meted out to McLaren this year – Mosley insisted all decision were made from an entirely neutral standpoint, and underlined the importance of ‘protecting' Ferrari's vulnerability.
“I use my neutrality with a huge amount of responsibility and stay in close contact with Ferrari to assure them that no British ‘mafia' or cartel tries to take advantage of them,” he stressed. “But should we find it necessary to impose our technical or sporting regulations, then Ferrari is treated like any other team. Should we find irregularities on a Ferrari – like the moveable floor after the Australian Grand Prix – it is removed and banned.”
In the same interview, Mosley also acknowledged the fact he has a very different relationship with McLaren boss Ron Dennis to the one he shares with Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo.
“[Ron and I] phone once in a while,” he said. “Personally I have no problems with Ron, but otherwise there are differing positions. With di Montezemolo it is different. He is chairman of Fiat and president of Italian business lobby Confindustria.
“I have known Luca longer and therefore better than Ron. Indeed I've known Ron since 1970, but I became really acquainted with him at the end of the eighties, whereas I have known Luca very well since the beginning of the seventies. My relationship with him is very personal.”
Why doesn't he feel the same way towards other non-British teams like Honda (who were heavily punished in 2005), Super Aguri, Spyker, Renault, BMW etc.... Why must he single out Ferrari?
motormania said:
We want real cars, big fat tyres, PPPOOWWWWEERRRRR as Jeremy Clarkson would say, no fancy wings, and passionate drivers with big balls to drive these monsters in some hair-raising wheel to wheel stuff. Is that not too much to ask for?
Sounds like a modern version of Formula 5000 is needed.Use a sealed (components fixed from point of manufacture) 5 litre racing V8 (600-800bhp) from 2, 3 or 4 manufacturers (US Nascar Roush racing or one of the Aussie V8 builders for example) and write loose chassis technical regs allowing different chassis makers to get involved (Penske, Lola, Dallara, G-Force etc..). Write a tyre spec and allow anyone matching it to produce tyres, get people like Avon, Dunlop, Pirelli involved (those not already in major F1/MotoGP type racing). Use a standard single element front and rear wing so chassis setup and driver input makes all the difference.
Then setup the spectacle, 1 long or maybe 2 shorter races (reverse grid in 2nd?) per weekend. Points for top 10 finishers plus pole and fastest lap.
So buy one a chassis or 4, buy a stock of engines, choose the tyres, sign up your drivers and go racing.
I've already listed the tracks to use on another thread.
Please send applications to me and makes all cheques payable to "Chassis and slipstream heritage" or just C.A.S.H for short.
AJS- said:
F5000 failed because it didn't find a niche, being bigger and louder than F1 cars on lower budgets didn't do it for them. Can-Am got stuck between single seaters and sports cars, ending up meaning that you'd need the budget for both!
No you cannot compare the old F5000 to any new big banger single seater series. The old F5000 was around for quite a few years but it only ran down because it was raced at the same time as a period of good F1 racing. In fact they gave F1 teams a few scares when they were run in mixed races, so much so that they stopped that very quickly probably because the bigger budget sponsors of F1 saw a cheaper and more exciting medium to invest in. It was run at a time when F1 racing was still affordable to new teams and teams could buy customer chassis and engines. Which is what I was proposing, calling it F5000 was just a name, I could have called it Formula Chimpanzee, if I had you wouldn't have given the analogy with the old F5000 series at all.My F5000 today, or rather Formula Chimpanzee would be the same as F1/F5000 was in the 1970's. Affordable, close, action filled racing
With none of excess baggage of modern F1.New series arrive all the time, take A1GP, Nissan World Series, Formula BMW, Formula Renault, Formula Palmer and others etc.. in the old days there was only F3, F2 and F1. Not every team races every series like they used to in the 1960-70s and some people from junior formula have limited budgets these days so can't afford the move up.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff