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?
round of applause for max, is this guy pulling our leg.
o look, another round of applause for max:
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=4117...
o look, another round of applause for max:
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=4117...
If history and heritage is so important to Max, why did he stand by and watch Lotus die in the '90s? Protecting Ferrari should not be one of his duties.
I also find it highly ironic and rather telling that he makes a 'Mafia' comment when talking about British teams...
I also find it highly ironic and rather telling that he makes a 'Mafia' comment when talking about British teams...
Edited by kevin ritson on Wednesday 24th October 17:25
johnph said:
Ferrari do have a significant amount of leverage - if there was no Ferrari in F1 would it be as popular as it is?
All they have to do is threaten to quit and they will get their way.
Quit and do what? Do you think Ferrari would be as popular if it was not in F1? There'd be riots in Italy. All they have to do is threaten to quit and they will get their way.
johnph said:
Ferrari do have a significant amount of leverage - if there was no Ferrari in F1 would it be as popular as it is?
All they have to do is threaten to quit and they will get their way.
That is the way that it has been made to look, but I doubt that that is the way that it has to be.All they have to do is threaten to quit and they will get their way.
Everything fashionable and superior has its day and eventually declines into the mists of time. It's been that way for millennia, and the FIA/FOM/Ferrari Mutual Love Club isn't going to change that.
It is a pity the the Grand Prix Manufacturers' Association did not bring off their proposed alternative series, which would have comprised BMW, Honda, McLaren, Williams, Toyota, and Renault, for starters.
If that series had got started, within a few years the original series in which Ferrari was running, against no opposition, would have become known as Formula None.
Now then Mr Flemke...
You seem to be a man with his ear close to the ground...
Could there really be a break away series that could stick 2 fingers (or should that be just the one!!) to the Max, Bernie and Ferarri show where by we have Renault, McLaren, Williams, Toyota, Honda and even Red Bull racing on some classic european circuits for real fans of the sport, while the three little pigs already mentioned have their own way in the far east.
If anyone thinks that F1 would be dead with Ferrari are simply talking out their own arse! Just because they have been in the longest does not make them the best, though Max and Bernie think overwise of course.
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?
You seem to be a man with his ear close to the ground...
Could there really be a break away series that could stick 2 fingers (or should that be just the one!!) to the Max, Bernie and Ferarri show where by we have Renault, McLaren, Williams, Toyota, Honda and even Red Bull racing on some classic european circuits for real fans of the sport, while the three little pigs already mentioned have their own way in the far east.
If anyone thinks that F1 would be dead with Ferrari are simply talking out their own arse! Just because they have been in the longest does not make them the best, though Max and Bernie think overwise of course.
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?
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.
No way.
Look at the CART/IRL debacle. The sponsors love F1 because they've got the eyes of the world on them and the widely accepted idea of F1 being the pinnacle of motor racing.
I reckon a lot of the hype in the UK at the moment is sour grapes, some of it justified, some of it over blown, that we don't have a world champion when we all thought it was a done deal on Sunday morning.
I'd love to see a good breakaway series, but look at it. 20 years ago there was basically F1 and Indycar, F1 being a global series of circuit racing, Indycar being ovals and street circuits mainly in North America. Now you've got CART, IRL, A1GP and F1 all trying to get the attention of the world on Sunday afternoon. A1GP has already sort of demoted itself from F1 rival to GP2 winter series out of necessity. CART is falling to bits and probably won't last much longer, and IRL is going back to being a North American oval racing series with the odd venture onto road circuits and street courses.
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!
I'd love to see a breakaway series that concentrated on the classic European circuits, but this wouldn't bring in the best drivers or the best teams unless it brought in the money, and the big money wants to be in Asia.
Where I do think there's room for a new formula is in Asia. Asians love F1 at the moment, their governments plough millions into it, fans turn out in droves to watch it, buy the merchandise and generally want a piece of the action. They will however get sick eventually of watching European drivers in European cars, and the novelty of having it in Asia will wear off.
Frankly I think the Malaysian GP suffers this already and I find it a big bore watching cars belting around some anonymous parkland in Malaysia.
If there is a breakaway series, then why not in Asia? Honda and Toyota are currently getting nothing out of trundling around at the back of the F1 pack, and other Asian/Japanese car makers aren't even in it, even though they make probably half the cars in the world. They coulf all gain from this. Meanwhile we could gain from forcing F1 to do what it does best, which as you said is good racing on proper European circuits between brands that we as petrolheads would want to buy.
Look at the CART/IRL debacle. The sponsors love F1 because they've got the eyes of the world on them and the widely accepted idea of F1 being the pinnacle of motor racing.
I reckon a lot of the hype in the UK at the moment is sour grapes, some of it justified, some of it over blown, that we don't have a world champion when we all thought it was a done deal on Sunday morning.
I'd love to see a good breakaway series, but look at it. 20 years ago there was basically F1 and Indycar, F1 being a global series of circuit racing, Indycar being ovals and street circuits mainly in North America. Now you've got CART, IRL, A1GP and F1 all trying to get the attention of the world on Sunday afternoon. A1GP has already sort of demoted itself from F1 rival to GP2 winter series out of necessity. CART is falling to bits and probably won't last much longer, and IRL is going back to being a North American oval racing series with the odd venture onto road circuits and street courses.
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!
I'd love to see a breakaway series that concentrated on the classic European circuits, but this wouldn't bring in the best drivers or the best teams unless it brought in the money, and the big money wants to be in Asia.
Where I do think there's room for a new formula is in Asia. Asians love F1 at the moment, their governments plough millions into it, fans turn out in droves to watch it, buy the merchandise and generally want a piece of the action. They will however get sick eventually of watching European drivers in European cars, and the novelty of having it in Asia will wear off.
Frankly I think the Malaysian GP suffers this already and I find it a big bore watching cars belting around some anonymous parkland in Malaysia.
If there is a breakaway series, then why not in Asia? Honda and Toyota are currently getting nothing out of trundling around at the back of the F1 pack, and other Asian/Japanese car makers aren't even in it, even though they make probably half the cars in the world. They coulf all gain from this. Meanwhile we could gain from forcing F1 to do what it does best, which as you said is good racing on proper European circuits between brands that we as petrolheads would want to buy.
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.
I thought F1 could not go on without Lotus but its demise caused hardly a ripple. Over the years Ferrari have often been backmarkers and racing hasn't suffered and nor have attendances at most races. They've often come up with cars that were rubbish - poor or dreadful aerodynamics, no grip, no drivers - and everyone else got on with the job. Then they would come back for a while then drift away. The recent renaissance has been sustained but it's taken an incredible amount of money. They will fall apart again, and sooner rather than later, and another team will take up the prime position.
Tyrell went from the top to the bottom in three years or so. Williams did it in one. McLaren won all but one race in one year and then faded. Ferrari will struggle. Their internal politics was always self destructive and there are signs that it is returning in force.
F1 is not big in Italy, Ferrari is. Once the team goes off the boil so will the attendance figures at the two Italian GPs each year.
Ferrari needs F1. F1 does not need Ferrari. And Ferrari needs an advantage to be competative. Let's face it, they are subsidised by all the other teams yet McLaren, with a much lower budget, have an equal car.
I was speaking with one of the hosts in the F1 Paddock Club and he said that while Williams used to refurbish their reservoirs in the active suspension days, Ferrari used to bin theirs after every race. Yet Williams walked the championship. Frist class team management is not important, it is vital and the Ferrari salad days did not start until they got Ross and the others. If Todt stays and Ross stays away, then it will all fall apart for the team.
Still, what do I know? I thought F1 would die with Lotus.
Tyrell went from the top to the bottom in three years or so. Williams did it in one. McLaren won all but one race in one year and then faded. Ferrari will struggle. Their internal politics was always self destructive and there are signs that it is returning in force.
F1 is not big in Italy, Ferrari is. Once the team goes off the boil so will the attendance figures at the two Italian GPs each year.
Ferrari needs F1. F1 does not need Ferrari. And Ferrari needs an advantage to be competative. Let's face it, they are subsidised by all the other teams yet McLaren, with a much lower budget, have an equal car.
I was speaking with one of the hosts in the F1 Paddock Club and he said that while Williams used to refurbish their reservoirs in the active suspension days, Ferrari used to bin theirs after every race. Yet Williams walked the championship. Frist class team management is not important, it is vital and the Ferrari salad days did not start until they got Ross and the others. If Todt stays and Ross stays away, then it will all fall apart for the team.
Still, what do I know? I thought F1 would die with Lotus.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff