Ferrari Fined

Author
Discussion

Leithen

Original Poster:

12,796 posts

280 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Schumacher, Barrichello and Ferrai Jointly fined $1 Million USD Half to be payed now, half suspended for a year, for their antics on the Austrian GP Podium.

Note the fine is not for the application of team orders.......

mondeoman

11,430 posts

279 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Not exactly big beer money to any of them is it..... Sounds like a lot, but watch it get lost in "expenses" or somesuch...

Token slap on the wrist.

ahonen

5,028 posts

292 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Disgusting. The FIA could have at least reversed the top two positions to show that it isn't 100% biased towards Ferrari. Oooh, USD 500,000, that might mean something to Minardi, but MS probably has it in loose change; stored in an oversize Bell's bottle at home.

Meanwhile, TV audiences continue to free-fall. Splendid.

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Oh....thats really going to hurt them.

The FIA probably pay Ferrari some type of bonus / retainer to turn up every race (because they think everyone watches F1 just to see the red cars), so no money will even change hands.

The last race was no differnet really, orders came into play long before the race was close to finishing.

Why do the FIA not listen to the reaction of the crowd / fans, at the time and at the races since Austria people were booing. At the end of the day the drivers did not have to follow the team orders, can they not think / race for themselves.

O/T: Why do F1 cars need two-way radios? Its not like the driver can do anything if the car runs into trouble. Whats wrong with looking at the pit board to know when to fuel, etc. Don't warn the driver its going to rain, let him find out the old fashioned way!

M@H

11,298 posts

285 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
quote:

Why do F1 cars need two-way radios? Its not like the driver can do anything if the car runs into trouble.


Yes thay can.. there are systems on board for them to play with... eg the Oil flow from the backup oil tanks and stuff...

Cheers
Matt.

smeagol

1,947 posts

297 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
quote:

O/T: Why do F1 cars need two-way radios? Its not like the driver can do anything if the car runs into trouble.


Well actually they can, there are back-up systems and various topologies they can switch on the car as it moves.NOt that I don't agree with you I think F1 is now so dull dull dull.

Big rules changes back to basics, slicks, aerodynamics only simple wings allowed, no traction control, manual gearboxes. Put racing back in the hands of the driver.

CarZee

13,382 posts

280 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
I really was hoping that Ferrari would be deducted some points in the Manufacturers' Championship.. too much to hope for from this shambolic charade I suppose...

JohnL

1,763 posts

278 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
"For antics on the podium" - didn't someone predict that whitewash?

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Yes you are both right......and I did know that......but the point I was trying to make is put the driving skill back into F1.

I don't think it needs to be the technological pinnacle of motorsport. Rallying seems to be taking that.......and still has driver skill as a requirement!

If the cars don't have radios the drivers cannot be given orders quite so easily.

Its a tricky one, Ferrari say they race as a team (whose objective is for MS to win!) and no doubt they are not the first or last team that may employ such thinking. Its just that the public did not like it.

wolosp

2,337 posts

278 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Specifying a 'window' when the first fuel stop should take place (say, no sooner than lap 15) would ensure there would be close racing for the first part of the race at least. Then maybe we could see Montoya get a race with M.S. at last.

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Am I right, in that the cars have to pit at least once?

Why not let the teams decide, see if the driver can look after the tyres and fuel to last the whole race with no stops.

Just like the old days.......

nevpugh308

4,415 posts

282 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Actually, I think you'll find the fine was actually for swapping podium positions ... they haven't been fined for "fixing" the race result (mainly because what they did was NOT against the rules, so they can't be fined for it).

IMO this is stupid .... regardless of what you think about what they did from a personal point of view, they did NOT break any rules. So the FIA fine them for something piffling, just because they can't fine them for what they really want to fine them for .... which was a legal move anyway ?!? Daft.

Personally, I think they ought to have it like they do in stock cars ... start the race with the good drivers at the back of the grid, the novices at the front of the grid, and watch the mayhem that enuses !

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Is not " fixing the outcome of the race " breaking a rule?

Certainly not sporting.

I thought one of the charges was bringing the sport into disrepute?

Is that what the FIA refer to as the podium incident or the reaction of the press / public / other teams, etc?

Leithen

Original Poster:

12,796 posts

280 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Team orders are categorically NOT against the rules - it's been going on since the inception of Grand Prix.

Ferrari can easily counter the disrepute charge regarding what happened in the race by stating the obvious - their actions were blatantly honest and "unhidden". No rules broken - no possibility of charge.

The Rostrum sheningans are a different matter and they fine is most likely in response to the Senior Austrian Politicians being publicly embarrased and made to look foolish thanks to Schumachers actions up there.

The FIA are notoriously picky about procedure around such "important people" - their cooperation is after all the foundation of the F1 global success.#

As for them worrying about the Fans - don't believe that for a second. They are rubbing their hands with glee - controversy in an otherwise boring year of F1 due to one teams domination is manna from heaven for one B. Ecclestone........

woodster

122 posts

276 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Does nobody else feel that the GP at the weekend was equally as fixed as the one in Austria? Let's face it, Shumacher was much quicker than Rubens and I'm sure if he had really pushed he could have passed him on the track (without team orders).
After the race one of the commentaters told us that "Rubens had done everything right and deserved to win", possibly right, but it's an outcome that we'll never actually know because for the last 10 or so laps they were no longer 'racing'. The same could be said for Austria, Shumacher may well have been able to beat Rubens, but because he knew he was going to win anyway, he didn't need to push.

Listening to the radio this morning there was an interview with Eddie Jordan, and he was asked about team orders in F1. His comment was that he had given team orders in the past (when he stopped Ralf passing Damon Hill) because he said it wasn't worth the risk to the team for both cars to be taken out in a dogfight.

I think my point is that we seem to have found ourselves in a team orders culture, where it's no longer about the quickest bloke on the day. Some teams are just more subtle about it than others. I guess F1 has simply become too commercial for the purists.

My thoughts....

Mark.

JohnL

1,763 posts

278 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
A long time since F1 was anything but commercial.

>> Edited by JohnL on Wednesday 26th June 12:33

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Agree with both points above.

Somehow F1 needs to get the focus back onto the drivers racing, not just the other teams but also team mates.

If the calibre of the F1 driver is rumoured to be so high then maybe they could try to pass eachother without taking both cars out of the race! But that is just heat of the battle, etc.

I guess it all comes down to the money and what the sponsor expects to see.

Slightly O/T, but Brundle regularly states that the first person you have to beat in the race is your team mate.

Must be frustrating for those drivers that are not even allowed to try!

nevpugh308

4,415 posts

282 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Lets face it, whatever Ferrari did on Sunday would have been wrong ..... if they'd let Barrichello win = fixing it (Schumacher could have won). If they'd let Schui win = fixing it again, same as a couple of weeks before. Lose, lose.

Pete Cros

285 posts

292 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
The fine isn't enough. 'Bringing the 'game' ito disrepute' by letting MS accept both first and second place trophies, should have resulted in a more severe penalty. The fine imposed isn't a penalty to Ferarri.

And YES MS did accept both trophies on the podium, RB wasn't allowed by MS to accept either 1st or 2nd, check your video footage.

Taking team orders onto the next stage. What will happen if Sauber ever get in front of Ferarri ?????.

Pete

135sport

442 posts

293 months

Wednesday 26th June 2002
quotequote all
Surely Ferrari would never allow that to happen......

If it happened on racing merit alone (i.e the gap between teams performance was evened out) then F1 would be worth watching!