Ferrari Toddler style behaviour
Discussion
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=4018...
Typical Italian bullsh1t. Ferrari are fine ones to talk about not acting in the interests of the sport (blatant team orders like Austria in 2002).
It isn't like they were possessing a class A drug, if they haven't benefitted from having the documents then why does it matter?
Love the road cars, but hate the F1 team and that miserable little prick, Todt.
Typical Italian bullsh1t. Ferrari are fine ones to talk about not acting in the interests of the sport (blatant team orders like Austria in 2002).
It isn't like they were possessing a class A drug, if they haven't benefitted from having the documents then why does it matter?
Love the road cars, but hate the F1 team and that miserable little prick, Todt.
maranello said:
"Today's decision legitimises dishonest behaviour in Formula 1 and sets a very serious precedent,"
Obviously the precedent here is that a team other than Ferrari may have benefitted.Really think that the toys can be kept in pram. If this is going to be thoroughly investigated and any documents are found to detail 'dubious' technical aspects of the SF cars they may well be grateful of legitimate dishonest behaviour.....
AKA8 said:
http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=4018...
Typical Italian bullsh1t. Ferrari are fine ones to talk about not acting in the interests of the sport (blatant team orders like Austria in 2002).
It isn't like they were possessing a class A drug, if they haven't benefitted from having the documents then why does it matter?
Love the road cars, but hate the F1 team and that miserable little prick, Todt.
Perhaps the thread's title should be, "Ferrari Todtler style behaviour"?Typical Italian bullsh1t. Ferrari are fine ones to talk about not acting in the interests of the sport (blatant team orders like Austria in 2002).
It isn't like they were possessing a class A drug, if they haven't benefitted from having the documents then why does it matter?
Love the road cars, but hate the F1 team and that miserable little prick, Todt.
It seems to be a big circus act to me.
No one will never really know who saw what at McLaren, so the outcome is only fair. I would be surprised if Ron Dennis resorted to pure cheating. He has done some unusual stuff in the past, like the car with two brake pedals, but I would be amazed if he turned out to be guilty.
No one will never really know who saw what at McLaren, so the outcome is only fair. I would be surprised if Ron Dennis resorted to pure cheating. He has done some unusual stuff in the past, like the car with two brake pedals, but I would be amazed if he turned out to be guilty.
My take on this is that it was actually someone from Ferrari who leaked the information.
Just because said information was given or seen by someone in Mclaren doesn't make them cheats.
If Mclaren had actually gone out of their way to obtain such information with the intention of using it. That would be cheating.
I don't actually see what Mclaren could have done differently in such a situation.
Can't help but think Ferrari are just upset that one of their employees was seeking employment elsewhere.
Just because said information was given or seen by someone in Mclaren doesn't make them cheats.
If Mclaren had actually gone out of their way to obtain such information with the intention of using it. That would be cheating.
I don't actually see what Mclaren could have done differently in such a situation.
Can't help but think Ferrari are just upset that one of their employees was seeking employment elsewhere.
What I'd like to know is what the documents were actually for. Which aspect of the Ferrari F1 project was covered in these documents? Was it engine data, aero data, or something else.
As I have mentioned before in another post, the teams are constantly photographing each others cars at tests and during a race weekend, with all teams employing photographers to work on their behalf, so what was so critical in these documents that any clever bod couldn't already work out just by looking at the car?
Look how Gary Anderson in Autosport's tech focus explains what the little mods on F1 cars does to the overall balance of said car.
Who actually sent the documents to the McLaren designer?
There seem to be lots of missing links in this spy saga which makes me think it's more of a Ferrari derived plan to scupper McLaren and other key individuals.
Leave the fighting to the race track Mr Todt !!
As I have mentioned before in another post, the teams are constantly photographing each others cars at tests and during a race weekend, with all teams employing photographers to work on their behalf, so what was so critical in these documents that any clever bod couldn't already work out just by looking at the car?
Look how Gary Anderson in Autosport's tech focus explains what the little mods on F1 cars does to the overall balance of said car.
Who actually sent the documents to the McLaren designer?
There seem to be lots of missing links in this spy saga which makes me think it's more of a Ferrari derived plan to scupper McLaren and other key individuals.
Leave the fighting to the race track Mr Todt !!
flemke said:
Conian said:
What ferrari have said is true though. It's one thing cheating, it's another thing getting caught. And then another thing get caught and being let off scott free!
Yes, it didn't seem right when Ferrari were let off scot-free after their movable floor was discovered.Geo28 said:
I don't actually see what Mclaren could have done differently in such a situation.
They could have informed the FIA immediately upon receipt, saying they'd been sent some unsolicited documentation and wanted nothing to do with it.If the rule clarification about the flexible floor was prompted by information that came from Ferrari, then McLaren have benefitted from that information.
Edited by jamieboy on Friday 27th July 14:21
In the spirit of a friendly debate:
Yes, they could have done, although I don't believe that there is any such obligation written in the FIA regs. If the circumstances had enabled them to do so, it would have been nice. However...
Do we the public even know when McLaren International (as opposed to the perfidious Coughlan acting on his own) became aware of the illicit documents?
The last I read was that J. Neale was only informed about the documents on 3rd July, the same day that the documents were discovered at Coughlan's home.
When one team is benefiting from an illegal device, obviously all its competitors are being harmed. To eliminate that illegal device is to remove the (future) harm. So, yes, that is a benefit shared by McLaren and the other nine teams.
Let's not overlook the fact that all of us fans also benefited from the removal of that device. Any time that one competitor is playing against the rules, the competition suffers.
All of us, Ferrari fans and Ferrari foes, want a fair, above-board competition.
jamieboy said:
Geo28 said:
I don't actually see what Mclaren could have done differently in such a situation.
They could have informed the FIA immediately upon receeipt, saying they'd been sent some unsolicited documentation and wanted nothing to do with it.Do we the public even know when McLaren International (as opposed to the perfidious Coughlan acting on his own) became aware of the illicit documents?
The last I read was that J. Neale was only informed about the documents on 3rd July, the same day that the documents were discovered at Coughlan's home.
jamieboy said:
If the rule clarification about the flexible floor was prompted by information that came from Ferrari, then McLaren have benefitted from that information.
Well, the whole grid apart from Ferrari benefited from the device's removal. When one team is benefiting from an illegal device, obviously all its competitors are being harmed. To eliminate that illegal device is to remove the (future) harm. So, yes, that is a benefit shared by McLaren and the other nine teams.
Let's not overlook the fact that all of us fans also benefited from the removal of that device. Any time that one competitor is playing against the rules, the competition suffers.
All of us, Ferrari fans and Ferrari foes, want a fair, above-board competition.
motormania said:
flemke said:
Any time that one competitor is playing against the rules, the competition suffers.
Is this not the Ferrari F1 mission statement (replace 'one competitor is' with 'we are')
flemke said:
motormania said:
flemke said:
Any time that one competitor is playing against the rules, the competition suffers.
Is this not the Ferrari F1 mission statement (replace 'one competitor is' with 'we are')Edited by ewenm on Friday 27th July 14:47
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff