| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Ferrari favoritism | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 20 2006, 11:32 PM (626 Views) | |
| schead | Mar 20 2006, 11:32 PM Post #1 |
|
Unregistered
|
Hello all, Before I get the usual "Ferrari basher" title, I need to say that I do not dislike Schumacher or Ferrari. I also would like to see a Ferrari resurgance this year. Now that I have that out of the way, I would like to talk about conflict of interest. I have, just tonight, come accross links that would change my mind about Ferrari. I always saw the "Ferrari are favoured" threads as being sour grapes, but this has changed my mind. Check out http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=6012 Now, it would appear that Marco Piccinni has his thumb in a number of pies. He is one of 3 directors of FOM, (or Formula One Management), which is Bernie's outfit, ( see http://www.answers.com/topic/formula-one-management ). He is also one of 8 "Senators" in the FIA, (see http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Relea.../281005-01.html ). He is, almost by coincidence, a director of Ferrari, ( see http://www.fiatgroup.com/main.php?w=PCXDXVJKJ0XM56CDTW2Y ). So, one man is director of the FIA, FOM, and Ferrari. I can now see where the anti Ferrari conspiracy theorists come from. At the end of the day, Ferrari's man is in a position that is responsible for not just Ferrari, but also the rule setting, (and enforcing), AND the decision on who gets what money from F1 rights, (which is controlled by the company that Ferrari's man is 2nd in charge for the next 100 years, at least!!). I see this, and I draw a parralell to Dick Cheney, who was a director of Haliburton. At least in his case, he actually gave up his directorship before becoming the VP. Obviously, everyone can see the obvious conflict of interest in Cheney's case, but in Piccinni's case, he didn't even give up the directorships!!! IMHO I believe that the FIA, and FOM should be subject to stringent rules that disallow any potential conflict of interest. How unfair is it to have one man in such a position of influence in the FIA, FOM AND a prominent F1 team??? |
|
|
| Norbert | Mar 21 2006, 01:22 AM Post #2 |
![]() ![]()
|
Surely Bernie counts as another, being a major shareholder/owner of the company that owns the TV rights and also being one of those responsible for deciding who gets the races each year....? |
![]() |
|
| timmadigan | Mar 21 2006, 01:29 AM Post #3 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
you can work your way through the FIA names and you'll find that most are tied with one manufacturer or another. The nations representative has to come from the motorsports world - thus is tied to either a racing series or a manufacturer that provides a racing team. |
![]() |
|
| schead | Mar 21 2006, 08:43 PM Post #4 |
|
Unregistered
|
OK, so tell me 1 single other person who is on the board of directors of an F1 team, the FIA and FOM. Or even, director of an F1 team, and either director of FOM or FIA senate? Marco is FIA VP, (sport) and FOM VP. He therefore is one in charge of rules and commercial rights, as well as being a Ferrari director. NO OTHER TEAM ON THE GRID can have their own guy deciding rules and cash. |
|
|
| timmadigan | Mar 22 2006, 08:19 PM Post #5 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
First of all, FOM is in charge of commercial rights only, not the sport itself. This may affect Ferrari's specialty payment (which i think is stupid - even as a Ferrari fan), but it doesn't affect the rules. After that, i reiterate that everyone in the FIA senate and board members have ties to motor racing or a manufacturer. They HAVE to come from the motorsports world and are nominated by countries. If Marco had such influence, we would never have seen the changes in 2002 that had an adverse affect on Ferrari, nor any of the 2004 changes for 2005 - everything would have been kept status quo to help maintain Ferrari's dominance. |
![]() |
|
| PiquetFan | Mar 23 2006, 05:55 AM Post #6 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I find it interesting that there is a perception that the FIA "always favour Ferrari". While there is no doubt that Ferrari are the jewel in the crown as far as F1 is concerned, and they therefore have considerable financial clout, I have never subscribed to the conspiracy theories. My impression is that there has been a concerted attempt by the controlling body to reduce Ferrari dominance. This has sometimes been to the detriment of the sport as a spectacle. |
![]() |
|
| safc_fan89 | Mar 24 2006, 10:51 AM Post #7 |
|
safc_fan89
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yes, because the rule changes never work. If the rules of 2002 were left as they were, we would have a decent championship now. This season has the pntential to be great, but in reality it will be boring because the aero rules mean overtaking is extremely difficult. |
![]() |
|
| pedal power | Mar 24 2006, 11:52 AM Post #8 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The problems with changing the rules are that the changes are done or perceived to be done to favour Ferrari. One example, allowing tyre changes this season, last season Michelin (apart from the farce at the US GP) was the better tyre than the Bridgestone
|
![]() |
|
| safc_fan89 | Mar 24 2006, 01:00 PM Post #9 |
|
safc_fan89
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The last 2 major rule changes have been as a result of Ferrari domination. These things even themselves out eventually. McLaren's domination in the late 80s and then Williams' domination for a few years was ended eventually. The rules shouldn't have been changed. |
![]() |
|
| Red5 | Mar 26 2006, 09:34 PM Post #10 |
|
Apprentice
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Max Mosley used to supply Frank Williams with F1 cars when he owned March, hmmmm F1 must be rife with Williams favouritism Bernie Ecclestone used to use BMW engines as a team owner, hmmm I can really see the BMW bias in F1 The thread starter has been watching too many episodes of X Files |
![]() |
|
| pedal power | Mar 27 2006, 09:29 AM Post #11 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This argument could go on and on. The FIA seem to treat Ferrari differently from all the other teams. One example, to get Ferrari to sign the new concorde agreement (2008 onwards), Ferrari had been rumoured to be offered a guaranteed amount each season irrespective of where they finished in the constructors table. One reason was due to their long participation in F1 and over the last few years they regularly won the title. It should be level playing field and all negotiations regarding concorde agreement and F1 teams should be transparent.
|
![]() |
|
| Red5 | Mar 27 2006, 11:16 AM Post #12 |
|
Apprentice
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whether you or anyone likes it or not Ferrari are the biggest brand name in the sport, maybe in any sport in the world and also the best supported so are by far the biggest attraction commercially The payments to Ferrari have been going on for years and are in the current Concorde Agreement that was signed in 97 so it is nothing new, all the teams at the time agreed to it including McLaren and Williams etc If you are making a movie and are a movie producer then you are going to have to pay far more to Brad Pitt and Robert De Niro than you are for instance Jason Statham however good an actor he is, is it fair that Brad Pitt would command more than Jason Statham ? maybe not but Brad Pitt puts bums on seats and so do Ferrari |
![]() |
|
| pedal power | Mar 27 2006, 02:07 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I kind of see your point, however I think it should be based on where you finish at the end of the season, rather than how long you participated. From the posts on various boards, the majority of F1 fans want is a level playing field in all matters F1.
|
![]() |
|
| schead | Mar 29 2006, 10:00 PM Post #14 |
|
Unregistered
|
So, you still cant name one single other person who is a member of the FIA senate, as well as a F1 team board member, and a FOM director? No nonsense with "I don't believe they would do that" crap, name one person who has his thumb in all 3 pies, (or even, for the sake of argument, in just 2 pies). What Toyota, Honda, BMW, Williams, Renault, Mclaren, Red Bull/Torro Rosso, Midland or Super Aguri board member is also a member of the FIA senate, or a FOM board member? I can answer that for you. The answer is nobody. If you really believe that having a team board member on the FIA senate, (that controls the rules), doesn't affect rule setting for cronies, you are living in the land of the fairies. Likewise, if you believe that having a team board member on the board of FOM, (that controls the money giving), doesn't affect money decisions, you are equally in the land of the fairies. Do not reply with "Ferrari wouldn't do that", or "This guy is a nice guy, so wouldn't do that". Reply with facts. If you know of another F1 team board member that is also on either FOM or the FIA senate, let me know. |
|
|
| madindehead | Mar 30 2006, 10:01 AM Post #15 |
|
Apprentice
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
it has always seemed that way i must say. why for example did the FIA decide to change tyres again this year? because Michelin tyres won every single race last year, except for....oh Indy. and who wasn't happy with that? Bridgestone and Ferrari. remember that last year the only big team on Bridgestones was Ferrari. the other two were too small to count for anything. so there we can see Ferrari being favoured by the FIA. voila. |
![]() |
|
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archive Forum · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2










![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)


8:58 AM Jul 11