Ferrari is cheating!! (again!) - Opinion

sgd · Post by **sgd** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 3:29 am

Test Ban??
"we don't chaet, but we test when there's a Ban for the rest of the teams" ferrari.
even if that ban was not obligatory by the rules.

call it as you want. I call that cheat.

Krazy-K · Post by **Krazy-K** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 6:33 am

All the teams in cooperation to reduce costs agreed on the "Gentlemans Agreement" and thus reduce testing. Again as has been stated, there is no ban as such, but simply an understanding between the teams. No one told the teams to sign it, but its just in the interest of the sport. Ferrari is following its own interest, if they did not want to be part of it and continue testing that's their own decision. As long as its not a rule passed by the FIA then there's no reason for them to stop testing. They're not cheating in this case either, again its just poor sportsmanship.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:29 am

In answer to K...Ferrari have the morals of a particularly sluttish alley cat.
Eg., they are currently testing everything they own that moves in a desperate attempt to claw back some advantage, whilst the rest of the teams abide by a gentlemans agreement.

Krazy-K · Post by **Krazy-K** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:45 am

Yeah,

, that's just about right

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:53 am

Krazy-K wrote:Yeah, , that's just about right

Kfer, that is twice you have agreed with me. I am getting distinctly nervous

sgd · Post by **sgd** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:16 am

Krazy-K wrote:... poor sportsmanship.

I know that about the Gentlemans Agreement... and i knew some will write excately what you wrote... i'm quite a pragmatical and so for me an auto-ban and a ban has little difference... I see it like cheat and of course will benefit ferrari.
it's clear for me that they just cannot win in a same-for-all conditions championship.
CHEAT CHEAT CHEAT!!

Krazy-K · Post by **Krazy-K** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:54 pm

Everyones entitled to their opinion

F1greyhound · Post by **F1greyhound** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 4:08 am

Its always hard to decide on your own against a group......

If you will agree to all gentlemans agreements you are offered you may throw the 1st stone...........

FERRARI simply dont agree to the testing restriction UNDER THE CURRENT CONDITIONS! Condemn them as much as you want but IT IS THEIR RIGHT!

Everybody in F1 tries to use the regulations to the limits to achieve a maximum result, e.g.MCLAREN "illegal brakes" in 1998, BAR "illegal fuel tanks" this year or MICHELIN "illegal flexible tyres" in 2003.

This weeping about FERRARIs extreme testing advantage is becoming boring....Marc Gene driving the V8 last week will provide them with a great advantage for Istanbul.......

CHEERS!

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:54 pm

The FIA have been talking about cost cutting to save the sport for a few years now. The fact that the Ferrari continues testing even during the August break is not only damaging their reputation but also the FIA's credibility.

In my opinion what Ferrari are doing is wrong even though there isn't a written rule that prevents them but as I said before, even with their abuse of the rules they are struggling and will at best finish 3rd this year and to that I say: Your selfishness in gaining preferential treatment from Bridgestone put you where you are now. YOU DESERVE IT

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 3:15 pm

Krazy-K wrote: .... An example: Most of the time you will see the Bridgestone headman standing next to Jean Todt throughout the race or qualifying. This of course is understandable for Bridgestone cause they want to get their top team to win, and for ferrari very conveniant because they get to have a tire producer give them tailored-fitted tires. (Notice how Bridgestone is only represented in the top teams through Ferrari, Michelin dominating the rest). But again there's nothing wrong with that, no one says that you can't do that, and companies are just following their own interest, i bet Michelin would be doing the same if put in that position.

Hi Krazy-K,

I disagree with your comment about Michelin doing the same thing. When they re-entered the sport they only had Williams as a top team and a year later McLaren signed up yet they still treated them equally and they still are treating all their teams equally. Michelin have a different philosophy from Bridgestone and I suspect that is why Ferrari decided not to switch to them early on.

Krazy-K · Post by **Krazy-K** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 6:56 pm

The main point i personally was trying to make was that Ferrari basically has their own Tire Producer who gives them the tires that they need, specified to suit the needs of their car. Whether or not Michelin would do the same is up for debate really, but you make a really good point, and have me thinking if what i said was not a bit off.

F1greyhound · Post by **F1greyhound** » Sun Aug 14, 2005 10:34 pm

Could you explain where is the advantage if the MICHELIN rubbers are better anyway?

You forget that the disbalance was created by teams like MCLAREN and BAR who switched to MICHELIN hoping for a better performance. This move was ok, but you cant blame FERRARI for remaining the only topteam with BRIDGESTONE. Maybe they were the only ones who tested enough to bring a functional tyre to Indy? Great cost-cutting if you have to mess up complete GPs...

Re. the cost-cutting FERRARI offered very efficient alternatives but as said before they have the whole group against them. Generally some changes to the regulations have been made to end the domination of FERRARI. If you take this years results that move, supported by all other teams, proved successfull.

Oh, these Ron Dennises and Flavio Briatores of this world are so much fairer than Jean Todt....HAHA

Come on folks, look for REAL conspiracies!

JayVee · Post by **JayVee** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 5:08 pm

F1greyhound,

When a team switches tyre suppliers they are taking a huge risk and they would only do it if they are confident the situation would be better for them. Both McLaren and BAR and even Sauber left Bridgestone because they couldn't accept being treated inferior to Ferrari by Bridgestone.

None of those teams knew for a fact that switching to Michelin would give them an advantage over Bridgestone, there is no way they would have known that before they switched. Unless it is a given that Bridgestone is inferior and will always remain so but then why would Bridgestone be in the sport then

The disbalance as you call it was created by the exclusive relationship between Bridgestone and Ferrari. As Ross Brawn said earlier this year, it was their own fault that they put themselves into this situation.

The testing alternatives put forward by Ferrari were not acceptable but why should 9 teams accept what 1 team wants. The most logical and common sense is for the majority to rule.

The regulation changes! You make me laugh, please tell us which rule was introduced to stop the domination of Ferrari ?
Face it, Ferrari stuffed up this year. Last year they took the title so early that they had more time than any other team to concentrate on this year's car (especially given their huge budget) yet they were arrogant enough (as Ralf once said) to think they will dominate with a modified old car and delayed the new car to maximise the benefit.
In the preseason most if not all of the so-called experts predicted another Ferrari/Michael domination and you really want us to beleive the regulations were put to end the domination of Ferrari (as you say: go look for REAL conspiracies

)

As for Dennis and Briatore, well yes I do beleive they are much fairer than Todt. Just look at the controversy Ferrari have created in the last 5 years and compare

F1greyhound · Post by **F1greyhound** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 9:10 pm

Can you prove that when MCLAREN left BRIDGESTONE even though they had just beaten FERRARI twice in the WDC they did so because FERRARI was favoured?

Can you prove that when BAR and SAUBER switched to MICHELIN at a time when it was evident that the french rubbers are superior they did so because FERRARI was favoured?

Come on..

The controversy as you call it was most times proven to be just "hot air" anyway. Im sure there will be a reasonable solution possible for next year but it cant mean that a particular team is put at a disadvantage or that restricted testing will mean a risk for the drivers or the promoters(like Indy 2005).

When new regulations with significant changes are made there is always the best chance for stopping the domination of one team. Not so sure about the FERRARI, but I would say BRIDGESTONE are the ones who "stuffed up" this year, except Indy.

Re, the teambosses, well everybody is entitled to his opinion.

Julian Mayo · Post by **Julian Mayo** » Mon Aug 15, 2005 10:12 pm

.................."french rubbers"