General Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
However important Ferrari are believed to be for the sport, the sport is more damaged by the sort of manipulation that Ferrari have been using in the recent past than by leaving the sport.
That is my opinion, based on the revelation of the veto that Ferrari have had.
As I have said before, I am not a Ferrari fan, but I don't hate the team either.
I'm just wondering where this 'manipulation' by Ferrari takes place. F1 teams have been aware that Ferrari (and NOT ONLY Ferrari) have had differing commercial agreements - some would say good business acumen. Check out PlanetF1, and elswhere, the comments made by Norbet Haug, Sir Frank Williams and Mario Theisenn on what you refer to as 'manipulation'.
What 'arrangements' were made to allow Honda to morph in to BrawnGP?? - anybody complaining??
Is there a suggestion that Ferrari's cars on the track have been built to different regulations than the other teams?? - I think not. All the teams stretch the rules as far as they can - viz. Ross Braun - both at Ferrari AND Bawn/Honda.
Hence trackside (the public side) Ferrari have been no different to any other team. The commercial 'agreements' and 'arrangements' have been thrown in to stir the pot and split FOTA - and, as an aside, get F1 fans who don't particularly like Ferrari history jumping up and down.
- 2 Replies to A Yahoo! User
Mick as has already been said at Monaco this weekend the other teams knew about different contracts as regards payments. What they did not know about were the technical advantages (veto) that ferrari have had.