FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[racechick]

Quite an emotive subject. I don't believe any competitor in any sport should have a veto over the rules and regulations of that sport; but this is F1 with all its back room, underhand deals, corruption, power struggles and bribes. I come to this discussion as a supporter of drivers in teams who have competed against Ferrari (Williams, McLaren and now Mercedes) so my views may differ from the views of the Tifosi. I thought it worth exploring some of the reasons I've heard bandied about as to why its ok for Ferrari to have a veto on the rules and regulations of the sport.

1.ferrarri have a great history of motor racing.

Well indeed they do........but so do McLaren and they haven't got a veto. Mercedes were racing cars before Ferrari existed, they haven't got a veto.

2.They have a wide fan base all across the world. Their fans are very passionate they deserve the veto for their team

Whilst its great that Ferrari are so well supported everywhere, why does that require them to have a veto? and id suggest that other teams have lots of passionate fans around the world too.

3. F1 needs Ferrari. Everything must be done to keep Ferrari in F1 and if that means giving them a veto, so be it.

My view is that no competitor can be placed above the series/ competition in which it is competing, that in itself will diminish and taint the competition.

4. Ferrari are just special.

I really have no answer to that one.

5. Someone needs a veto to stop the FIA doing silly things.

Id say why Ferrari? Why not a representative group from all teams? And where was that veto when Bernie brought in go slow tyres? Double points?
which brings me nicely to my next point

6. Ferrari have a veto but they'd never use it.

So why have it then? But in fact they have used it. it cost Montoya ( my favourite driver before Lewis ) the 2003 World Driver Championship ( Michelin tyre fiasco). Did they veto the Renault mass damper? Don't know. What else have they vetoed? Don't know, because its all hush hush , secret secret. we didn't even know they had a veto until relatively recently. In the old days it would be Jean on the blower to his old mate Max........not a man you'd likely have top of your list of guys with integrity, and not a man above abusing his position of power to conduct a personal vendetta, in this case against Ron Dennis.
And now we have Jean himself running the show. i must admit I've been impressed with his performance, he's seemed to do things very fairly, but the fact is we don't know. We don't know if Luca's been on the phone asking for the regs to be tightened up a little and therefore outlawing the new Merc nose. Yes they can veto new technology.
But to me we shouldn't be debating 'if', or 'when' or 'how' the veto has been used, we should be asking 'why?' Why has one team been bestowed with this power?
I thought a poll might add a little interest to the debate, so please tick the phrase that most closely fits your view of the veto. Of course you may have a completely new view that I've not thought of. Please share it with us! there are a lot of Tifosi on the forum, id love to hear that side of it....straight form the (prancing) horse's mouth so to speak.

[Jabberwocky]

For me I believe it should be an all or nothing scenario. Everyone has it or no one has it. However if non of the other teams had the sense to weedle one out of the FIA/FOM to get them to sign a Concorde agreement then that is there look out.

[myownalias]

Any team having a veto is a stupid idea! my view is that teams should have no say in making policy, rules and regulation, that in my view is the job of the governing body and/or owners. The teams simply have to decide whether they want to compete under the given rules and regulations. Giving teams power will always lead to corruption with teams throwing their toys when they don't get their way; this is all teams, not just Ferrari!

[What's Burning?]

waiting for the tifosi to chime in

[spankyham]

waiting for the tifosi to chime in

Chiming in

You can't pass judgement on only knowing hearsay about one element of a contract. Perhaps if someone could post the whole contract we could come to some view. Anything else that is posted is simply pure speculation.

I guess this is almost a temptation too big to resist if you want to speculate negatively about Ferrari. We will see how the speculation develops in-thread.

[What's Burning?]

It's not speculation that they have veto power, it's not speculation that they've used that veto power in the past, it's not speculation that they were granted such power as an enticement for them not to leave the sport. Therefore there is no need to know the exact verbiage of the contract.

My views do not apply only to Ferrari, the name of the team is irrelevant, because what I oppose is favoritism by those that set the rules towards a specific team. To put it in terms I know will resonate with you, just like Ferrari claim no driver is bigger than the team, no team is bigger than the sport.

[sagi58]

waiting for the tifosi to chime in

I have to agree with spanky!! Without knowing the who, what, when, why and how,
it's pretty difficult to look back at a decision that was made unless we understand
the circumstances surrounding it.

Being fair, isn't always about equality.

[What's Burning?]

It's not that difficult to get an idea of the framework in place. The truth about Ferrari's power in Formula One

[racechick]

waiting for the tifosi to chime in

I have to agree with spanky!! Without knowing the who, what, when, why and how,
it's pretty difficult to look back at a decision that was made unless we understand
the circumstances surrounding it.

Being fair, isn't always about equality.

Clearly not. It's about favouring Ferrari.

Reading that article WB posted, showing exactly how Ferrari are favoured, and which page of the contract it's written on, it's difficult to hang on to the notion that it's all hearsay. In fact it's worse the I thought!! The amount of extra money they get is ludicrous. But my major gripe is the veto. It's like playing a football match whereby your opponent is obliged to remove the goalkeeper for fifteen minutes, or play with only ten men.
It's very hard not to have negative feelings about Ferrari in the face of such injustices.

[spankyham]

It's not that difficult to get an idea of the framework in place. The truth about Ferrari's power in Formula One

...Reading that article WB posted, ..... my major gripe is the veto.

Again, anything you are reading into a Ferrari veto is nothing but pure speculation. If you want to deal in facts, publish and quote the contract - then you have a basis.

The only section specified in that article refers to a prospectus which says, for "some" rules that have already been agreed to by all teams, they cannot be changed unless Ferrari agrees, and if that is breached then Ferrari may terminate their participation in the contract.

As I mentioned, those who want to speculate and make up other veto powers or meanings of course are free to do that, but it is nothing but speculation and an avenue, for those who want, to be as creative as they like.

Ferrari have veto over the birth of all first born of all F1 drivers racing for teams other than the Scuderia perhaps

[LRW]

s***. We better not speculate. Quick - best green pen 80% of the threads on here.

[LewEngBridewell]

So who's clicked poll option 4?

[What's Burning?]

Ferrari have veto over the birth of all first born of all F1 drivers racing for teams other than the Scuderia perhaps

I understand why you'd rather not speculate, I don't understand why your rationalize or ridicule any discussion that one competitor can have veto power over anything let alone some of the specifics mentioned.

I agree, let's not speculate, because we all know that the truth is entirely less savory than anything we can speculate about.

Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven.

[spankyham]

... the specifics mentioned.

As yet, not one specific from the agreement in question has been revealed. One second hand document says that Ferrari can leave F1 if "some" (not all) rules that have already been agreed to, are attempted to be changed.

I agree, let's not speculate, because we all know that the truth is entirely less savory than anything we can speculate about.

I have no doubt that with the given carte blanche here, the speculation will probably hit some new highs on the savory-o-meter.

.... If only we all used more facts to base our opinions on before commenting....

[What's Burning?]

Couple of years ago, Red Bull had flappy front wings, and parc ferme hand adjustable suspension, but we didn't hear anything other than third party speculation. I mean we could see the wings flapping but hey, they passed the test so nothing illegal right? That situation reminds me a lot of this not so mythical Ferrari veto.
We're never going to get the details but that doesn't mean that this veto isn't real, that it isn't UGLY and it hasn't been exercised plenty. Ferrari did get the new engine reqs delayed by a year and two additional cylinders added to the ICE unit with zero fuss.

F1 is unsavory enough as is. People go to jail based on circumstantial evidence all the time. Sometimes the evidence has to be dug for, investigative reporters do it all the time, it rarely ever comes accompanied with a confession from the guilty, but I'm sure Ferrari has nothing to hide.