FORUMula1.com

[texasmr2]

I seem to recall the Germans worshiping Berger in the 80's and 90's and he was Austrian!!!!!

How times change!

That's my boy Gerhard as his appeal and character made him loved no matter what his nationality was. I alway's loved to hear his interview's as they would ask "So Gerhard what do you find to be the best part of this circuit?' and his reply would be "Zee girls'"!!!

that must of been when he had zee hair!

Ladies and gentlemen we have a WINNER LOL!!! Stop it RD I'm about to piss myself !!!

[manbearpig]

Before I start this topic, unless you didn't know already I am neutral in the Ferrari/McLaren debacle as I am a Williams and Jordan fan, secondly I do not want to see posts like "fERRAri are TEH cheating tozzorxz" "Alonso cheated by using info" etc as this will be just ignored which I know most of you don't do but you can never be too careful.

After the recent events of Stepneygate, Raikkonen winning the title and Ferrari and Schumacher's dominance early in the decade, and of course Ferrari being the most successful F1 team in history, a lot of people seem to feel the FIA are biased towards Ferrari. One thing we all seem to agree on is that Max Moseley is an idiot and needs removing of his duties ASAP, but I don't quite think he's Ferrari biased. Here's a few points that should be considered.

Suzuka - 1990

Everyone knows the story of this one, Senna got pole position, asked the FIA to move the pole slot to the other side of the track, they agreed to do so but did not fulfill it, Prost gets away better, Senna rams him off at turn 1, becomes Champion, Berger goes off at the same corner 1 lap later, Mansell's Ferrari breaks down (again), Piquet and Moreno score Benetton 1-2 and Aguri Suzuki becomes the first Japanese driver on the podium etc etc.

The important thing here is that Prost was driving a Ferrari, and also Balestre was the FISA president at that time and Senna kept his title, and this was a year after Senna accused Balestre of fixing the 1989 Championship in Prost's favour (who was still with Senna at McLaren that year). Any sign of Ferrari bias or even French bias from the FIA here? Nope.

The 1990's - Williams dominance and Ferrari are nowhere

Nigel Mansell and Alain Prost in 1992 and 1993 pretty much coasted to the titles in their Williams cars that had the best Active suspension, ABS brakes, Traction control etc whilst Ferrari were pretty much nowhere and only led 1 Grand Prix - Jean Alesi in the opening laps of the 1993 Portuguese GP. If the FIA were "Ferrari biased" at this time, they would have taken away Williams' electonic gizmos away.

They did indeed take away TC, active suspension from them eventually though, but not just them though, all of the teams' gizmos - even Ferrari's. And this was for 1994, but originally they wanted to ban it from the Canadian GP with immediate effect, and the only team that wouldn't have been affected wasn't Ferrari, it was the Scuderia Italia team - the back of grid warmers of 1993 with their slow and heavy Lola chassis.

The Schumacher years - the ones he didn't get away with

Now we come to the Schumacher years at Ferrari and the occasions he didn't get away with any "dirty driving". First of all, Jerez 1997, he tries to take off Jacques Villeneuve, fails, loses the title and gets punished by the FIA and has his 2nd place in the title taken away from him.

Next we have Austria 2002, Barrichello's about to win, Jean Todt passes a piece of paper, Barrichello lets Schumacher through to win, the crowd boos, Schumacher feels embarrassed and Ferrari chicken up the podium ceremony and get hit with a whopping fine and team orders are banned.

And last but not least, Monaco 2006 qualifying. Schumacher's got provisional pole, Alonso and Webber are setting faster sector times than Schumacher who promptly "stalls" at Rascasse cocking everybody's laps up in order to keep pole. He gets all of his times taken away and is promptly sent to the back of the grid.

Discuss.

• Good post Jordan . I've yet to see any solid evidence that the FIA favors Ferrari , it's all just rumors .

Like some that would blame Ferrari for the mass damper ban last year , when Flavio says it was Mclaren that did it .

• And the Prost got favoritism from the FIA at Suzuka , well , that's just a red herring thrown out by Mac fans for an unexcusable act by their driver , perhaps the most blatent take out move in histoy .

• At least Schumi would leave room for doubt . But let's not let truth get in the way of a good hate .

[bud]

I've yet to see any solid evidence that the FIA favors Ferrari , it's all just rumors . Like some that would blame Ferrari for the mass damper ban last year , when Flavio says it was Mclaren that did it . And the Prost got favoritism from the FIA at Suzuka , well , that's just a red herring thrown out by Mac fans for an unexcusable act by their driver , perhaps the most blatent take out move in histoy . At least Schumi would leave room for doubt . But let's not let truth get in the way of a good hate .

i thought the most blatant take out move was Jerez 97 by Schumi on JV afterall Schumi got punished Senna didnt! then theres the move on Hill in Adelaide 94!
Yeah Sennas move was blatant but i believe it was justice after what happened in 89 after Prost turning in on Senna who then won the race and title only to have it taken away after the race through a technicality! aside to that you dont see anything wrong with winning pole then having the side of the track for pole changed after qualifying?

[darwin dali]

afterall Schumi got punished Senna didnt!

Yup, that's why you can't say the FIA is biased towards Ferrari

[bud]

afterall Schumi got punished Senna didnt!

Yup, that's why you can't say the FIA is biased towards Ferrari

he was out of the race it didnt matter what happened afterwards! he was allowed to keep his records it was a light punishment in reality

[Mikep99]

I've yet to see any solid evidence that the FIA favors Ferrari , it's all just rumors . Like some that would blame Ferrari for the mass damper ban last year , when Flavio says it was Mclaren that did it . And the Prost got favoritism from the FIA at Suzuka , well , that's just a red herring thrown out by Mac fans for an unexcusable act by their driver , perhaps the most blatent take out move in histoy . At least Schumi would leave room for doubt . But let's not let truth get in the way of a good hate .

i thought the most blatant take out move was Jerez 97 by Schumi on JV afterall Schumi got punished Senna didnt! then theres the move on Hill in Adelaide 94!
Yeah Sennas move was blatant but i believe it was justice after what happened in 89 after Prost turning in on Senna who then won the race and title only to have it taken away after the race through a technicality! aside to that you dont see anything wrong with winning pole then having the side of the track for pole changed after qualifying?

Some very good points there manbearpig.

Bud I agree Shumi's 97 & 94 were major brain snaps & unacceptable in my eyes.
But it’s a bumout saying Sennas was OK because it was payback. All equally unacceptable.

[bud]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49qF32Pazwc watch this vid Mike

[manbearpig]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49qF32Pazwc watch this vid Mike

I'm not sure what that video proves , except Senna was already po'ed before the race . And I'm not one to defend Schumi , so I will withdraw that comparison .

[bud]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49qF32Pazwc watch this vid Mike

I'm not sure what that video proves , except Senna was already po'ed before the race . And I'm not one to defend Schumi , so I will withdraw that comparison .

what Senna was DQ for the previous year 89 is allowed in 1990 on the gournds of safety!

[manbearpig]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49qF32Pazwc watch this vid Mike

I'm not sure what that video proves , except Senna was already po'ed before the race . And I'm not one to defend Schumi , so I will withdraw that comparison .

what Senna was DQ for the previous year 89 is allowed in 1990 on the gournds of safety!

I still don't get what you argument is . Yes Senna got a bit of a shafting there , but he should have proved he was the better driver by going around Prost , not through him . That's what I'm saying , but maybe we're talking about two different things .

[bud]

arguement is Karma dude Prost had it coming after he turned in on him in 89 Suzuka!

the briefing shows Senna was not too impressed with Prost voting for what Senna got DQ for in 89 as being ok should something like that happen in the chicane again in 1990, you see Piquet putting the case forward, add ontop the Pole position grid spot being swapped over after qualifying where the pole spot was not on the rubbered side of the track so who ever got P2 had the advantage. when before qualifying the stewards said the pole spot would be on the rubbered side of the track.
I believe Senna even said before the race that he was just going for the first corner no matter what! Prost didnt even lift knowing that Senna definately wasnt so whose to blame there huh

[F1tastic]

Yes.

[onelapdown]

If I could just lob a couple of hand grenades in, by the time of Suzuka '89 Prost had already signed for Ferrari for the following year, so to go back to the original theme of this post...

Also, in 1994 not only was TC, Active suspension Etc banned but refueling was reintroduced, which favoured cars with thirsty engines (such as Ferrari's V12 for example.)

[Martin]

Interesting debate. On the face of it Ferrari does not really seem to have had much special treatment (Shumi's behaviour was blatant and obvious so the FIA would have to punish him). Its more subtle than that I think. I think that it is about how much influence Ferrari has with the FIA. It has to be a factor. All teams should be represented.
That Max has a 'special relationship' with di Montizemolo is not in doubt, cos Max said so, he has also made it clear that he does not have a good relationship with Ron Dennis, so Max would have to be extremely proffesional to not allow those 2 factors to prevent him from using influence within the FIA. Is he that proffesional? I dont think so. I dont know what his relationship is with Briatori, or anyone else, but I just dont think that the FIA is well run by MM, especially with a stroge Ferrari presence.
Its just opinions but I think that the FIA management needs a bit of a sort out, for the sake and credibility of the sport.

[bud]

the problem with the FIA is its run by patriotic Europeans! each looking out for their own nation closely followed by a team their aligned to with majority being aligned to Ferrari.