FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Frosty]

I knew there had contractual rights when it came to the regulations but I didn't realise it stretched as far back as 1998 I thought it was the product of the GPMA situation back in 2005. That's why Max has used this two tier system to try and get around the Ferrari veto power.

[Gilles 27]

I think its quite healthy that at least someone has veto power over the FIA. If it has to be a team, then what better team than the only one to have competed in every F1 season ever

[Jensonb]

Yes I know how veto works.

...

Well we finally have a reason why Ferrari got the FIA to crack-down on Michelin's tyre widths in 2003 which cost Williams and McLaren a chance of the title.

Yep that was the first one that crossed my mind. There's loads when you think about it. Its infuriating!

[racechick]

Yes I know how veto works.

...

Well we finally have a reason why Ferrari got the FIA to crack-down on Michelin's tyre widths in 2003 which cost Williams and McLaren a chance of the title.

Yep that was the first one that crossed my mind. There's loads when you think about it. Its infuriating!

Why do you always have to be so arguementative. I know how veto works but I cant remember the details of the tyre arguement. There was another tyre thing as well when the regs changed and Ferari benefitted, I just dont remember the details.

[Jensonb]

Yes I know how veto works.

...

Well we finally have a reason why Ferrari got the FIA to crack-down on Michelin's tyre widths in 2003 which cost Williams and McLaren a chance of the title.

Yep that was the first one that crossed my mind. There's loads when you think about it. Its infuriating!

Why do you always have to be so arguementative. I know how veto works but I cant remember the details of the tyre arguement. There was another tyre thing as well when the regs changed and Ferari benefitted, I just dont remember the details.

Why do you have to be so sensationalist? I was just trying to calm the exclamations of mis-deed and make sure we directed it only where it was due

Interesting sidenote on that. If we know about it, it probably had nothing to do with Ferrari's veto.

[Frosty]

Another thing I would say is i guess that Ferrari can Veto the regulations that will affect them but not veto ones that don't directly affect them that's why the FIA have come up with the 2 tier system.

[Jensonb]

Another thing I would say is i guess that Ferrari can Veto the regulations that will affect them but not veto ones that don't directly affect them that's why the FIA have come up with the 2 tier system.

That's an interesting point actually...The Two Tiers isn't just to appease Ferrari's veto (Though it notably failed to do so), it's to isolate it.

[racechick]

Yes I know how veto works.

...

Well we finally have a reason why Ferrari got the FIA to crack-down on Michelin's tyre widths in 2003 which cost Williams and McLaren a chance of the title.

Yep that was the first one that crossed my mind. There's loads when you think about it. Its infuriating!

Why do you always have to be so arguementative. I know how veto works but I cant remember the details of the tyre arguement. There was another tyre thing as well when the regs changed and Ferari benefitted, I just dont remember the details.

Why do you have to be so sensationalist? I was just trying to calm the exclamations of mis-deed and make sure we directed it only where it was due

Interesting sidenote on that. If we know about it, it probably had nothing to do with Ferrari's veto.

Sensationalist how? By pointing out the favours Ferrari have been enjoying or by agreeing with an observation made by 7up?

[7UpJordan]

Whilst we're still on the subject of the Ferrari veto's, remember McLaren's clever braking system used in the first few races before surprise-surprise Ferrari noticed it and got it banned? And also who can forget the sudden baffling decision to have Renault's mass-dampers banned in 2006?

Imagine if Todt/Schumi/FIA-bias era Ferrari had been around when the FW14B was conquering everything in sight, Ferrari would have tried to get everything on that car banned, the active-ride suspension, ABS brakes, traction control, semi-automatic gearbox (probably try and claim Williams copied them in some kind of melo-dramatic spygate scandal).

[Gilles 27]

Right just so we're clear, as Jensonb has already and correctly highlighted, we're talking about a VETO not any kind of ability to dictate to the FIA any kind of mid season rule changes or clarifications. It simply allows Ferrari to say no to any rule changes proposed by the FIA, nothing else, nothing to do with getting stuff banned!

[racechick]

I wonder why Ferrari didn't veto the banning of some of the innovative technologies that other teams came up with... Seems a shame.

[Gilles 27]

Well no team in their right mind would help out their competitors, especially if what they are doing is actually against the rules. This Ferrari conspiracy stuff is just sour grapes and is tired and old. even if it was going on, its not the reason they won so many titles.

[racechick]

Its no conspiracy, Ferrari have admitted it!!

[Gilles 27]

They are constantly being accused of cheating by people who are bitter about the results of previous championships and they have never admitted to cheating. The conspiracy theory is that Ferrari have won their championships because they have cheated in some way and this is not the case

[racechick]

I havent mentioned cheating in this thread. Ive said they had veto over regulations. This is a fact.Yes you are right, they would have been mad to help their competitors by vetoing the banning of their technological advancements. Perhaps the same vetoing rights afforded to all teams might have been a fairer way to go.
They were not all illegal incidentally, only declared so after FIA intervention. Legality is determined by the FIA and Ferrari had veto over their decisions.