FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[CookinFlat6]

2006, Ferrari got the tyre rule changed to force a pitstop - hurt them

How did that hurt them exactly? Just because they didn't win the championship doesn't mean it hurt them, just didn't benefit them as much as they wanted.

Ferrari got Renaults mass damper banned, before which they were not winning, this hurt Renault, however the fact that they had to stop for tyre changes was better as one of the big advantages of the dampers was to keep the tyres in better shape. So its debatable that Ferrari would have been better off when Renaults dampers were banned if there werent tyre changes

In any case Ferrari still didnt win that year missing out by a few points, Renaults oss would have been bigger had they not had extra tyre changes

[CookinFlat6]

A lot of this is recent. Apart from 2006. Anymore older examples. From before 2009, from the era before that. Also is it true that Ferrari did cheat in the 1999 Malaysian GP, something to do with the under tray of the car I think, were disqualified and then pulled off some shifty agreement with the FIA or Bernie, got the decision reversed and then went on to win the Constructors Championship, the first in 16 years in 1999? Oh yeah, that was one big massive sentence too. At least I put in some commas for you to take breaths. hehehe

There are numerous examples of 'special assistance' for Ferrari over the years. Many have commented on this, and even the acronym FIA was said by many to mean Ferrari International Assistance, however nothing could ever be proven or claimed as fact.

However once Bernie actually confirmed Ferrari had 'special assistance' as well as extra payments and a rule veto, then it becomes academic to look back at any such incident in the past when Ferrari appeared to benefit from rulings and decisions made by the FIA.

However apart from that I am more interested in the less obvious incidents where Ferrari did not end up with a gain but nevertheless were at the center.

Thanks for the commas, I forget sometimes

[bud]

Kiki... you're back!!!

[AKR]

A lot of this is recent. Apart from 2006. Anymore older examples. From before 2009, from the era before that. Also is it true that Ferrari did cheat in the 1999 Malaysian GP, something to do with the under tray of the car I think, were disqualified and then pulled off some shifty agreement with the FIA or Bernie, got the decision reversed and then went on to win the Constructors Championship, the first in 16 years in 1999? Oh yeah, that was one big massive sentence too. At least I put in some commas for you to take breaths. hehehe

There are numerous examples of 'special assistance' for Ferrari over the years. Many have commented on this, and even the acronym FIA was said by many to mean Ferrari International Assistance, however nothing could ever be proven or claimed as fact.

However once Bernie actually confirmed Ferrari had 'special assistance' as well as extra payments and a rule veto, then it becomes academic to look back at any such incident in the past when Ferrari appeared to benefit from rulings and decisions made by the FIA.

However apart from that I am more interested in the less obvious incidents where Ferrari did not end up with a gain but nevertheless were at the center.

Thanks for the commas, I forget sometimes

good read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AKR]

Kiki... you're back!!!

Yep


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RichieRooster]

I think that F1 needs to just take stock of where it is. Lets not have teams like Ferrari and RBR spitting the dummy out because they're not at the front.
Ok Marc wont complain, but nor are Force India, Williams, McLaren, etc. I haven't heard Lotus screaming too loud up to now.
Yes, all Mercedes powered admittedly, Look at Ricciardo, he's making the Red Bull work.

Give the regs time. We cant change rules because a couple of teams disapprove. If other sports changed the rules because a couple of top teams complained they would be a laughing stock

[bud]

Off topic I know but mods, if there's one person who deserves to be in red and have access to secret women's business it's AKR!

[sagi58]

Kiki... you're back!!!

Yep

Rolling out the



for a fellow Tifosa!!
Benvenuta!!

[Jabberwocky]

I think AKR needs to ask to join the Red Club mate

Sent using NCC-1701

[racechick]

Where is AKR? Sagi and Spanky would just LOVE AKR. Actually I kindov miss her.

[AKR]

To all those who missed me and welcomed me, thank you. I'm very flattered. . Btw I have not been around for long time. What is Red Club? I assume a club for tifosi. I accept my welcome invitation in that case. .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LewEngBridewell]

The man is delusional. That was the best race F1 has had for years.!

My thoughts exactly. I saw his reaction when Alonso was passed easily by the Force India, and I knew more stupid comments were going to surface, no matter how exciting the race was.

To all those who missed me and welcomed me, thank you. I'm very flattered. .

Welcome back!

[racechick]

Oh you're there!!! I missed your previous posts, just thought someone was referring to you. Yes welcome back Kiki!

[CookinFlat6]

To all those who missed me and welcomed me, thank you. I'm very flattered. . Btw I have not been around for long time. What is Red Club? I assume a club for tifosi. I accept my welcome invitation in that case. .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even those that couldnt miss you as they were not here welcome you AKR. Its always welcome to have knowledgeable Ferrari supporters on board

While we are at it I would like to add another example of Montezemolo shooting the team in the foot by off track politics gone awry. And this one is fairly controversial

Maybe installing Todt as FIA head is now working against Ferrari? Maybe Todt is going out of his way to be fair and lawful and in doing so will be a little less enthusiastic about caving in on Ferraris demands?

Montezemolo had travelled to Bahrain to meet with Bernie Ecclestone and with FIA president Jean Todt to discuss changes he would like to make to the rules, to improve the show.

But Todt was adamant that, apart from working on raising the decibel level of the sound, there would be no changes.

“This is not a banana republic, where someone turns up and says, ‘Let’s change.’ IF you want changes, it has to be done through the regulatory framework,” he said after the meeting.

[/quote]

[1Lemon]

2006, Ferrari got the tyre rule changed to force a pitstop - hurt them

How did that hurt them exactly? Just because they didn't win the championship doesn't mean it hurt them, just didn't benefit them as much as they wanted.

Ferrari got Renaults mass damper banned, before which they were not winning, this hurt Renault, however the fact that they had to stop for tyre changes was better as one of the big advantages of the dampers was to keep the tyres in better shape. So its debatable that Ferrari would have been better off when Renaults dampers were banned if there werent tyre changes

In any case Ferrari still didnt win that year missing out by a few points, Renaults oss would have been bigger had they not had extra tyre changes

Ah yeah I forgot about those clever dampers.