UK Karting - Notice Board (Chat) : Re: Confirmation..

Notice Board (Chat)

Re: Confirmation..
Posted by 'itpro' on 22 May 2009 @ 10:19

| View Message Thread | Reply to this message |

itproJoined: August 2001
Total Posts: 6
[ View User Profile ]

Total tripe!

Currently, there is a dispute about whether the RIGGED contract was from 1998 and NOT 2005 which you would currently prefer to pretend was the ACTUAL date! That will only become clear when (if) the contract is laid before the CIVIL court for the court's perusal! FIAt are 'considering' whether they WANT to take this to a civil court or not! They may WELL decide that the benefits for showing their cheating-hand will be outweighed by the DIS-benefits of making clear EXACTLY how many championships were RIGGED for them!

The details of the potential 1998 contract have NOT been disclosed as yet even though MANY are openly suspecting its existence. It's my bet that it will NEVER be disclosed unless FIAt decide to go 'Nuclear' over the '2 tier championship'. However, I put NOTHING past FIAt's spite and anger!

Oh.... I am SURE that Maurice Hamilton and Ian Phillips would like to be dismissed as 'not mainstream' to name just TWO! Secondly, I am SURE you prefer the Independent's view of the matter; personally, I have MUCH more faith in the Times, who said:-

*************************

Ferrari would be able to stop anything they did not like or changes which they might suspect could be advantageous to their competitors or moves in technical directions which either did not suit their cars or the abilities of their designers and engineers. Ferrari could thus decide exactly how far apart the goalposts should be in what is supposed to be the world's pinnacle series in motor sport. Once again, any analogy with other sports underlines just how indefensible this arrangement is. Imagine the English cricket team having a secret deal with the ICC allowing them to veto any changes in the rules when this is not available to Pakistan, Australia or South Africa?

Given that Ferrari have been secretly afforded preferential commercial and technical arrangements by the people who run Formula 1, it is only a small step to suggest that those same people also afforded preferential treatment to Ferrari in sporting decisions. Sporting decisions, that is, made by the FIA stewards, the FIA World Motorsport Council, and the FIA International Court of Appeal. Given the extra information that is now at our disposal, it may be time to re-write the history of Formula 1 over the last 10 years.

Let us begin in 1998, when Ferrari reputedly first received their right to veto any of the FIA's technical regulations. McLaren began that year in dominant form, but were running a special 'brake-steer' system, which applied differential braking force to the rear wheels as an aid to direction-change. This was swiftly banned by the FIA, despite having been used by McLaren throughout much of 1997, without any legal challenge. Ferrari subsequently came close to snatching the 1998 drivers' championship from McLaren.

In 1999, the championship fight again distilled into a battle between Ferrari and McLaren, but at the penultimate race, both Ferraris were disqualified when their 'bargeboards' (aerodynamic appendages behind the front wheels) were found to be outside the mandatory dimensions. Ferrari's Ross Brawn was initially disinclined to appeal what appeared to be a cut-and-dried decision. Something, however, subsequently changed his mind, and an appeal was lodged. Days later, the FIA International Court of Appeal reversed Ferrari's disqualification, on the basis not that the bargeboards were in fact legal, but that the rules had been inadequately written. McLaren salvaged the championship at the final race.

McLaren were working on an energy recovery system at this time, and their engine supplier, Mercedes, were also exploring the use of beryllium in their powerplants. Ferrari, however, lobbied the FIA over the use of both technologies, and both were duly banned.

There then ensued a period in which Ferrari dominated the sport. There was a blip, however, in 2003, when the Michelin-shod Williams and McLaren cars mounted a championship bid against the Bridgestone-shod Ferraris. At a crucial stage in the battle, Bridgestone complained that the contact patch of the Michelin tyres exceded that permitted by the regulations. The contact patch of the Michelins had been unchanged since 2001, but the FIA upheld Bridgestone's complaint, Michelin were forced to change their tyres, and Ferrari won the championship.

In 2006, the Renault of Fernando Alonso, fighting Michael Schumacher's Ferrari for the World Championship, employed a 'mass-damper' in the suspension system. The mass-damper maintained a consistent contact patch between the tyre and road surface. Prior to the German Grand Prix at the end of July, the FIA banned this device, and did so on grounds which would have rendered all aspects of a suspension system illegal. The stewards of the Italian Grand Prix at Monza then gave Alonso a grid-place penalty for no greater impertinence than running ahead of Felipe Massa's Ferrari during a qualifying lap. Alonso would have lost the 2006 championship, but for an engine failure suffered by Schumacher at the penultimate race.

In 2007, the FIA fined McLaren $100,000,000 for receiving confidential information from a Ferrari employee. A tight championship battle between Ferrari and McLaren was won at the final race by Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen, when the McLaren of Lewis Hamilton suffered an unexplained electrical defect.

And then, in 2008, with yet another championship battle between McLaren and Ferrari reaching its climax, Lewis Hamilton was stripped of victory in the Belgian Grand Prix for skipping the chicane. On this occasion, however, Ferrari lost the championship at the final corner of the last race.

The current state of play between Ferrari and the FIA, with Luca di Montezemolo threatening to withdraw from the sport, and Max Mosley asserting that Formula 1 could survive without Ferrari, is perhaps akin to a falling-out, then, between lovers. Is this the end of the affair? Will there be a trial separation, or perhaps more likely, a grudging rapprochement? Perhaps all it needs is an incentive or two to bring the parties together again.

**************

Perhaps you'd like to pretend that the Times don't count as "Mainstream", too?

Ian

Message Thread:

For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 13:49)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 13:57)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'Doink' (21 May 2009 @ 14:13)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'Boots' (21 May 2009 @ 14:21)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'RichyC' (21 May 2009 @ 15:05)

Makes McLaren`s problems seem very small time now. by 'IvanGreenfield' (21 May 2009 @ 15:34)

Re: Makes McLaren`s problems seem very small time by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 15:51)

Rigged by 'TanglerTKM' (22 May 2009 @ 15:57)

Re: Rigged by 'Doink' (22 May 2009 @ 16:31)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 16:36)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'TanglerTKM' (22 May 2009 @ 17:20)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'Doink' (22 May 2009 @ 17:26)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'Doink' (22 May 2009 @ 17:31)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'Doink' (22 May 2009 @ 18:02)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'itpro' (23 May 2009 @ 0:37)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'TanglerTKM' (23 May 2009 @ 8:54)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'Gillard77' (23 May 2009 @ 11:12)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'itpro' (24 May 2009 @ 0:37)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'davidmc' (24 May 2009 @ 2:16)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'itpro' (26 May 2009 @ 0:51)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'TanglerTKM' (26 May 2009 @ 1:24)

Re: Rigged, Tangler by 'TanglerTKM' (24 May 2009 @ 10:09)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (21 May 2009 @ 15:51)

Typical Tifosi by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 16:40)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'Doink' (21 May 2009 @ 16:49)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (21 May 2009 @ 17:13)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 18:27)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (21 May 2009 @ 22:18)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:11)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (22 May 2009 @ 0:31)

Re: Typical Tifosi by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:45)

Confirmation.. by 'merv' (21 May 2009 @ 18:18)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'itpro' (21 May 2009 @ 18:28)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'Doink' (21 May 2009 @ 18:53)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'davidmc' (21 May 2009 @ 18:51)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (22 May 2009 @ 0:17)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:31)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (22 May 2009 @ 0:45)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:49)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'davidmc' (22 May 2009 @ 2:14)

Re: Confirmation.. by 'itpro' << You are here!

Re: Confirmation.. by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 12:08)

Oh really.......! by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:27)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'BD' (21 May 2009 @ 18:57)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (21 May 2009 @ 22:26)

Re: For those who said I was WRONG about FIAt! by 'kudos' (21 May 2009 @ 22:51)

BD and Dan by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 0:43)

Davidmc if you want to quote... by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 9:18)

And this from the times as well.. by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 9:23)

Re: And this from the times as well.. by 'davidmc' (22 May 2009 @ 13:26)

Re: Davidmc if you want to quote... by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 9:25)

Re: BD and Dan by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 9:23)

BD...DOH! by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 9:31)

re: bd...doh! by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 9:35)

re: bd...doh! by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 9:42)

BD.... what a stunning reply! by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 10:23)

me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 10:32)

Re: me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 10:34)

Re: me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 10:37)

Re: me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 10:41)

Re: me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 10:50)

Re: me.......tifosi..........wtf. by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 10:51)

Hang on! BD by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 10:58)

Re: Hang on! BD by 'BD' (22 May 2009 @ 11:06)

BD..it would be a shame if you left by 'merv' (22 May 2009 @ 12:00)

Re: BD..it would be a shame if you left by 'DanTheK1RaceGearMan' (22 May 2009 @ 15:42)

Re: BD..it would be a shame if you left by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 16:37)

Re: BD..it would be a shame if you left by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 16:40)

Just for Clarity by 'Gillard77' (22 May 2009 @ 9:48)

Re: Just for Clarity by 'itpro' (22 May 2009 @ 10:26)

Re: Breaking news....... by 'Doink' (22 May 2009 @ 16:44)

Post a Reply:

You may post a direct reply to this message which will appear in this thread.
To post a new or unrelated message use This Form. Top of Page
Notice Board Index

[ UK Karting Main Index ]


News	Karts & Karting	Notice Board	Market Place	Companies Directory	Tracks Directory	Events Calendar	Race Results	Photo Gallery	Links