checkered wrote:Tom, it’s 0830 GMT,
What the WMSC needs to show here more than anything is its responsibility in leadership. The FIA owns the F1 World Championship and in the end is responsible for it, period. Something has gone wrong when leadership has become solely an exercise in crisis control. By definition the issues that have to be addressed in this situation are larger than whether McLaren or some people within have broken the sporting code in some way. It is the focal point of the matter, yes, but if there isn’t a clear and acceptable way out and onwards for everyone involved the WMSC will have danced around its overriding responsibility towards very many people who work very hard, in good faith, to make F1 all that it can be.
It’s important to draw distinctions. There’s a difference between unacceptable bahaviour and not challenging it in a proper way. There’s a difference in how an individual bears responsibility and how an organisation does it. There are differences in how responsibilities are shared. Ferrari hasn’t come across as one of the most sporting teams in a long time. It certainly has seemed like many Italians have fallen over each other in a disorganised spectacle of futile attempts to aid “their” team in the “spy case”, così fan tutte as they say. But if Ferrari has been wronged, another wrong won’t make it right. Revenge isn’t justice. Towards anyone, of that I’m sure.
I think if all of us approach this Spygate matter with the impartiality and sanity as Checkered. This whole thing would have ended at the FIA WCMS meeting last month.
But Ferrari has been given the opportunity by Max Mosley to indulge and even take advantage of the system. As many forum members have pointed out before. Other teams that have landed themselves in hot water were told by Mosley that if they appeal the FIA decision, they risked the most draconian penalties such as a heavy fine, expulsion from the championship,and docking of all points.
Why was Ferrari given this special status to pursue their case through multiple venues (the FIA and courts in two countries)??
In my field of business (finance), if we decide to pursue our case with the highest industry body (such as the Takeovers Panel in the UK or HK), all parties must agree to be binded by the outcome before committing to this course of action. This is to ensure all parties play by the same rules set out by the Takeovers Panel and the outcome is final. The losing party cannot turn around and say we dont agree with the outcome and we're going back to the court to pursue our case.
Dont forget in 1999 Ferrari was found guilty to have been using illegal bargeboards but kept their first F1 Championship. But Ferrari was not penalised because the illegal bargeboards gave no performance gain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Come on Mr Mosley, you may as well tell us who the Champion is before the season begins.
Ferrari is doing this clearly with the intent of trying to get McLaren banned from the Championship so they can be the 2007 Champions.
If McLaren does get expelled (which they can appeal), I'd like to see Ron Dennis to continue their participation (under appeal) in the remaining races and beat Ferrari fair and square on the track and let the world know that the MP4/22 is a superior car to the F2007!
There is nothing special with Ferrari. It has shown time and time again that they are not interested in the wellbeing of the sport. They are only interested in themselves and they are a team driven by self interest only. They will quite gladly scorch the earth if it serves their purpose.
