BBC Home

Explore the BBC

31 comments

user rating: 2 star

Ferrari not to appeal

Formula One
by Galahad (U1645165) 30 July 2007
comment on the article

...because they aren't allowed to. Apparently decisions made by the WMSC aren't subject to appeal.

Although there is always the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne which I would assume is the final recourse for cases such as these?

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/mot...

I long for the day that Todt and Dennis are no longer in charge of their respective teams. Theirs is a personal dislike that is getting somewhat childishly out of hand.

Although of course when you're playing for big stakes there is always going to be a lot of tension. If it was Brawn vs. Whitmarsh I daresay it would end up the same?

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Jul 30, 2007

Glad F1 hasn't let cycling overtake it as the worlds most inherently corrupt sport. Keep up the good work Bernie!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 30, 2007

shoemakerscheat
they think ferrari are cheats because they are not really neutrals. They are actually deceitful w4nkers who think that the claim of neutrallity would enhance the substance of their argument. Believe me, they are all Maca fans. No neutral would bother post rubbish about an issue he cares nothing about.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 30, 2007

I think most of the posters here are interested in F1 and concerned about the dishonesty. I don't, believe you have to follow a team blindly to have an opinion.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 30, 2007

Ignoring all the biased rubbish on this thread, it seems to me that the best way Ferrari can answer this ruling is to win the WC which is till possible for tham.
I always remember how Pete Sampras the tennis star would respond to a questionable line call that went against him. He would step up and fire down an ace, effectively cancelling out the call. Best for anyone in sport to do their talking in the competition because nothing is more effective than beating the other guy, is it.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 30, 2007

Jean Todt seems particulary bitter with the WMSC decision.
Maybe he thinks that Ferrari cannot beat McLaren this year on the track.
Or it could be that JT is still furious that the "flexi-floor" details were leaked and that Ferrari's performance dropped off after the FIA ruled it out.
There are still questions that remain unanswered regarding NS, MC and exactly who knew what and when at McLaren.
Until ALL the details are fully known, it'll be pure speculation and rumour.
Unfortunately though, It has taken some of the shine off of an excellent season.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 30, 2007

to Canadiancharles

The fact is that Ferari have got one second rate driver and one third rate overpayed driver (Raikkonen), but McLaren have the driver lineup all the other teams can only dream about.

So your hope of a Ferrari doing a Pete Sampras is a complete insult to a true sporting legend, and just face it Ferrari are just using this as a excuse for their inadequateness.

To the people who say that this forum is biased towards McLaren, this may be because Mclaren is a British team (with a little help from are German friends), and we are talking about this on British Broadcasting Corporation .co.uk which we British have to pay the taxes for...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 31, 2007

Ferrari "forgot" they cannot protest an FIA ruling while they had YET ANOTHER prolonged hissy fit?
Now, poor souls they find that they aren't ALLOWED to appeal, oh, bless them, they are victims of unfairness on behalf of everybody and they get no support. ( why doesn't Alonso drive for them????).
Well, excuse me, they were told this YEARS AGO. Are they SO STUPID?
The FIA controls the championships which are run to FIA rules. Like it or leave it.
PLEASE can Hollywood do a special oscar next year, best act of outraged victim EVER!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by eriman (U8275596)

posted Jul 31, 2007

No you forgive me Mr "Coughing-up-pellets"
In fact what they said is;
The official statement from the WMSC read: "The WMSC is satisfied that Vodafone McLaren Mercedes was in possession of confidential Ferrari information and is therefore in breach of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code.
People are automaticaly found guilty when they "break the low" or found in "breach of the code" which literally means the same. I see nothing subtle about the statement made by the WMSC, unless you have another meaning or definition for the word "guilty" other than what is written in the dictionaries of english.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 31, 2007

He(Jean Todt) added: "Since that time and even earlier, McLaren was perfectly aware, not only of the e-mails sent by their informer within our company, but also of the fact that their chief designer had stayed in contact with him and had received and continued to be in possession of a significant amount of technical information that belonged to us."

Hold on a minute. If there are e-mails that have been sent to McLaren, why weren't these put foward as evidence of spying to the presiding committee? Or is Ferrari making it up as they go along?

I get the distinct impression that they are miffed that they DON'T have a God-given right to win everything.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 31, 2007

I understand that for Brits (having Hamilton as leader of Championship) decision is fair.But no one is mentioning that McLaren got caught with hands on the jar and did not paid for it. No body is saying that at Ferrari are Saints but this will open doors of the Pandora’s Box in the future

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 33.33%
    1 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2
    0 votes
  • 1 66.67%
    2 votes

average rating:
2.33 from 3 votes