Ferrari's "Special Deal" with Bernie.. The Truth is out!

[Scuderia_Russ]

It amazes me that other teams on the grid can get away with this http://www.f1technical.net/news/11267, but no... the F.I.A. favours Ferrari apparently. Can you imagine if this was the red team, there would be bloody uproar! Because it's Renault no-one bats an eyelid. I am astounded at the front page poll results by the way which basically says that Renault should be allowed to catch up because they are a bit behind everyone else. What?! How does that work then?

[Rob W]

It amazes me that other teams on the grid can get away with this...

I think it's pretty obvious there are more details that came into play and it's distinguishable from what people are talking about here. I can easily imagine Renault simply saying "we have evidence that other teams have improved their engine curve" etc from video/sound or whatever and essentially saying that other teams have been allowed to make modifications outside of the spirit of the rules which Renault have not done - and so they should be allowed leave to catch up.

Of course, they could have done this anyway - I mean, how could they punished if other teams have already done it? - but by making something public of it as they have done they've achieved two other things: they've make it impossible for the FIA to say no to them (for fear of Renault making something even bigger/public about it) and also it gives a very public and credible reason to Renault fans and sponsors why they were underperforming. I.e.: We've been at a disadvantage. If we can fix this, we'll be fighting at the top again.

It's a good strategy by Flavio and has nothing to do with trying to get something other teams haven't already gone ahead and done themselves. It's not like the mass-damper where it boiled down to the rules being changed, in-essence, because Ferrari tried and failed at building a similar device... when they failed they threw their toys out of the cot.

[andartop]

I'm feeling dizzy and confused with this sort of "ethics". Please help me understand. If everyone cheats, that's ok. If all but one cheat, it's more convenient to allow that one to cheat as well. If only one cheats, that's illegal. But no matter what, Ferrari is always to blame!

[modbaraban]

So accepting aditional money just to stay in the championship is cheating wait, no it isn't. And besides what's the big news? I read about it in F1Racing years ago when that whole Ferrari-concorde deal happened. Apparently Bernie really struggles to come up with anything to distract F1 world's attention from CVC.

As for Renault engine thing - it's rediculous. They'll have a significant advantage in the engine dept. next year.

[Rob W]

As for Renault engine thing - it's rediculous. They'll have a significant advantage in the engine dept. next year.

I'm not so sure. All of the teams would have a lot more info on it than us and they didn't see any problem with it... I mean, they all had to agree on it from what I recall. So their must have been ample grounds for it... and, as I said above, Renault clearly had a very persuasive argument for being allowed to do it.

I guess time will tell. I imagine, like the big tire change years, there is potential for some result anomalies especially in the first half of the season as teams come to grips (no pun) with the new tires and aero.

[pitlaneimmigrant]

Renault won't a have an engine advantage next year, don't forget that Renault's engine 'upgrade' was agreed to by all of the teams in FOTA during their December meeting. If there was a chance of Renault leaving everyone else for dead, then the other chiefs wouldn't have accepted it.
The FOTA meeting and its resulting changes for '09 was a massive bargaining session. BMW got to keep KERS, Toyota got to have their crazy 6 week factory closure proposal and Renault get to equalise their engine performance.
You are right that there would be an uproar if the red team had got this concession, but then after winning the constructors championship they aren't in a position to argue they are disadvantaged.