What word from Manor, Campos and USGP?

[Harrelson]

http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news ... t_id=38324

another insight on Manor situation

Max should have taken his bunch of corrupt loonies with him. Manor obviously got special treatment and the deserving teams like Prodrive were left perplexed. The FIA should be sued

[timbo]

The FIA should be sued

I wonder whether there's enough substance for it already.
Apparently EU legislation regulates deals like this.

[WhiteBlue]

http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news ... t_id=38324

another insight on Manor situation

One has to consider that Donelly is on the FOTA target list. So whatever "evidence " is produced should be seen in the light of the FIA election campaign. This could have a serious background but it could also not. I will reserve judgement until more facts emerge and both sides have been heard.

[The FOZ]

http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news ... t_id=38324

another insight on Manor situation

Wow...IF that article is accurate, I can't imagine how the FIA could not be sued, and I can't imagine WHY nobody would sue them over this. Oh, wait, it's F1, the laws of physics, logic, and reality don't have to apply.

At the very least, Donnelly has created a conflict of interest about as big as humanly possible.

And there's talk of him succeeding Moseley?! He'd certainly fill Max's shoes, that's for sure.

[WhiteBlue]

from James Allan's blog

Meanwhile Manor is currently the subject of some controversy regarding the involvement of FIA chief steward Alan Donnelly in the team’s F1 entry.

According to the Guardian, Manor already has VIrgin as a 20% shareholder and Donnelly was working on finding further equity partners and sponsorship for the team in Saudi Arabia. The paper reveals details of a leaked email to illustrate the point. The email was allegedly sent on on 29 May, two weeks before the FIA announced the three successful new teams.

This is part of what looks like quite a systematic attack on Donnelly, following on from the stories about him lobbying teams in Turkey, particularly Ross Brawn’s to leave FOTA’s proposed breakaway and sign up to the FIA world championship.

It would appear that the tactic is both to undermine Donnelly and his FIA role by alleging conflicts of interest and possibly to force an enquiry into the process by which the entries for 2010 were made, with a view to getting the process re-run.

It’s all part of the ‘great game’; the battle between FOTA and Mosley.

Essentially what I have thought as well. If there was a review of the evaluation process certainly FOTA would not be entitled to demand it. They cannot claim to be harmed by it. I reckon one of the teams which have not received approval would have to complain in some form. Then an independant court could look into the evaluation process which was carried out by Deloitte if I remember right. Certainly according to FIA rules the FIA has the sovereign right to select new entrants. FOTA has no right to demand a voice in that. On the other hand the membership of the FIA would have a right to investigate if irregularities are obvious or probable. One would need a coalition of clubs to demand an inquiery into the issue.

[The FOZ]

I'd disagree.

It very much appears, to my eye, that the strongest team (prodrive) was omitted from the entry list for 2010, and the ones that were selected aren't that hot. After all, who said that 3 teams HAD to be allowed entry?

I think it's very much in the FIA's interest to bring weak teams into the mix, because they will do nothing to foster high level competition, and further divide FOTA.

[WhiteBlue]

I have a feeling that we will hear a lot more before all this is over. Three new teams seems to be just right considering we already had 10 teams and 13 were the target. I was surprised ProDrive was not on the list but I also thought that ProDrive had made some conditions which the FIA could not gurantee. For Prodrive the budget cap was a condition and a pritty good chance to be competitive very soon. Mosley probably was not so confident that he would be able to swing a strong deal to satisfy Richards. Just a theory, but possible.

[Conceptual]

And people said I was crazy for starting this...

And if Manor has a car in the tunnel, what regs is it designed to meet? I think that if it is for sure to the published 2010 regs, the FIA may have to allow it's entry.

Or a lawsuit may ensue...

[timbo]

Yet another twist
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_ ... t_id=38333

[WhiteBlue]

I think that the story is strong enough to justify publishing. But there are a lot of holes in it to prove the main point, that applicants have been told much too late that they need a Cosworth engine contract. For this it needs a bit more than just hear say. The aim of the story is to declare the selection process invalid and start from scratch with probably other people and objectives in control.

There could be a connection to the penalty pact of the five engine manufacturers. It was very late discovered that this pact was in place and it was threatening the viability of the F1 series in the case of a break away. It is entirely imaginable that the Cosworth requirement was put in place as a reaction to this manufacturer boycott. I do not actually know if Williams and Force India would have received Toyota and Mercedes engines in a case of a break away, but I very much doubt it. So the other side had virtually no option but to make sure the next time there was no boycott chance from the manufacturers.

The requirement of an independant engine manufacturer is legitimate in my view under the circumstances. I do not want F1 to come under the control of the manufacturers. I prefer it to be independant and run by the FIA.

[Conceptual]

I think that the story is strong enough to justify publishing. But there are a lot of holes in it to prove the main point, that applicants have been told much too late that they need a Cosworth engine contract. For this it needs a bit more than just hear say. The aim of the story is to declare the selection process invalid and start from scratch with probably other people and objectives in control.

There could be a connection to the penalty pact of the five engine manufacturers. It was very late discovered that this pact was in place and it was threatening the viability of the F1 series in the case of a break away. It is entirely imaginable that the Cosworth requirement was put in place as a reaction to this manufacturer boycott. I do not actually know if Williams and Force India would have received Toyota and Mercedes engines in a case of a break away, but I very much doubt it. So the other side had virtually no option but to make sure the next time there was no boycott chance from the manufacturers.

The requirement of an independant engine manufacturer is legitimate in my view under the circumstances. I do not want F1 to come under the control of the manufacturers. I prefer it to be independant and run by the FIA.

When does the term "discrimination" come into effect in the EU? Being refused entry because a constructor doesn't want the engine that the governing body "wants" them to have (IE: not a mandated single engine supplier formula) while others are already enrolled with engines other than the ones being mandated by the FIA are allowed to compete.

It is my sincerest hope that the FIA gets sued until they are no longer a valid sporting entity. I believe that only then can the fascism that rules the worlds top level motorsport be defeated.

Hey, when Hakkinen is more interested in driving NASCAR than any euro-FIA series, there must be a problem.

I just hope that Campos, USF1 and Manor grow some steel balls, and stuff them down Max's throat. They have an angle to sue, and it is my hope that the FOTA teams will financially support their legal claim just to bust the FIA apart.

Then again, I want to see the cars that the published 2010 regs promise!

[donskar]

Must agree with Conceptual on this one. And to WB, your opinion is intellectually valid, but might not stand up in a court of law. It would appear the selection process was skewed insofar as teams planning to use a legal, homologated engine seem to have been denied consideration. If that point -- no Cosworth, no entry -- can be proved, then I believe a strong legal case could be made.

Imagine you'd filled out the entry form to run a marathon, paid the fee, put in weeks of training, then were banned from the event because you were wearing the wrong brand of shoe.

More important than legalities -- this is just another example of how very corrupt this sport has become. It is a continuing disgrace, with no end in sight.

[WhiteBlue]

I do not see a disadvantage if all the new teams were told about this at the same time. If F1 teams can be told to run with one brand of tyres and ECU why should they not be told to run with one brand of engines in an emergency. The main point IMO is: was there an emergency situation that forced the FIA to field such a requirement and were the teams told about it in a timely fashion.

Before we start the name calling to the FIA again one should consider that no other entity in the sport ever cared about getting new teams on the grid and preventing existing teams to be driven into bancrupcy. FOA and Ecclestone are just saying F1 do not need Super Aguri, Ferrari or Honda whenever there is a crisis. FOTA have yet to demonstrate that they care about decent competition and will actually help in getting new teams on the grid regardless of customer relationships.

[Conceptual]

I do not see a disadvantage if all the new teams were told about this at the same time. If F1 teams can be told to run with one brand of tyres and ECU why should they not be told to run with one brand of engines in an emergency. The main point IMO is: was there an emergency situation that forced the FIA to field such a requirement and were the teams told about it in a timely fashion.

Before we start the name calling to the FIA again one should consider that no other entity in the sport ever cared about getting new teams on the grid and preventing existing teams to be driven into bancrupcy. FOA and Ecclestone are just saying F1 do not need Super Aguri, Ferrari or Honda whenever there is a crisis. FOTA have yet to demonstrate that they care about decent competition and will actually help in getting new teams on the grid regardless of customer relationships.

Did you miss the part where Mercedes and FOTA teamed up with the remains of the Honda team, and gave birth to this years championship leaders?

Or is that inconvenient to your argument?

[timbo]

Did you miss the part where Mercedes and FOTA teamed up with the remains of the Honda team, and gave birth to this years championship leaders?

Or is that inconvenient to your argument?

Good point.
Also from that link I posted it is clear that some of the "new" teams planned to use FOTA engines.