Montezemolo expects FIA reaction

Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo said he expects the FIA to analyse the circumstances of yesterday’s European Grand Prix.

Ferrari expressed outrage yesterday that Lewis Hamilton was able to finish second in the race after taking a drive-through penalty for overtaking the safety car, while their drivers finished lower down the field after staying behind the safety car.

Di Montezemolo said:

The result of yesterday?s race was misrepresentative. Ferrari, which showed itself to be competitive in the European Grand Prix, paid a price that was too high for respecting the rules.

Meanwhile those who didn?t follow the rules were penalised by the race officials in a way that was less severe than the damage suffered by those who did respect them. That is a very serious and unacceptable event that creates dangerous precedents, throwing a shadow over the credibility of Formula One.

We are sure that the FIA will fully analyse what happened, taking the consequent necessary decisions. Ferrari will watch this with interest.
Luca di Montezemolo

2010 European Grand Prix

Browse all 2010 European Grand Prix articles

Advert | Go Ad-free

58 comments on Montezemolo expects FIA reaction

  1. mvi said on 28th June 2010, 15:03

    I do hope that the FIA seriously reviews the Safety Car rules. They are certainly confusing and have an unnecessarily large element of chance built in. The need for refueling is gone, so closing the pits and picking up the field in order would work quite fairly.

  2. Ferrari actually have a point, but they´ve spent so much time crying wolf all season long about anything they don´t like that I couldn´t care less. And after his “deserved win” in Singapore, Alonso can´t say anything either.

  3. Maciek said on 28th June 2010, 15:05

    Somehow I think that if the safety car had come out behind Massa, Ferrari wouldn’t be telling us about how unfair the race result was for those stuck behind it. Besides all of which, it’s up to drivers to do the best they can with the cards they’re dealt – it’s called tough luck. Perhaps they could ask Kamui Kobayashi for driving tips.

    • Patrickl said on 28th June 2010, 21:30

      All the cars behind Massa were able to make it to the pit lane though.

      Come to think about it, maybe that’s a good compromise? Wait with the safety car till the first car that passed the pitlane entry comes on the straight.

  4. dyarab said on 28th June 2010, 15:06

    “We are sure that the FIA will fully analyse what happened, taking the consequent necessary decisions. Ferrari will watch this with interest.”

    I dont know about everyone else but that statement really bothered me. Seems to me, the necessary decisions, in LDM’s view, are to put Alonso on the podium.

    Ferrari will watch with interest…. what the heck does that mean. Sounds like a veiled threat to me. If they dont get what they want are they gonna threaten to pull out of F1?! Cry more?!? Sue somebody??

    I mean what’s next? Blaming Mark Webber for improperly violating the airspace above Valencia.

    Sometime you’re the fly, sometime you’re the windshield. Move on.

    • Scribe (@scribe) said on 28th June 2010, 21:41

      Great post, very funny, bang on.

      Those choice lines from Ferrari speak of such entiltlement, we’ve been saying constantly this year that Monty thinks somethings wrong with F1 if Ferrari arn’t winning, it’s all in the sunshine now.

  5. I would love to see an FIA statement on this and punish the ferrari team, for doubting the integrity of sports and also making it a media headline arnd the world by saying that F1 is manipulated race.

    Well. I hope F Alo n ferrari will get some kind of ban or grid penalty!

    • BasCB said on 28th June 2010, 15:52

      Pleas no, not like the Mosley years!. I get what you mean and Ferrari would need some reprimand for damaging the sport with not letting of these rants on how bad everything is though.

    • slr said on 28th June 2010, 15:57

      I doubt that the FIA will punish Ferrari. Remember, Jean Todt is the new leader.

      • nelly said on 28th June 2010, 18:10

        they’d have no reason to punish ferrari in the first place. Todt/no Todt. If the complaints got ridiculously bad and unnecessary, a reprimand yes. If they continue like they are doing until silverstone, then just gaffer tape is needed :D

  6. tharris19 said on 28th June 2010, 16:05

    What “consequent necessary decisions” are you referring to Luca. Boy, you and Ferrari have a pair!!

  7. BasCB said on 28th June 2010, 16:22

    I think this blog (Will Buxton) does offer some thoughts on the subject: http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/is-formula-1-bringing-itself-into-disrepute/
    A piece Buxton thought about, very interesting. Here’s what i make from it:

    1. I think the decisions are being made later than should be especially surrounding SC situations
    2. This is probably the most funded cry by Montezemelo this year, even though the language used is hefty.
    3. If there is a precedent for passing the SC (GP2 2006, L. Hamilton, black flag), the FIA might want to think about following that, or at leas seriously consider a more severe punishment or explain to the fans why not.
    4. Ferrari and Alonso should tone down their comments and enable us to take them seriously or risk a reprimand/penalty for bringing the sport in disrepute.

    5. The penalty for keeping the jack on the car should be punished harsher, although a race ban seems too much (as in the Renault case).

    • Patrickl said on 28th June 2010, 21:44

      This Buxton “journo” usually doesn’t think things through that much, although this time it’s not so bad.

      Still, there is a massive difference between a car being side by side with the safety car as it comes out of the pitlane and simply passing the safety car whilst travelling behind it first.

      I don’t know why the stewards gave 5 second penalties, but it sounded like in this isnatnce they got the minimum times set rather poorly. For instance, Button learned of the safty car in the final corner before the pit lane entry. He could not have braked there, but still he got penalized.

      I’ll bet there were more cars that got cought out by the minimum times that were set too tightly.

      All in all the drivers didn’t really win anything with their transgression either and they might even have been past the incident already.

      Giving all these drivers drive throughs would have made even more of a mockery of the race.

      These free time penalties can only be handed out after the race. So therefore it makes sense that they waited till after the race to hand them out. Gave them a chance to check the telemetry and hear the drivers too.

      I’d much rather have that than 9 cars with a drive through. Now that would have turned the race into an incredible joke and been an unfair punishment for the minor transgression of the drivers (in previous instances they drivers weren’t even penalized).

      It’s just sad that they didn’t realize that they can hand out time penalties when they penalized Schumacher in Monaco.

  8. Philip said on 28th June 2010, 18:05

    Wait now two words RED BULL, how ‘convenient’ Weber has a ‘pace car’ incident when he has no chance of getting on the podium and the pace car deploys between Vettle and Hamilton, now that is the real conspiracy. Weber drives into the Lotus on purpose to spin both off but as we all know RED BULL gives you Wings and instead of crashing he does another aerial ( the in car footage is just great)barrel roll (oh yes the last one was in a Mercedes) then the Mercedes pace car deploys. Now this is of course complete rubbish but it just shows how a fevered brain a few coincidences create a good yarn so investigate RED (herring and a load of) BULL

  9. hawkfist said on 28th June 2010, 18:20

    I’m sure Ferrari would still be upset if this had been Vettel that had done it, but because it’s Hamilton they’re acting like little kids.

    Was it fair? Not really. Was it a deliberate pre-conceived plan aimed at keeping Ferrari down? No. Have Ferrari benefited from numerous unfair decisions over the last 10-15 years? Yes. Will Alonso ever admit it was unfair he won the ’08 Singapore GP? No.

    If Alonso had managed to get passed Buemi and looked competitive down the field they’d have a far greater argument. They seem to be implying that if the safety car had come out 5 seconds later they’d have instantly overtaken Hamilton and got on the podium no questions asked.

    The one good thing to come out of this is that Luca Di M hasn’t realised now is a great time to get back on his “slow backmarkers are dangerous” sandbox. That’s a battle he’d have far more chance of winning right now and get his prized third Ferrari on the grid.

  10. John H said on 28th June 2010, 18:43

    “those who didn’t follow the rules”

    What rules were broken exactly? Hamilton kept to his delta time. Perhaps the fact that the safety car was released just at that time was just ‘unlucky.’

    Typical Ferrari yet again.

  11. chris said on 28th June 2010, 20:07

    all I can say is:
    Whats up Ferrari? not winning are we? yea you’ll need to lean on the the FIA again to get races wins GIVEN to you AGAIN.
    They are the ones ruining the sport im afraid- not Lewis hamilton, Mclaren or the FIA

    oh and another thing, I couldnt believe it when Alonso said the the FIA where biased towards Lewis and Mclaren – yea right! after all thats happened in the past few seasons to Mclaren!

  12. hawkfist said on 28th June 2010, 23:09

    Isn’t Alonso the guy who was happy to sit at Mclaren using Ferrari data, but as soon as things stopped going his way he suddenly decided he should report it?

    Get out of your glass house Alonso and grow up.

  13. Palle said on 28th June 2010, 23:26

    What if next time a driver actually brakes before the SC line to keep the competitors behind him and behind the SC? Would that be more illegal than braking and accelerating when the SC is pulled in the pits? Why would it be unfair and how would You prevent this from happening if You think it is unfair?

    Solution to some of the SC problem:
    The SC could be “avoided” by making the leading driver the SC? He could get the job of driving as a SC, when instructed by flagposts and pits to do so. Maybe via a SC speed limiter button, like the Pit lane speed limiter. If the pits are also closed while the SC is “deployed” in this way, the only negative effect for the race is that the race is “neutralized”, but this is a classic effect of the SC deployment.
    The transition into SC should be made visible for the other Pilots by a blinking taillight other than the one used in rain, and You maybe need additional signaling when the SC deployment period is ending.

  14. Prisoner Monkeys said on 29th June 2010, 1:34

    Shut up, Luca. When was the last time a race was “representative”? There have been plenty of quick cars over the years that have failed to live up to expectations, so why should the FIA go and make special allowances for Ferrari? Because it’s Ferrari?

    If the FIA should take action against anyone, they should take it against Ferrari.

    • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 29th June 2010, 14:09

      Agreed. The amount of tripe Luca’s spouted over the year has been enough to bring the sport into disrepute. That is, if anyone outside F1 actually listened to him and cared who he was…

  15. CapeFear said on 29th June 2010, 2:57

    The rules are fine it’s only twice this year due to bad stewarting that there has been a problem.

    As for Monte i take his words like a pinch, if it was Alonso instead of Hamilton he would be lauding his driver, “look at him he made podium with a penalty” because that’s Monte

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.