Formula One gridlock as Ferrari take action

The crisis in Formula One intensified yesterday when it emerged that Ferrari have initiated legal action in the French courts to try to stop rule changes, including a budget cap, to which they are opposed.
The development came as the teams met Max Mosley, the president of the FIA, and Bernie Ecclestone, the sport’s commercial rights-holder, at Heathrow airport for what was being seen as a critical meeting to try to stave off a growing boycott of next season’s championship by the teams.
No agreement was reached but Mosley characterised the discussions as “friendly” and added that the FIA was not prepared to back down over its plans for a £40 million budget cap for next season or the deadline of May 29 for entries for 2010.
“It was quite a friendly meeting but, in the end, all that happened was that the teams have gone off to see if they can come up with something better than the cost cap,” Mosley said. “We explained we cannot put back the entry date, as this has all been published, and we cannot disadvantage the potential new teams who will come in. But we are prepared to listen to whatever they have to say.”
The legal action by Ferrari, with a hearing in Paris due on Tuesday, reflects the belief at Maranello that the FIA has broken an exclusive agreement with the team over consultation on new rules in its radical proposals for next year. The Italian team, whose president, Luca Di Montezemolo, was not present at the meeting after the death of his father, is thought to be seeking an injunction against the FIA in France, where the organisation is based, to stop the changes going ahead.
Ferrari said that legal action was supported by some of the other teams who regarded it as in their interests too. “There is a contractual agreement between the FIA and Ferrari — once this agreement is broken, we need to protect ourselves,” a spokesman said when asked whether taking action of this kind was something that could be said to be in the interests of the sport.
Although no overarching agreement was reached at Heathrow, there was important progress in key areas with Mosley showing signs of compromise in the wake of criticism from several teams about what they view as his dictatorial approach to setting the rules. According to Ecclestone, Mosley conceded that a two-tier championship, with cars running under two sets of technical rules, will not now happen. “Max agreed one set of regulations for everybody,” Ecclestone said. Mosley also agreed to discuss in more detail some of the teams’ outright objections to having their company books perused by FIA accountants as part of the policing of the cap.
Most important , however, was Mosley’s apparent preparedness to listen to any new proposals the teams may come up with to cut costs to the FIA target figure but without the imposition of a cap that Ferrari, in particular, believe would be unworkable and is out of step with the culture of the world’s most exclusive motor racing series. The teams told Mosley they would need two weeks to come up with their own version of cost-cutting; Mosley gave them seven days when a further meeting will presumably be required.
In the background Mosley’s advisers continued to convey the impression that this crisis is being made to look far more serious by the teams than is the case and that a deal will be reached. Uppermost in the FIA collective mind is the new teams who want to join Formula One — Lola confirmed yesterday they are planning to enter the championship next season — and ensuring the cost of entry is pegged at a level that is realistic.
“We still want to ensure that new teams can enter,” the FIA said. “We don’t want to lose existing teams and we are trying to find a radical solution that allows everybody to compete, while sustaining the same sporting values, but at the same time reducing overall costs in difficult economic times.” Ecclestone said he was “happy” with the state of play in his business and dismissed talk of a crisis.
He suggested that Ferrari’s legal action was too late. “It’s good, it keeps it in the bloody newspaper,” he said. “They should have done it before — idiots. They should have done it at the beginning.” Was he worried about its implications? “Nothing frightens me,” he said.
Source:The times