Newsgroup: it.sport.formula1.moderato
Titolo: [ENG] Ruminations on democracy

Source: 
grandprix.com
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns16824.html
When he was writing the rules for 2008 and beyond, FIA President Max
Mosley said that he wanted all the Formula 1 teams to have an equal  
voice
in decision-making. The result of this desire was a new body called the
Sporting Working Group that would decide on rule changes with the
majority winning the day. This was deemed to be a better system than
having one party in a position to block change because the regulations
insisted on unanimous agreement. Last week the Sporting Working Group  
had
its first meeting and democratically voted to get rid of the engine
homologation rules that Mosley has been pushing so hard for in recent
years.
It was a vote of 8 teams to four. A democratic decision.
Now, however, Mosley has sent the teams a message saying that "the 2008
Formula 1 World Championship is a competition for cars with homologated
engines" and adding that "in the absence of acceptable proposals for
improvement to the homologation regulations, the existing rule of total
homologation for three years will stand". Mosley has not asked the F1
Commission nor the World Motor Sport Council about this decision. He has
simply decreed that the vote of the Sporting Working Group will be
ignored.
The argument he puts forward for this is that: "by entering the
championship, a team accepts the regulations as published and, equally
importantly, is entitled to rely on them when deciding whether or not to
enter. A major factor in deciding whether or not to enter is the cost of
competing. No responsible governing body could agree to rule changes
which increase the cost of competing once entries have been accepted."
The engine homologation rules are detailed in Appendix 6 of the 2008 FIA
Sporting Regulations.
The argument that one could put forward against this is that by entering
the championship, a team accepts the regulations as published and,
equally importantly, is entitled to rely on them when deciding  
whether or
not to enter. A major factor in deciding whether or not to enter is the
method by which the sport is regulated. No responsible governing body
could agree to rule changes that alter the methods of regulation once
entries have been accepted.
The decision making processes are detailed in Appendix 5 of the 2008 FIA
Sporting Regulations.
This clearly states that the rules can be changed using the Sporting
Working Group with a simple majority vote.
In effect what Mosley is saying is Appendix 6 is binding but Appendix 5
is not. The justification for his action is that the World Council does
not need to support his action because it has already voted to accept
Appendix 6. That is true.
But by the same token the World Council has also voted to accept  
Appendix
5 and that vote must also be respected.
Teams that entered the World Championship accepted that there would be
some form of engine homologation. They also accepted that those rules
might be changed by a majority vote.
The FIA rule-making structure allows for the Formula 1 Commission and  
the
FIA World Council to stop proposals made by the Sporting Working Group.
The best way forward therefore would be to call a World Council meeting,
appoint a new F1 Commission, and then go through the process of  
accepting
or rejecting the SWC proposal. There are six weeks before the rules for
2008 must be set and that is plenty of time to go through these  
steps. In
that way Mosley will avoid suggestions that he is over-stepping his
power.
However, the use of FIA power is really only an issue if someone within
the FIA stands up and challenges what Mosley has done.
If there are no questions asked then he will do as he pleases but he
should not be surprised in that circumstance if people start asking
whether the sport is being run along democratic lines.
Copyright 1988-2006, Inside F1, Inc.
-- 
Automatically gathered from the web
Subscribe/unsubscribe/info at
http://www.grandprixpassion.com/mailman/listinfo/webnews
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit 
http://www.messagelabs.com/email
 
______________________________________________________________________

, 
ale...@sevenseas.org
 says...
Bravo Mosley.
Dimostra di essere meno neutrale più di Galliani presidente di Lega ...
E siccome il NG è moderato non scrivo altro.

ma di che si parla? I motori sono _già_ "omologati": ditemi voi cosa si
può inventare oggi nei motori dove tutto è definito sia nelle dimensioni
che nei materiali... 
Come dice AS di oggi nell'ultima pagina Bastian Contrario: Tecnologia,
ma de che?
Mo'basta con 'sta panzana che la F1 è la massima espressione della
ricerca tecnologica. È falsissimo sia in termini assoluti che relativi.
In assoluto, piaccia o no, la punta di lancia della ricerca tecnologica
è data dalla sperimentazione a fini militari. In termini relativi (nelle
corse) la F1 è messa pure peggio. Già negli anni 60-70 nella Can-Am si
era sperimentato a go-go alettoni, effetto suolo, minigonne, motori
turbo e ventilatori, leghe leggere e miniaturizzazioni. Tanto che
confrontare il genio di Jim Hall (Chaparral) con quello di Mike Gascoyne
è come mettere Galileo Galilei al cospetto del divino Otelma.
E la stessa F1 perde la battaglia tecnologica con se stessa: nel '93 le
vetture avevano numero di cilindri libero, sospensioni attive, 4 ruote
sterzanti, ABS e chi più ne ha più ne metta.
È la produzione di serie a dare e travasare alle auto da competizione
piuttosto che viceversa.
Cos'è la F1 oggi? Fondamentalmente un monomarca temperato, con un
creatività tecnologica da medioevo sostenibile, ma frequentato da Case o
multinazionali: se sfornano auto o bibite fa lo stesso, basta che
muovano o facciano muovere soldi, regalando wrestling tecnologico.
No? Guardate bene lo monoposto degli ultimi 5 anni. A parte i ritocchi
estetici e non, le F1 sono sempre le stesse. Poi noi, cavolo, dobbiamo
pur scrivere per vendere il giornale che il nuovo modello ha fiancate
più rastremate e un'accentuazione dell'effetto coco-cola (lo ripetiamo
da vent'anni, che se era vero a quest'ora i retrotreni erano fini come i
fianchi di Oriella Dorella)
continua sul settimanale, da non perdere!
(sono d'accordissimo...)
-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - 
http://www.Mailgate.ORG

 ma de che?
Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita 
http://www.x-privat.org/join.php

 E siccome il NG è moderato non scrivo altro.
Stiamo parlando, ricordiamoci sempre, del figlio del fondatore del 
Partito Fascista inglese, alle cui manifestazioni partecipava da giovane.
-- Alessio

, 
david....@fao.org
 says...
Articolo che ho letto pure io.
E dopo averlo letto non ho più dubbi: Bastian Contrario for President.