lol, Garbage. FIA have and will always write the rules. whether they have the power to or not (which they do). unless they teams agree. they simply refuse to give a licenses to the event. result? No races. FOTA threatened this bull $hit, some years back. "we don't like the FIA, so we are going it on our own", result? they are all still there (FIA controlled F1). why? because the circuits they planned to race on need an FIA sanction, in order to do so. they will all throw their, collective, toys out of the pram. then quickly pick them all up, and go racing under the FIA.
Rules are rules, if they don't like them, find somewhere else to race! the loss of Ferrari, and the others. may well free up the sport. putting back in the innovation. and stopping the vast waste of money by the top teams.
you may not be able to think of F1 without these cars. but F1 will not die if they stop taking part. these teams very well might.
where would Ferrari race if not in F1? think of one other form of motor sport and see if they have ever succeeded. yep that right, there are none. again who needs who? F1 now, would be much better off if they were not racing. because they are not that good at it. all they do is throw money at the problem. they are actually the cause, along with those who chose this flawed route too, of the problems the sport has now. so changes are made so the sport does not die., what do Ferrari do. shout and scream and threaten to take their ball home. apparently its unfair to a team who waste £300,000,000 per year if costs are reduced. lol, i don't know the BrawnGP budget, but its vastly less than that of Ferrari, yet the Brawn cars are leaving the red cars in their dust. as are RedBull. this, in truth, is what frightens Ferrari. as it shows that given an equal budget, they would be lucky to qualify off the back row. they ar, and always have been, counterfeit merchants. but without the money, they can no longer pay someone to do the work.
which is why it will go to court action. It seems FIA dont have the right to dictate finances and commercial aspects. The question is are they 'dictating' finances if they have left it open for teams to choose.... ~so making new rules that create the two-tier system that the teams dont like, but which is seemingly within the governing law? This is the problem, its not clear who will win this one.
