Yeah but it didn't happen and Masi broke tons of procedures to gift Max the win? So your point is what? We don't even know when the stewards did exit the track, they could've only been off it by the start of lap 57.
F1 2021 Season
- Thread starter pauldyson1uk
- Start date
You seem to be changing your mind from comment to comment regarding when they could unlap.
But anyway how do you know when the stewards were actually clear? Maybe there was still one last one jumping the barrier (and getting clear of it) a second before Masi finally allowed them to unlap.
Anyway it doesn't really matter does it?
If Masi flicked a sneaky cigarette in his exhaust, and I didn't have to see it live on TV, I am a happy man.
At the end of the day, I like both Lewis and Max and am happy with either as champ, really. But in my eyes, this was Lewis's race all day long until Masi happened.
There's surely a lot of stuff that goes on behind the scenes in F1 in terms of negotiations about penalties, rules and what not. But what I want to see live on TV is a fair spirit and competition, because I expect that from a sport.
Last edited:
Do you honestly think that it's far fetched to think that a racing series that sells it's events to dictators and is known to influence races from the outside would influence a race to comfort one of it's clients?
If you go through the team radio, most of the field seemed to expect cars to unlap themselves. It happens all the time. It's not a made up rule. If you go back a few more laps, Mercedes would know that there was a chance cars would be allowed to unlap. That's the WHOLE REASON why Red Bull pitted a second time! Mercedes chose not to pit, because then Max would stay out, he'd been in the lead, and he already pitted fairly recently under the virtual safety car. (another time Mercedes chose not to pit because they'd lose track position).
Also, I'm not defending ignoring the rulebook because I liked the result, but I can understand the logic Masi went by. I think people lend too little weight to the agreement between teams that it's preferrable to end under 'green' conditions. That's a big part of the reasoning Masi gave the stewards. The race director shouldn't give weight to whether cars have pitted or not, and I don't think he did. I think if Lewis had pitted, which would probably mean Max stayed out to win track position, I think Masi would've made the same decision, and Lewis on fresh softs vs. fairly fresh hard would've had a big chance to overtake and win the race. Then people would complain that Max was robbed, and I'd be here with same arguments as I am now.
In any case, Masi didn't decide to 'fix a championship'. Just look back at the season, and you'll see decisions that have benefitted both drivers throughout.
Posted a picture earlier of the last of the stewards leaving the track. I think the other questions are answered in this and other posts I've made. Masi broke one procedure, not 'tons', and he followed others, I don't dispute that, neither does the FIA documents from the protest.
A fun fact regarding the regulations, if you care to read it, I'll put it in spoiler because it's quite long is that
The 15.3 that reads:
The clerk of the course shall work in permanent consultation with the Race Director. The Race
Director shall have overriding authority in the following matters and the clerk of the course may
give orders in respect of them only with his express agreement:
[...]
e) The use of the safety car"
Seemed to have been put in that way explicitly to give the race director a safety clause.
When it entered the regulations back in 1994, it read:
The clerk of the course shall work in permanent consultation with the Race Director. The Race
Director shall have overriding authority in the following matters and the clerk of the course may
give orders in respect of them only with his express agreement:
[...]
e) The use of the safety car"
Seemed to have been put in that way explicitly to give the race director a safety clause.
When it entered the regulations back in 1994, it read:
Notice how both sub-points d & e both exclude the part about 'accordance with the Code or Sporting Regulations,'
Had the wrong lap number in mind. I was trying to make a point earlier that if unlapping started on lap 56, lap 57 would be the 'following lap', and I mixed up the numbers for one of those posts because of that. Before the most recent of the quest posts, I went back to check the pictures posted earlier.
The last of the stewards leaving the track were shown on TV. The white stuff on the track were still there the following lap.
In any case, I rather the season be decided on a controversial last lap, then that they crashed in Abu Dhaabi, or because of the tire blowing up in Azerbaijan, Bottas damaging everyone's car in Hungary or anything like that. Ideally, there would be one more lap of racing so the decision wasn't controversial, and Lewis had taken a pit stop, so both would have fresh tires.
I think this whole Masi decision is quite amplified because it was the last race, but there have been so topics of discussions throughout the season. Even going back to the first race, there was a non-call for like 30 laps on Lewis cutting corners, and he won by 0.7 seconds. There are also several occurrences where they would've crashed if Lewis didn't yield, early on in the season Max won more points because of that. There are so many decisions that wouldn't have made the last lap of the season so decisive.
Even if we disagree on when the cars could unlap themselves, hopefully we can agree that Masi didn't make the decision he did purposely to let Max win.
Ridiculous claim.
Masi let only the cars between Hamilton amd Verstappen unlap themselves. He also didn't wait the extra lap which should've been done under the normal rules, which would've ended the race under safety car conditions if followed correctly. Also no pressure from Sainz who was closing in on Max because the cars between him and Max were not allowed to unlap themselves.
Your talk about "toys left in the pram" seems silly considering the outcome was fixed by the race director. Maybe you think this is normal? Do you know that letting only a limited number of cars unlap themselves has never happened before in F1?
How can teams plan strategy when the race director is not following protocol? It is pot luck (or pit luck if you like a pun).
Beat me to it.
Ahhh true colours shown.
You care more about personalities than the integrity of the sport.
I understand now.
Sorry for a long string of posts ArjenIsM3.
But I have to agree with this. I don't think there is any evidence of racism or homophobia dictating the farcical decisions made by Masi. They are bizarre but the motive is not known.
Il
I agree with pauldyson on this one.
You guys realize that the FIA has approved the anti-racism campaign Lewis pushed for a few years back, which now airs at the start of F1tv broadcast, and which is marked by all the drivers on the grid before every single race, and as the ruling body also reserves the right to reject any helmet design they chose to, like they did with Kvyat's helmet design in the past.
They wouldn't bend the rules because they don't like the guy who's the most recognizable currently competing in the sport.
If you look beyond the TV pictures, and pay a visit to the corporate websites of F1, our to a majority of their sponsors, F1 have launched a bunch of initiatives to promote diversity. They even sent out a survey just a month ago regarding that very issue.
It's difficult to have a serious discussion when so much of your post is misrepresentation or blatantly false. Nobody on the radio expected only the cars between Lewis and Max to be unlapped and nobody else - all of the radio chatter I've heard has been about how wrong it was.
Suggesting that 15.3 allows the race director to ignore any of the other rules regarding the safety car is just bizarre, as if that were the case then the entire rulebook around the SC could be replaced with "race director's discretion". This is the same race director who's on record as stating that the rules require all cars to unlap themselves and the safety car to come in at the end of the lap following the announcement.
We can't agree on your final statement either - Masi knew exactly what would happen, he made up the rules knowing that Max and only Max would benefit, and knowing that it was a guaranteed overtake. Given that he's on record and so had to change his mind to do this, it was either laughable incompetence or maliciousness, either way he should be long out of a job.
I'd much rather see the championship decided within the rules than outside them - punctures, accidents, all these things happen in motor racing. But after all the talk about it being decided on the track only to actually be decided in Masi's office, meh.
All I said is I don't think it's far fetched to think that something like that might play on the minds of those currently trying to extract maximum value out of their product.
The F1 paddock itself is a diverse place with people from all over the earth. As are the sponsors, fans etc. It's become a worldwide affair. But those actually making the decisions aren't.
Oh so you’re mental. You would rather it end in the controversy it did than other racing incidents or subjective calls. This objectively awful and outside of the regulations call is a preferable option for you. Yes ideally we would have had a fair race at the end that goes without saying, but to say this was preferable to other things that happen all the time is quite a crazy position to take. To each of your examples - Azerbaijan: tires fail occasionally, Lewis even finished a race with a blown up tire last season. Hungary: some people think Bottas did that in person which is crazy, but again crashes happen on the first corner quite regularly. The first race: other drivers were doing it and drivers always push the limits until they are told not to (see Alonso and Vettel), after Red Bull complained the field were told they couldn’t do it anymore. All of these are part and parcel of F1, some of them are bad refereeing decisions like we get in football. But the final lap on Sunday was just a mockery of the entire regulations and the sport itself. I don’t see how that is preferable - the most telling thing is how Riccardo and Lando (who have stronger ties to Max and Red Bull) thought it was ‘fecked up’. The only people who could see this as preferable would be Max
And no he didn’t purposefully give it to max in any sense of bias. However he did purposefully let max win for the sake of there being one last lap of racing. Everyone and their dog who has watched even one race of F1 knew that his decision results in Max winning 99/100 times. He even said to Toto ‘I let them go car racing’. No he didn’t, he let one car on fresh softs overtake a car on 40 lap old hards for the sake of the race not ending under a safety car as it should have.
You can talk about Merc not bringing Lewis in to put. Under the VSC it was the correct decision because by the end he was double digits out in front. They had managed the race perfectly. Under the actual safety car again, they made the right decision because the race should have ended under the safety car. If they had pitted and the regulations had been followed Lewis would have finished the race 2nd behind the safety car. Both teams had great strategies. Mercedes’ strategy would have won them the race if the regs were followed and Red Bull took risks in case the unthinkable happened.
And regarding the stewards leaving, we have that one shot of them making their way off the track, we didn’t see when the final steward left. Unless you can show when exactly the final steward was gone then your argument is entirely hypothetical. We have in the 57th lap Masi talking to Horner and saying ‘I’m just making sure the track is clear’. To which he got the reply ‘we just need one lap of racing’. And what did they get? Gifted the title for the sake of the spectacle.
I said most of the field expected cars to be unlapped. Meaning all the cars. Whether or not all or some of the cars were unlapped didn't make a difference when Mercedes decided to not pit Hamilton.
I think we'll just stay in disagreement to be honest. I fully believe Masi would make the same decision if Lewis pitted and Max stayed out.
In any case there's no such a thing as a guaranteed overtake between Lewis and Max. It could've easily ended in a crash if Lewis didn't take evasive action, and I'm pretty sure no one wanted a crash given how much publicity that got in advance.
I think Masi give a lot of weight to ending the race under 'green' condition, considering it's a title deciding race, and possibly he forced the issue a bit.
It's not ideal, I'll agree to that. Ideally, there was one more racing lap, the unlapped cars were cleared, and both would have fresh tires. That would've been a lot better, but the bit of whether they had fresh tires is a decision the teams themselves decided, just like Mercedes going faster on the straights is because Mercedes designed the car that way, and Red Bull is faster in corners because they designed their car that way.
Why do you insist on calling me crazy or mental at the start of every post? I'll gladly repond to disagreeing arguments, and I'll try to make my counter-arguments in a civilized manner, but I don't understand why you have the need to discuss ad hominem. Like everything else you write is fine. Either I disagree with your post, or I learn something new. I've already been mistaken about something earlier in this thread, I'm better off for being proved wrong. But calling me mental... for me it undermines the rest of your post. I'm not offended or anything, I'm just saying, your post would be so much better without the name-calling.
My point wasn't that I wanted the controversy, but that I wanted the race to end in a race, even if that last lap was a race because of a controversial call. Reading it back, I worded that weirdly, I apologize for that. A fair race as the last lap would be much preferrable, on that we agree fully. What I mean about Azerbaijan is that too tires were destroyed in what I'd call an unnatural way. Both on the straights (Stroll & Verstappen), for me that's not 'tires fail occasionally'. Pirelli were under a lot of scrutiny after that race. It was probably provoked by the reheating after the red flag, but for me that's not any better than the controversial call. That would be a 25(!) point-swing if Lewis didn't make a mistake on the re-start. That 18 points more than the Abu Dhabi thing. The other examples I kind of agree with you. My point is that there have been a lot of situations this year that could've had a big impact, some of them were down to racing incidents, some of them were down to bad refereeing. As late as Qatar, Max let Lewis overtake him twice over the same incident as far as I could tell, and still got a 5-second penalty which was harsh. I could probably find a lot more examples. (Been a hell of a season, am I right?)
I think Masi would make the same call if Lewis pitted, and Max stayed out. Honestly, I do. I think the Horner call affected him, but I think the massive expectation of the race would play a factor in not wanting to end under safety car. I agree it was likely Max would be able to overtake, but Masi cannot let whether one car has pitted and the other haven't be a factor in his decision-making. Red Bull took a huge risk pitting in the first place, expecting the cars to be unlapped, and Lewis did not pit. He probably wanted to keep track position, but he would have soft vs hards. That decision to stay out is as much a part of racing as everything you mention in the first part of your post. At the time of the crash, Mercedes wouldn't know for certain the race would end under a safety car. They took a risk, like Red Bull did, and none of that should factor into the race director's decision-making. Considering the number of laps left, I'll agree that Mercedes' choice was the safer option in their situation. Red Bull could afford to take the risk they did, given the circumstances.
You see in the photo the last steward jumping over the fence. I can go back and snap another when he's over the fence if you'd like, because he's almost entirely over the fence when they change shots.
"""We have in the 57th lap Masi talking to Horner and saying ‘I’m just making sure the track is clear’""" -- This was played on air 20 seconds after the lead cars had passed the line, and the mesages to the FIA aren't played live, so it likely happened on 56. I assume right after the call that 'lapped cars will not overlap' message was issued, but yes it probably played in the back of the mind of Masi, which is why I think they should restrict team principals from speaking to the race director. I don't agree with how Toto spoke to Masi either. I'd say one person per team maximum, and they should have restrictions on what they can say. For Red Bull i.e. Wheatley is a lot more controlled in his messaging than Horner. I don't really like how some radio messages between drivers and engineers sometimes seemed to be made specifically to affect race stewards in case an incident is reviewed either.
Last comes to last, I think my main point here is that Verstappen was deserved champion, Hamilton would be as well. I wish it happened under different conditions, but I don't think FIA or Masi doctored the outcome. I've loved this season, nothing has gotten me as excited as race day, and it started all the way back in Bahrain. I hope the next season is just as entertaining to watch (in terms of racing, not controversy), and I hope even more teams get into the mix. Imagine this season, but McLaren and Ferrari could also mix with Verstappen and Hamilton.
As you said it didn't (bolded), it's the fact they thought there was no way it would all be done in 4 laps, knowing full well the lapped cars could only overtake once the track is safe to do so. Plus, they had no option to pit, it's a win-win for the 2nd placed driver in that circumstance. Either he gains track position, or he gets fresh tyres and hopes the SC doesn't run until the end.
Although it was definitely a fantastic last lap, Lewis was cheated, and there's no arguing against that, and that's the end of it really. The decision was made for television, not for the sport and integrity of the race.
I think the two of us agree more than it seems. It was indeed a fantastic lap of racing. I was on my feet in excitement. I loved that there were so much on the line, I wish it was fairer racing. But I do not think Masi doctored the outcome. I just think pit strategies didn't play into it. I think he'd made the same call if Max was leading the race.
Both of them would be deserved champions, and I just hope next season is as exciting as this one. I've seen people talking about Hamilton retiring, but I really hope he's there for the start of next season, ready to fight. If he gets his 8th after this set-back it will be sweeter. If he doesn't, he'll still make the season better by competing. Hopefully, McLaren and Ferrari can get into the mix too.
Tbh I do think Horner's message to him played a big part in the race restarting, it felt like it was not going to be up until shortly after that message
Same, I have tickets to Silverstone 2022, so really hoping he's there. Winning his 8th would be sweet too, although in my mind he already has 8.
Yeah, possibly. But I think the sentiment to end the race with racing was there even before the race started, and I think the 'its called motor racing' message to Toto was frustration being vented. I really think they should restrict team bosses from speaking to the race director directly, and have restrictions on what can be said. I like Jonathan Wheatley's style a lot better. 'I'm not sure we agree, but I do understand', I think he said after the Lap 1 incident when Lewis conceded the advantage rather than the position.
Oohf. You're lucky. If I wasn't unsure whether travelling abroad would be allowed (given the ebbs and flows of Corona), I'd want to attend to Silverstone too.
100% going in the future. The atmosphere seems to be amazing there. Lewis with the union jack was a joy to see tbh.
I think Mercedes started focusing on the 2022 car earlier than Red Bull, and Red Bull is abandoning the high-rake concept for next year, per Newey, so I'm sure Lewis has every opportunity of winning his 8th. Just hope it's close all the way to the end, regardless of who wins.
40 lap old hards against brand new softs is a guaranteed overtake, its a huge difference. Everyone expected all cars unlap themselves, and then the safety car to stay out for the following lap, as the rules state.
Some of the cars being unlapped but not all absolutely made a difference, as if they hadn't then Max would have had to clear them rather than sit neck and neck with Lewis for the restart, and if they had then he'd have Sainz right behind him (not to mention the race would have finished under safety car as per the rules, as Masi has stated and done before).
If Mercedes had known what was going to happen, they would have pitted Hamilton. They couldn't have known because Masi made it up to give Max the win and the title.
Well, yes. Then we agree, don't we? It's not a guaranteed overtake, but it's a likely one.
Everyone expected all cars to unlap themselves, but I also think they expected it to happen sooner, going by the team radios. Possibly because they saw the car being craned away.
I mean Alonso literally started laughing when he heard 'no unlapping'.
I just think Masi would've made the same call if Max were leading, and I don't think pit strategies played into Masi's decision-making, and it shouldn't.
Mercedes stayed out, so they had old tires. Red Bull pitted (twice) under safety cars, and had newer tires.
Its strange you know when it was safe to unlap the cars, do you have extra feeds or something? Perhaps you were there looking at the corner? Just because the car is craned off does not mean its safe. There will be debris to sweep away, the fire suppression system went off which needed to be cleaned and the barrier likely needed to be inspected. Until all this is done and the marshalls have reported in, its not safe. Just because "the car is gone" does not mean the track is immediately safe. The drivers also will have no idea the state of this either, they go by their race engineers, who go by the director.
I've addressed all of this in other posts.
This is such bullshit. Fresh softs vs old hard? Latifi probably could have overtaken Hamilton in that scenario, the pace delta was probably more than 5 seconds.
and that shouldn't factor into the race director's mind because that's race strategy for individual teams.
Exactly. SC rendering Lewis' massive lead to nothing is not unprecedented, nor is sorting out the lapped cars and restarting the race. Team Mercedes definitely considered that, but had decided in the end that there 'probably' won't be a restart.
The only thing in the race director's mind should be to ensure the safety of drivers and stewards within the spirit of the racing regulations. There was nothing wrong with the safety car, but there was a lot wrong with the procedures that followed after deployment of the car.
I don't think anybody is arguing with the safety car. That is pure bad luck for Lewis and it was needed.
Whether Lewis was pitted or not is irrelevant, because the restart of the race was fudged, not the actual safety car deployment itself. The restart of the race was fudged because the race director removed all obstacles between the 1st and 2nd place cars, and kept all the obstacles between the 2nd and 3rd place cars as well as kept all the obstacles between other cars further down the grid. This in effect, was not a level playing field between the whole grid as the race restarted. This is a fundamental sporting error.
I don't think anybody is arguing with the safety car. That is pure bad luck for Lewis and it was needed.
Whether Lewis was pitted or not is irrelevant, because the restart of the race was fudged, not the actual safety car deployment itself. The restart of the race was fudged because the race director removed all obstacles between the 1st and 2nd place cars, and kept all the obstacles between the 2nd and 3rd place cars as well as kept all the obstacles between other cars further down the grid. This in effect, was not a level playing field between the whole grid as the race restarted. This is a fundamental sporting error.
Last edited:
Exactly, the whole problem is the race director set up the last lap for show, as entertainment not sport. Not even good entertainment mind as anyone who watches F1 regularly knew there was practically 0 chance Verstappen didn't overtake Ham in that situation. He could even make a clumsy move as Ham couldn't afford the crash either. All the lapped cards should have been let past and then the safety car in the lap after, like how it has been done a million times before.
Personally I had really enjoyed this year as the first proper title battle in years, and had been hoping Ver would win, but the manner in which it was done was a disgrace. The race director damaged the sporting integrity for what he thought would be a more entertaining finish, you only have to see the reactions from all the drivers, there's not one person involved in the sport who doesn't know that was a farcical call my Massi, and that includes Horner and Verstappen.
The fact that he made such an obvious breach of the rules/convention at the very least, in order to massively favour one driver really starts to bring into question some other choices that where made throughout the year by Massi. Both in favour of Lewis and Max, I really feel like Massi/ the stewards where trying their best to keep the title close for drama purposes only. Some of the calls like no penalty for Max in Brazil where bizarre, but it makes sense when you see them trying to manufacture a title battle as close as possible.
I've only done so once after reading what I perceived to be a viewpoint I just can't understand. But I should not have resorted to name calling and I apologise. I was just incredulous when I read that.
'My point wasn't that I wanted the controversy, but that I wanted the race to end in a race, even if that last lap was a race because of a controversial call.' I just don't see how in any world having a controversial call dictate the entire fate of a whole season is preferable to the race ending under safety car. It makes a mockery of the whole sport. Give the multitude of actual fans and drivers of this sport a choice between what happened and the race ending under safety car conditions 9/10 would say safety car. Red Bull would have had complaints but not so severe that they would be disillusioned with the result. I just don't see how any fan of the sport, apart from those who support Max and Red Bull, could see what transpired as being in anyway the right or preferable call.
All the incidents you name are part and parcel of the sport. Pirelli misfunctioning could have happened to anyone - it's akin to the Sunderland goal against Liverpool where it deflected off a beachball. The worst luck in the world, but it could have happened to any team and its not against the laws of the game (the laws have now been changed as a result - Pirelli were then under scrutiny to test their tires as a result). And again other incidents were either racing incidents or bad refereeing. This was someone making a decision out of the confines of the sporting code. 48.13 is not written to dictate that you can ignore prior regulations - 48.12 is carefully worded to allow the clerk to call the safety car in later than a lap after the last car unlaps itslef 'if they deem it safer' to do so. NOT bring it in and ignore previos regulations. The other one 50 something or other which gives the Race director the right to overrule the clerk, is again in the name of safety not in the name of 'letting them race'. Yes teams pushed for races to finish in green conditions, but based on the reactions of other drivers again who called it 'not right', and 'fecked up', this is not what they meant.
'I think Masi would make the same call if Lewis pitted, and Max stayed out. Honestly, I do.' And that would have been equally as wrong and 'but Masi cannot let whether one car has pitted and the other haven't be a factor in his decision-making.' yes I agree. But there wasn't a difficult decision to make. There were two decisions under the regulations - start the racing again at the beginning of lap 58 with no cars having unlapped themselves OR end the race under a safety car. Nothing apart from the regulations should have influenced his decision.
'That decision to stay out is as much a part of racing as everything you mention in the first part of your post. At the time of the crash, Mercedes wouldn't know for certain the race would end under a safety car. They took a risk, like Red Bull did, and none of that should factor into the race director's decision-making. Considering the number of laps left, I'll agree that Mercedes' choice was the safer option in their situation. Red Bull could afford to take the risk they did, given the circumstances.' I mean just to this whole point, yes it was a decision made by Mercedes and part of racing, but they made the correct call. It was a risk, the car could have been cleared earlier and they would have been fecked. But they made the 100% correct call. Under the regulations Lewis would and should have won.
No one really thinks, apart from those with bias colouring their view that the FIA or MAssi doctored the outcome out of a desire to see Max being champion. But they doctored the outcome purely for the spectacle. It was WWE. IF you want manufactured excitement then fair enough. But it's odd that your actual criticisms of Masi come in him not unlapping the car earlier rather than the monumental feck up and you just keep giving him the benefit of the doubt. Yes I loved this season too, everything up until lap 56 of the final race was dramatic, it was arguably the greatest season we've seen ever (at least for the younger generation) however for a lot of fans it's been tainted. Max 100% deserved to win, over the season he was the more consistent driver and I would argue that was the greatest season of driving I've seen. BUT Lewis in a sense deserved to win it more, not out of ability or anything like that, but because the rules were not followed and it was stolen from him by one of the worst decisions this sport has ever seen.
This is pointless. Other posters have called you out for this as well, but you're trying to defend the decision using smoke and mirrors, acting like it didn't change the result (it did), or that Mercedes are to blame themselves for their strategy (even though they judged it perfectly based on the actual rules).
We get it, you're pleased with the result, and you found the final lap farce exciting because your guy was handed an easy overtake. Those of us who care about the sport over Max recognise how awful the precedent is that's been set.
Putting the events during the race on Sunday aside, I'm curious as to why Mercedes have elected not to appeal.
Was pressure exerted by the FIA citing that any further action (valid or otherwise) would damage further the reputation of the sport?
I do think they had reasonable grounds to have the result overturned so there must have been something said to someone to alter their intentions since Sunday.
Was pressure exerted by the FIA citing that any further action (valid or otherwise) would damage further the reputation of the sport?
I do think they had reasonable grounds to have the result overturned so there must have been something said to someone to alter their intentions since Sunday.
Been in a rabbit hole watching reaction videos of the last lap. While it was a messed up decision, F1 got what they wanted which was a crap ton of excitement. Makes me wonder if they will do what NASCAR has done (and overdone to a fault) which is adjust the rules to try to search for more ways to bring the other teams up and encourage closer finishes.
I am also slightly disappointed in the withdrawal of the appeal because I genuinely wanted a legal and detailed explanation of the events, regardless of who is the champion or not.
If the FIA were forced to admit that the 'god-clause' does indeed give the race director full powers to shape the flow and story of a race, and that teams and fans should have been aware of this and expect this, then ok, I know where I stand on the matter.
If the FIA were forced to admit that the 'god-clause' does indeed give the race director full powers to shape the flow and story of a race, and that teams and fans should have been aware of this and expect this, then ok, I know where I stand on the matter.
In the spirit of your post, I have a question, not aimed at you, but an open question.
If Mercedes register an appeal after the race, regarding application of the rules, by the officials, which they did, why does that in any way, require the input of Red Bull?
The complaint was of a regulatory nature. It is between Mercedes and the FIA.
There's no need for anybody else to have their opinion heard, in the processing of the appeal.
If the solution then affects someone else (Red Bull?), that is grounds for a separate appeal, and hearing on their behalf.
It does exist but it's never been used before.
It's essentially the 'big red button' the president has for setting of nukes. it's there, but is never used and shouldn't be.
We all know why it was done. I bet the FIA / Formula 1 execs in general were absolutely creaming themselves with how it went down. I've never seen F1 generate so much traffic outside of the closer circle.
The usuals getting their daily meltdowns in. Thread is definitely like groundhog day.
The FIA's new stewardship led by freshly elected president Mohammed Ben Sulayem will meet to discuss the case around Lewis Hamilton's absence from Thursday's prize-giving gala in Paris, with zero tolerance for the Mercedes driver if he is found to have breached F1's sporting rules.
Hamilton, along with Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff, was conspicuously absent from the governing body's traditional end-of-season award ceremonial, a snub that reflected the pair's anger of the events that unfolded at the end of F1's title decider in Abu Dhabi and which were orchestrated by FIA race director Michael Masi.
Hamilton's deliberate absence is a breach of the FIA's sporting regulations and could imply a sanction for the Mercedes driver if the FIA chooses to pursue the case.
Article 6.6 of F1's sporting rules clearly lays out the law: "The drivers finishing first, second and third in the Championship must be present at the annual FIA Prize Giving ceremony."
"At the end of the day, rules are rules," commented new FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem in his first meeting with the media.
Pity Masi did not do that.
I agree with Lewis, I would not have gone, so it will cost him a few quid, worth it I say.
https://f1i.com/news/429138-fias-su...Ux6YUmhhMeKYaZVp4pD5nupxSVt3Z6r8_MxQWwSZYqcCs
Hamilton, along with Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff, was conspicuously absent from the governing body's traditional end-of-season award ceremonial, a snub that reflected the pair's anger of the events that unfolded at the end of F1's title decider in Abu Dhabi and which were orchestrated by FIA race director Michael Masi.
Hamilton's deliberate absence is a breach of the FIA's sporting regulations and could imply a sanction for the Mercedes driver if the FIA chooses to pursue the case.
Article 6.6 of F1's sporting rules clearly lays out the law: "The drivers finishing first, second and third in the Championship must be present at the annual FIA Prize Giving ceremony."
"At the end of the day, rules are rules," commented new FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem in his first meeting with the media.
Pity Masi did not do that.
I agree with Lewis, I would not have gone, so it will cost him a few quid, worth it I say.
https://f1i.com/news/429138-fias-su...Ux6YUmhhMeKYaZVp4pD5nupxSVt3Z6r8_MxQWwSZYqcCs
Mohammed Ben Sulayem - is he even a former racer , what's his connection to the sport?
That's hilariously hypocritical and tone deaf