FIA Thread

[NathanOlder]

Not quite. It closes a minor inconsistency in the rules that Red Bull argued in the Steward's hearing. The thrust of their argument is left intact. However, the Race Director doesn't use that point in his argument. And, the main grounds for the Stewards upholding his decision is based on his general power of “overriding authority" to control the use of the safety car. That remains unchanged.

All the other ambiguities in the rules remain intact. Presumably, a consensus formed around preserving the flexibility as a necessity to deal with the uncertain nature of safety car deployment. I think that's a common-sense approach....provided they tighten up their internal procedures.

Yes, they haven't changed anything really have they. "Any car" means exactly the same as "all cars" in that context. They can't change 15.3 without admitting the stewards totally faked their dodgy interpretation of it and were wrong.

They replaced the word any with all.

"all cars that have been lapped" means all cars not some of the cars.

Any means all the cars too. Its ridiculous that anyone can read 'any' as 'some'. If any was to mean some, then it would be worded 'any number'

[izzy]

Not quite. It closes a minor inconsistency in the rules that Red Bull argued in the Steward's hearing. The thrust of their argument is left intact. However, the Race Director doesn't use that point in his argument. And, the main grounds for the Stewards upholding his decision is based on his general power of “overriding authority" to control the use of the safety car. That remains unchanged.

All the other ambiguities in the rules remain intact. Presumably, a consensus formed around preserving the flexibility as a necessity to deal with the uncertain nature of safety car deployment. I think that's a common-sense approach....provided they tighten up their internal procedures.

Yes, they haven't changed anything really have they. "Any car" means exactly the same as "all cars" in that context. They can't change 15.3 without admitting the stewards totally faked their dodgy interpretation of it and were wrong.

And that's the key.

Even if they want to pretend that technically, he was able to do what he did (which is bs, and a cover up attempt) Peter Bayer came out in an interview and conceded that Mercedes could succeeded in voiding the whole result in the courts.

Even so, its clear to me that the FIA don't agree with his decision making to justify the way he used the rules to execute a 1 lap shoot out unfairly. It would've been within the bounds of acceptable if he had brought in the safety car without asking cars to overtake from lap 56 or 57. and allowed the current track scenario to finish under green.

He went too far orchestrating which cars he would apply the regulation to. He didn't need to do that to finish under green. Manufacturing Max vs Lewis for 1 lap was a step too far. It is clear for normal people to see that his judgement became clouded after he succumbed to pressure and lobbying from teams.

Boiling it down to this, the bigger changes they made were to the RD rather than the regulations. One can argue they think the regulations are okay, and that the problem was Masi and the stewards using them inappropriately in AD and that's why he's gone and the regs have stayed the same.. Must be why Peter Bayer is conceding legally in a court, Mercedes had too strong a case and would rip to shreds their arguments those stewards presented to them in their protest dismissal.

Well for me the plot is a bit thicker. Peter Bayer quite recently claimed it was all because MM had seconds to decide and wanted to finish under green.

But he had 3 or 4 minutes, and as you say his first decision was already going to give a green flag finish!

So our senior FIA official was lying to us, and why?

It's because the RD did his job perfectly in the first seconds, then was made to change it, by his bosses and the stewards' bosses.

Of course now they have to mark their own homework rather carefully

[AeroDynamic]

FIA explains laser scanning system for F1 car scrutineering

The FIA has outlined the new laser scanning scrutineering system it will use to examine the legality of Formula 1 cars from the start of the 2022 season.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fia-e ... g/9074942/

[diffuser]

Yes, they haven't changed anything really have they. "Any car" means exactly the same as "all cars" in that context. They can't change 15.3 without admitting the stewards totally faked their dodgy interpretation of it and were wrong.

They replaced the word any with all.

"all cars that have been lapped" means all cars not some of the cars.

Any means all the cars too. Its ridiculous that anyone can read 'any' as 'some'. If any was to mean some, then it would be worded 'any number'

You pay me enough, I can interpret All to mean some too ! ROFL.

Hope they Payed Masi enough to retire on.

[AeroDynamic]

[dans79]

Looks like everyone is turning up the heat on the FIA!

[AeroDynamic]

Looks like everyone is turning up the heat on the FIA!

He represents the stakeholders, what happened in AD hurt F1's image and potential value. They want that AD report out to either deny anything went wrong, or to assure fans that they know what went wrong and won't happen in future.

Stefano is rumoured to have wanted Masi gone.

[izzy]

No-one can imagine sweet Stefano being involved in it can we, just because his employer really really wanted Max to win

But F1, Liberty and FIA are all the same club aren't they. From when Max (the spanky one) and Bernie stitched it all up together. And it's still a mix of Ross, Pat, Stefano, Nikolas, Jean, Mohammed, who knows, I get confused which boy is in which part of the club.

Anyway Michael Masi first of all made a perfect decision, not to unlap to make sure the season ended with a racing lap. And what we lack at this point is a MOTIVE for changing it. What will they come up with?

[izzy]

He represents the stakeholders, what happened in AD hurt F1's image and potential value. They want that AD report out to either deny anything went wrong, or to assure fans that they know what went wrong and won't happen in future.

Stefano is rumoured to have wanted Masi gone.

Well I think the opposite I think F1 makes a lot more money with the new, young, mainstream, blond WDC than it would have with an 8th boring one from the same weird pyjama wearing type. Plus the drama omg, so DTS

Imo this is why the whole thing happened. And otherwise, what do we have for a motive?

[diffuser]

He represents the stakeholders, what happened in AD hurt F1's image and potential value. They want that AD report out to either deny anything went wrong, or to assure fans that they know what went wrong and won't happen in future.

Stefano is rumoured to have wanted Masi gone.

Well I think the opposite I think F1 makes a lot more money with the new, young, mainstream, blond WDC that it would have with an 8th boring one from the same weird pyjama wearing type. Plus the drama omg, so DTS

Imo this is why the whole thing happened. And otherwise, what do we have for a motive?

That is short term gain for long term loss. I think you have alot of happy to see Hamilton lose (nothing to do with him, just people get tired of the same guy winning) and Max/RBR fans happy to see him/them win. There is a large contigent of F1 fans, some Hamilton, some Max and some just F1 fans that really didn't like how that went down. if you don't appear to fix what happened, you risk losing them or turning the sport into WWF. WWF idea wouldn't work for me cause alot of the attraction is the engineering. Why would they need any engineer if it's all make beleive.

[Big Tea]

He represents the stakeholders, what happened in AD hurt F1's image and potential value. They want that AD report out to either deny anything went wrong, or to assure fans that they know what went wrong and won't happen in future.

Stefano is rumoured to have wanted Masi gone.

Well I think the opposite I think F1 makes a lot more money with the new, young, mainstream, blond WDC that it would have with an 8th boring one from the same weird pyjama wearing type. Plus the drama omg, so DTS

Imo this is why the whole thing happened. And otherwise, what do we have for a motive?

Total population of Netherlands is just 17.5 million, and most of them already attend races with Max.

[Partymood]

They replaced the word any with all.

"all cars that have been lapped" means all cars not some of the cars.

Any means all the cars too. Its ridiculous that anyone can read 'any' as 'some'. If any was to mean some, then it would be worded 'any number'

You pay me enough, I can interpret All to mean some too ! ROFL.

Hope they Payed Masi enough to retire on.

I think he could have retired before the last race of 2021, see Silverstone. Had he done is job then we wouldn't be here discussing AD

[AeroDynamic]

Any means all the cars too. Its ridiculous that anyone can read 'any' as 'some'. If any was to mean some, then it would be worded 'any number'

You pay me enough, I can interpret All to mean some too ! ROFL.

Hope they Payed Masi enough to retire on.

I think he could have retired before the last race of 2021, see Silverstone. Had he done is job then we wouldn't be here discussing AD

The stewards make the decision to investigate or not. RBR protested it and saw an independent panel from the RD. You're blaming Masi for something he doesn't decide outcomes on.

It was a racing incident. Lucky they gave Hamilton 10 seconds as it is. He probably got one because they begged for it and Hamilton had the fortune of being able to continue. It should've been a reprimand at worse. You only need to look at Baku 2018 to see why Max is the common denominator for silly and bizarre crashes that he could avoid based on where he puts his car.

[dans79]

Any means all the cars too. Its ridiculous that anyone can read 'any' as 'some'. If any was to mean some, then it would be worded 'any number'

You pay me enough, I can interpret All to mean some too ! ROFL.

Hope they Payed Masi enough to retire on.

I think he could have retired before the last race of 2021, see Silverstone. Had he done is job then we wouldn't be here discussing AD

Actually he did his job in Silverstone! He told the stewards to look into the incident and make a ruling if needed.

The stewards make decisions about who should get penalties, not the RD.

[izzy]

He represents the stakeholders, what happened in AD hurt F1's image and potential value. They want that AD report out to either deny anything went wrong, or to assure fans that they know what went wrong and won't happen in future.

Stefano is rumoured to have wanted Masi gone.

Well I think the opposite I think F1 makes a lot more money with the new, young, mainstream, blond WDC that it would have with an 8th boring one from the same weird pyjama wearing type. Plus the drama omg, so DTS

Imo this is why the whole thing happened. And otherwise, what do we have for a motive?

That is short term gain for long term loss. I think you have alot of happy to see Hamilton lose (nothing to do with him, just people get tired of the same guy winning) and Max/RBR fans happy to see him/them win. There is a large contigent of F1 fans, some Hamilton, some Max and some just F1 fans that really didn't like how that went down. if you don't appear to fix what happened, you risk losing them or turning the sport into WWF. WWF idea wouldn't work for me cause alot of the attraction is the engineering. Why would they need any engineer if it's all make beleive.

Yes I agree with all this, it might turn out to have been a mistake. But so far afaik the stats are all in favour. And at the time, we can imagine how the situation happened: there are Ross, Jean, Stefano & co sitting watching the race, and goddammit Lewis and Mercedes are gonna do it AGAIN!!! So boring. Until... Latifi .

And so then there's the SC, 5 laps to go, Max pits, and Michael says no unlapping! Frustration. So far, so near, so far. Unless...

It probably didn't seem such a bad thing to ask, if only Michael had had one more lap available. But then there was still a marshall on the track, so it all got rushed and he's not the strongest head in the world is he, and so what he did looked terrible and worse than any of the bosses really intended.

And that's the only motive in play afaics. MM himself had no reason to do what was so obviously wrong and always going to be bad for him.