Try reading what I wrote and thinking about it a little?
I don't care that Vettel has now been disqualified because it's clear they didn't have the reuqired amount of fuel in the tank but a few pages back people were arguing that even if the legal amount of fuel was in the tank then he should be DQ simply because their pump didn't work and "those are the rules". That's not in good spirit and it's using a badly/lazilywritten rule that can't take into account every eventuality to disqualify someone who did nothing wrong.
It's been said plenty of times by the people in F1. There's no such thing as the "spirit of the rules". There's the rules, and that's it. The rule itself allows no interpretation or consideration of "the spirit". It's baked in.
If (to use your own analogy) there's a rule that says Usain Bolt must supply his running shoes for inspection after a race, and if he doesn't the punishment is disqualification, then there's no "spirit of the rules" where he can argue a week later that he should still be allowed to keep the win because his shoes were perfectly legal, honest, just trust him that if said shoes had been supplied for inspection, they would have been fine. The judges are just supposed to take it on trust and ignore the shoe inspection rules for a single competitor that broke that rule.
You don't seem to understand the rule isn't about what fuel is or isn't in the car, it's only about if a litre can be supplied to the steward when they ask for it. There's no interpretation or "spirit of the rules" allowed. It's a simple request that if a team can't comply with, the rules have a mandatory disqualification as punishment, and nothing else.
How do you know Vettel's car wasn't under-fuelled and he gained advantage from that? How do you know the fuel in his car was the correct spec? You can't know that because a sample could not be supplied, and the rules do not allow a team to "self-certify" that they are following the rules when they can't provide proof when requested. In fact, the way Vettel was told to stop on track and the fact the team couldn't supply the required sample is circumstantial evidence that they were underfuelled.
You may not agree with the rule, and maybe the teams should change it, but it's what AM agreed to race under, and they can't simply refuse to abide by it because they don't like the results of being held to those rules.
